Ins & Outs 2016/17 January Transfer Window Discussion

[CMWellfan]

I would anticipate increased speculation in advance of the Scottish tie - wouldn't be surprised if they show interest in Moult too. Truth is, only Celtic (in Scotland) can afford either player and they aren't currently short in those departments.

 

Celtic source tells me they are looking to punt Griffiths for decent dough. Same guy says Moult is on the "edge of the radar," as a replacement.

 

I believe the first part of the story ax develop and sell is their strategy, buying Moult I think is highly speculative.

If there was no discount, or one that I thought wasn't to our advantage, then I'd rather the money was in Motherwells account earning a little interest rather than someone else's account.

 

Take the £1.5m discussed, 60% is £900,000 giving at least 3% interest over the next 4 years which would be worth £108,000 or £27,000 per year which could be used to either pay a youth player or added to the wages offered to someone we're trying to sign which could make the difference between him signing for us or one of our rivals. This player then could possibly be sold on before the debt is due to be payed giving us more cash in the bank.

 

It seems crazy to me to pay off an interest free loan with money that could be working for the club.

Where are you going to get 3% interest?

 

Clear the debt, get rid of it once and for all.

 

My view is that for the first time in a while we have three ( at least ) sellable assets in Moulton, Heneghan, and Cadden. It wouldn't be unreasonable to value them at a combined £2 million. We also appear to have a couple of youth superstars coming through.

 

I'd like to see us offering an extension to Joe Chalmers - slated to he'll last year, he's shown a lot more this year. TBH - secure him and McMillan, settle with Hammell. I doubt even his biggest fans pre-season are looking forward to another 18 months of him.

 

Best line I heard from a Celtic fan since the game was "nine man Motherwell were fantastic in the first half, imagine what you could do with a full team." ( Hammell and Lasley ).

 

Get your act together, Burrows - a blind man could see that giving extensions to Lasley, Hammel and McFadden was an act of stupidity. Samson and McManus are getting by with one good performance in six.

 

I blame Burrows more than McGhee - it's him that signed off on these contracts, and if McGhee bolts, it's us that are left with the Benjamin Buttons of Scottish football.

 

By the way - I reckon Bowman could be doing with a good "mid season pre-season." Drop him for six weeks and drill him up to SPL standard. He'll come back a real asset.

[David]

Blyth and bowman are on contracts, so unless someone wanted to take them from us, they're going nowhere. Also, there's a chance moult gets sold, so we're going to need forwards.

 

Lucas and belic will go because their deals are up and it should free enough cash to bring someone in who is not injured.

 

You've mentioned Moult being sold twice now, but i've heard absolutely nothing to suggest this is the case. In fact, wasn't it said at the recent Society meeting that we're in a position where we don't have to sell anyone in January?

 

If that's the case, why would we let go of our top striker mid-season? It would make no sense unless a mental offer came in, especially considering he has something like another year and a half on his current deal, doesn't he?

[Kmcalpin]

 

In fact, wasn't it said at the recent Society meeting that we're in a position where we don't have to sell anyone in January?

 

If that's the case, why would we let go of our top striker mid-season? It would make no sense unless a mental offer came in, especially considering he has something like another year and a half on his current deal, doesn't he?

Yes, it was mentioned and you're right. The club does not have to let him go unless a very large offer comes in. Given the importance of us staying in the top flight for the next 2 seasons and the increased revenue that will bring, the Directors would need to balance the benefits of a transfer fee against the potential loss of income his departure could cause if we were to finish in 11th or 12th place.

[Gadgey]

It's all speculation but I'm guessing that nobody had anticipated Marvin leaving so very late in the day as much still seemed to be up in the air and not agreed.

 

Equally, I'm sure there was a clear list of Marv replacements lined up in priority order. Each of those and their agents would have working their options also and most likely would have been sorted by the time we knew Marv was away.

 

An offer like Belic may have been what we were reduced to. It's an extremely low risk punt and his pedigree at least was attractive. I can't see how him not getting in the side will damage relationships with West Ham though?

 

The loss of Pearson has been more telling than the loss of Marv. As we all know, if our front two get service, they'll score goals and a player like Pearo would make all the difference to our eventual fate this season.

 

I wouldn't punt Lucas, simply because he'll be cheap already as he'll know that he'll be running out of chances. I know it may be fantasy stuff but a midfield of Pearson, McHugh, Lucas and Cadden would bring some real solidity and creativity with good cover in Lionel, Clay, Lasley, McLean and Thomas

[MelvinBragg]

I see Ross MacLean has signed a new contract which I reckon is good news.

 

I've also been told that Ainsworth and Cadden will both be leaving. Not clear whether this will be in January or at the end of the season.

 

Ainsworth isn't a surprise although I suspect we'll miss him more than some fans realise. In simple terms of goals and assists, he contributes far more than Johnson did.

 

Cadden, I'm told that there are two clubs that are interested and it's been indicated to the player that the club are expecting him to move. Again not certain whether this will be in January or at the end of the season but perhaps the club are thinking the possible return of Pearson in January would soften the blow of letting Cadden go in midseason. Personally not convinced that would be a good move for us but can see the logic...

[Lobey_Dosser]

I see Ross MacLean has signed a new contract which I reckon is good news.

 

I've also been told that Ainsworth and Cadden will both be leaving. Not clear whether this will be in January or at the end of the season.

 

Ainsworth isn't a surprise although I suspect we'll miss him more than some fans realise. In simple terms of goals and assists, he contributes far more than Johnson did.

 

Cadden, I'm told that there are two clubs that are interested and it's been indicated to the player that the club are expecting him to move. Again not certain whether this will be in January or at the end of the season but perhaps the club are thinking the possible return of Pearson in January would soften the blow of letting Cadden go in midseason. Personally not convinced that would be a good move for us but can see the logic...

Yeah, very good news about Ross MacLean, not too long ago there were rumours about him getting freed. Sounds like another couple of contract extensions are on the horizon too.

 

I'd expect offers to come in for both Moult and Cadden and the ethos of the club is such we wouldn't want to stand in their way if good offers are made. However retaining our premiership status is imperative so hopefully one, most likely Cadden, can stay until the summer.

 

Would be sad to see Ainsworth go, particularly if we end up in a relegation battle, but he deserves more game time and a number of clubs will be monitoring his situation.

[milo]

I fully expect Cadden to leave like all our good players but if we don't need to sell it would be madness to let him go in January with our league position so precarious.

 

I'd be more than happy for Pearson to return and sadly it does look like Ainsworths days are numbered. It's a pity as on his day he is a match winner but his form is extremely inconsistent.

 

Would rather he didn't go to another Scottish club though.

[superward]

It was made fairly clear at the AGMs this week that nobody needs to be sold and the most important thing is ensuring we are not in the bottom 2. So, unless it's a fee that cannot be knocked back as it's so big then I fully expect to see them in February.

[Lobey_Dosser]

It was made fairly clear at the AGMs this week that nobody needs to be sold and the most important thing is ensuring we are not in the bottom 2. So, unless it's a fee that cannot be knocked back as it's so big then I fully expect to see them in February.

It's not fully in the clubs' control though as we seen with Marvin. Moult and Cadden are terrific characters but if the right opportunity comes up for them and their agents view the offers as fair value, they'll more than likely move on with our best wishes.

[steelboy]

If the offers come in they'll be off.

 

We missed out on a big fee for Reynolds by knocking back Rangers. That didn't work out badly but we're not in a strong enough position to do the same nowadays. We can't afford another Hutchy scenario.

[weeyin]

As I said elsewhere I'd sell to anyone but Rangers. They are too big of a credit risk unless we get full fee in cash up front before the player is signed.

[Busta Nut]

I am not sure where the confidence is coming from regarding Pearo coming back.

It's not a stretch to think he will but many on here and when speaking to folk in person seem to think it's a done deal already.

 

Moult/Cadden. I think both will be gone by the summer. Jan? I am not sure, would need to be a great offer for either.

 

I can't understand why so many folk are wanting to keep Lucas either. He's made of plastic forks.

[Kmcalpin]

Moult/Cadden. I think both will be gone by the summer. Jan? I am not sure, would need to be a great offer for either.

 

I can't understand why so many folk are wanting to keep Lucas either. He's made of plastic forks.

Absolutely. Trying to replace players in the January window is notoriously difficult and I'd hold off until the summer to sell unless the bid was phenomenal.

[kmmfc]

The line that we don't need to sell in January is not reality. We've got debts to pay by 2.5 years time so the quicker we clear those debts the better. If we get a below average offer, we'll take it as we can't take the risk of our assets getting a serious injury.

[Andy_P]

The line that we don't need to sell in January is not reality. We've got debts to pay by 2.5 years time so the quicker we clear those debts the better. If we get a below average offer, we'll take it as we can't take the risk of our assets getting a serious injury.

 

Important distinctions to be made I think.

 

We don't have to pay the debts back in two-and-half years or they demand what's left of their loans or close the doors on us.

 

What we have is two-and-a-half years to pay back - through the route of player sales - before a structured re-payment plan commences.

 

It's obviously in our interests to have the debts cleared when the terms are more favourable to us but that doesn't mean we need to sell at the first opportunity or below our valuation. Indeed all the signals that have come out of the club for the last year or so have emphasised the very point that in comparison in recent times we are now in much stronger negotiating position.

 

Equally there is not the same pressure to sell at anything less than a fee or our choosing in January because in contrast to previous seasons we are in a position to see us through to the end of the season without the need for loans from directors or the Well Society.

[Brazilian]

Given the importance of us staying in the top flight for the next 2 seasons and the increased revenue that will bring, the Directors would need to balance the benefits of a transfer fee against the potential loss of income his departure could cause if we were to finish in 11th or 12th place.

 

the debate on potential players moving on or not is all good and the club repeatedly stating that they dont 'need' to sell is all very well in creating the correct public profile

 

But the quoted section, gives me the absolute fear if I have picked it up correctly and they are selling the myth of increased revenue in a couple of seasons, which would dictate decisions here and now?

 

thats is right up there with the top six and two cups runs when its comes to the sort of mismanagement which has almost bankrupt the club over the last seven? or so years.

 

the club needs to be finanacially responsible and start looking to create that reserve fund long whispered about , but due to overspending has never materialised, despite fans stepping up, in fact that fund has turned into significant debt.

 

the loans are all good, the restructing fine, the position of not having to sell has been well worked but is temporary, until debts and reserve amounts are reversed, if the club is to be seen as being finanicially responsible to continue and grow the fans contributions as well as trade responsibly, then any gambling on retaining players when good offers are made would be irresponsible.

 

the club shouldn't be looking at the debt amount and thinking we've nothing to pay for 3 years, they should be looking at the debt and thinking we need to aggresvely target a reserve fund of £2million in three years to trade responsibly through the lean summers and winters... (edit- not leaving it to fans contributions, that should be a society fund, who even knows what Capital expense could be demanded in the next decade)

[superward]

The increased fund line may be related to the AGM where they talked about having an extra home old firm league game and increased solidarity payments next season due to Celtic in the champions league.

[weeyin]

The increased fund line may be related to the AGM where they talked about having an extra home old firm league game and increased solidarity payments next season due to Celtic in the champions league.

TV money is being bumped up next season too, apparently. Never good to be relegated, but this season would be more financially significant than most.

[wellowell]

We will also have made money in the cup this season as had 3 old firm games all on TV as well so surely must have made something out of that .

[Andy_P]

There was a post or press release that gave the sums involved in the League Cup and from memory it was £30,000 per live game in the League Cup. I think it's £84,500 per live Scottish Cup game.

[Del_Superwell]

They estimate at this stage that we should make around 270k from the Rangers cup game and next summer we receive a solidarity payment of 250k as a result of Celtic getting into the group stages of the champions league, money thats vital to the club.

[Ya Bezzer!]

I can't understand why so many folk are wanting to keep Lucas either. He's made of plastic forks.

 

Don't forget he's on a 1 good game run of form!

[Del_Superwell]

Did Lucas not play something like only 4 games in 6 years at Swansea due to injuries so we knew what we were getting when he came in.

 

That said in the Ross County game he was very impressive, if we could get him fit for a run of even 10-15 games then id be inclined to keep him as he looked a classy player who was spraying around passes for fun.

[capt_oats]

Did Lucas not play something like only 4 games in 6 years at Swansea due to injuries so we knew what we were getting when he came in.

This is true. Though from the looks of things he also has 42 caps for Wales through the various age groups. The injuries he had seemed to be serious ones that kept him out (fractured back, ruptured ACL x2) rather than recurring niggles.

[StipeIsGod]

Keep in mind that a tight market in January strengthens our hand re Cadden; in that a better financial offer may be forthcoming from a desperate club.