Let me give you a scenario. Completely off the top of my head, no idea if true or not. Not saying it is, but a possibility. Barnsley want to free up wages. No club willing to match the salary he’s on here, thus player doesn’t want to leave (understandable) Barnsley move player to ‘sister club’ on same wages, thus freeing up money at Barnsley for new players.
Are we ********. Fringe player (and the rest of his hair). Not in the managers plans. Offloaded to free up wage budget.
Is it that dodgy really? All we know is that our owners own both clubs. We're all presuming there's no fee involved. No point jumping to conclusions, but from what I can see, nothing 'dodgy' has happened.
Isn’t one of the main points of having clubs in different countries is that players can be moved sideways between those clubs - both benefiting the club and the player. As I said earlier - it looks like we couldn’t recoup the outlay for McGeehan so have moved him sideways. He’s off Barnsley’s wage bill (making room for other players to be brought in). He benefits our sister club. The owners haven’t lost a shed load of money selling him for a knock down price. It’s a WIN, WIN ....... and WIN scenario.
Love the negativity towards this. Almost everybody said they'd sell him in the transfer threads. If he'd gone to a Portsmouth, Charlton, etc, with no mention of any fee, there'd be pages of 'good luck, Cameron' posts. Now, he's gone to a club under some of the same ownership as us, and folk are insinuating at some form of financial fraud.
Our owners don’t own both clubs , we are owned by a consortium of people and as are they, the key thing is that each consortium have different people in them, with a couple of common denominators . Don’t understand why people automatically see a negative, no one knows deals behind it or money etc. I see the positives that the club is making moves early to free up places in the squad of players not likely to be playing, which hopefully in turn means incoming.
Stop talking sense and so what if the owners are using their knowledge of our fringe players to benefit both clubs?
Thank you for playing your part in our 2018/19 promotion season, it was greatly appreciated. Good luck with your career, Cam, and if you ever return to Oakwell as an opposition player, you'll receive a warm reception from me.
The OWNERS haven't lost money? It isn't the owners money remember, it's the club's money and the club I support has just handed a good player to another club free of charge because we spent money buying a far far weaker replacement
Our owners are moving players freely between two clubs they own. If that allows us to reduce our outgoings to suit FFP by getting people we can't sell off the wage bill, I think other clubs will be able to legitimately question that. Fair enough, we might be able to argue a case about owning the clubs so why not, but if that's ok, what's to stop Oostende paying us £20m for a player in a season or two if we get overstretched and need to meet FFP criteria?
Yet your not bothered about Styles getting a longer contract because the money will go to the owners???? Seems like you've got a grudge or 2
As l said the other week they're beginning to shift players between their clubs, we are now the big fish in their investment - hopefully we will be getting the up and coming players from the feeder clubs.
My grudge is that our owners have treated the fans with utter contempt and have straight out lied to us in the past. I have no shame in saying that I hold a grudge against these people after the way we have all been treated by them. And yes it is possible to believe that in the long run our owners intend to profit from player trading without also thinking they're going to put their own money in. Remember that during this global pandemic the owners have asked the fans to gift a cash injection to the club but have refused to do the same themselves
We've let a fringe player go, and another one on loan. Dropping in a £20 million transfer to satisfy FFP is bit of a stretch.