O'Grady given permission to talk to Charlton.

We must have agreed a price, come on Ben let's hear the waffle.

 

In chronicle on Friday

Mansford said I think it's important that the deal fee is undisclosed, so we're not hold to ransom when we look to do our business in the transfer market come the last week of August, so I won't be disclosing the fee we've received in the best interest of the club,all I will say is we as a club are happy with the fee.

 

Lets give Ben Mansford and BFC the opportunity to tell us what is happening.

They must get this right, as we are talking about selling our leading goal scorer, at what looks like a knock-down £500K fee.

Like I say, we have to grant them their chance to respond, but I am not exactly brimming with optimism.

 

Get real pal, how do you expect them to tell us stuff like that, when what every Barnsley fan wants to know is who won thousand pound draw this month, how to win 17 million on a made up loto. And that john stones is on England stand by list, They've too much on with all them important things to inform us of to find time to put ***** like that on the site.

 

^^^This^^^. It will give us an opportunity to see if we really are changing the culture at the club or if it is just a case of same old *****, different day and meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

 

It is the same boss and there lies the problem.

 

On one level that means "If clubs know we've got a lot of money for him they'll hold out for more from us when we go for their players" (which is ***** - fine if you're Man City, ******** if you're us) but on another level it also means "if clubs know we'll let our best striker go for peanuts we've got no chance getting owt for the others".

Double speak taken to a new level.

IMHO trying to conceal transfer fees is rubbish and excuses are being made.

 

Agreed, that we like to announce lots of news, which is actually not really news, but its easy and fluffy for the Club to do this.

The sale of COG is a key issue, gives Ben Mansford an opportunity to see if he is delivering on what he has said in the past, or are we just bumbling along as normal (backwards, in my opinion).

 

To be fair to DW, he will probably be wanting O'Grady to stay but he will have very little say in the amount we get.

 

Since when do managers set fees, and when would that ever be a good idea? The fees agreed are down to the clubs concerned, the buying club wanting to pay as little as possible and the selling club as much as possible. There may be influence from other quarters but the final decision is always the people running and overseeing the club.

 

I think there needs to be a degree of realisation that buying a replacement in Division 1 to score 15 goals is far easier and cheaper than buying one to score the same amount in the Championship. A quick example:

Chris Dagnall (Barnsley) : 34 games (19 more as sub) - 6 goals
Chris Dagnall (Leyton Orient) : 11 games (10 more as sub) - 6 goals.

We all agreed Dagnall was a great trier, but not Championship quality. He's gone on to do fairly well for Leyton Orient. You could say if he'd have played a whole season he'd be looking at well over 15 goals.

 

The owner and directors of the club.

 

I'd have thought so too, even if it was just to get a second opinion.

 

The first team manager isn't responsible for setting the price of player sales. He may give a recommendation and share a view, but it's the directors of a football club who have financial authority.

 

I would have thought both Mansford and Wilson will sit down and have a realistic value and minimum fee for each player.
This would need to be updated at least twice a year, depending upon factors like period of contract remaining, current form, etc.

At the end of the day, Wilson is our "football expert" so he must have a say in the valuations?