' Cornellius transfer not the only balls up '

the more I see of our transfer dealings under Malky and Moody, the more I am sympathetic as to why VT was so determined to get rid of them. The two ongoing at the moment are Campbell and Caulker, now surely on signing Campbell the deal that was put together left nothing in the deal for the club? How did they manage to insert a measly £800K release clause, its pathetic when you think about it, especially when you consider we were probably paying him £30-35K, it wasn't as if he was coming to a club that was desperate, the guy has got to be worth £3-£4 million, having got over his injuries and had a full season in the Premiership? Now Caulker, again, we weren't a desperate club, so why have a release clause for the same amount that we paid for him, no increase? So if we had stayed up, his value would be closer to £15 million and whats he on £40k? I know that some on here will blame the CEO, but Moody and Malky were the football men, who had the most knowledge of how these deals work. VT was properly taken the piss out of

I havent read your post in full, as off out, but just so you know, if Caulker is sold to QPR, we have not lost one pence

The Caulker clause is good business as we don't have to give any of the money to Spurs. We've not made a loss on him.
Campbell I agree, the 800k clause is ridiculously low.

We won't lose a penny on Caulker and Medel. We may even make a small profit from the two. Brayford will hopefully show this season why he was rated as the best right back in the Championship and prove the 1.5 million to sign him was a bargain. I would say we will probably get our 2 million back on Catherine too if we sell him. To me, it seems we will only lose money from the Cornelius and Odemwingie deals, so for you to slate Malky for "several" signings that you say we will lose money on is highly unfair and untrue.

People forget that cambell was a gamble buy considering the injury problems he has had in the past. Also he was bought in January of our promotion season and scored some vital goals for us which potentially got us promoted.

I agree the release clause is a bit low but it is still more than what we paid for him.

Maybe an 800k release clause was one of the terms of Campbell's contract when he signed

I remember thinking when we were making some of these transfers "How have they managed to pull that one off?!" - the answer is now obvious, they offered them high wages and a 'get out of jail free card' clause in their contract saying we had to release them for a low fee if we went down.

The problem we have got here is, any club promoted to the Premier League, New players dictate their contracts and have get out clauses and its happening at 99% of the clubs that go up and down from the Premier League.

If were going to blame anyone its Simon Lim CEO who wrote all the contracts up and then was present on every player signing and over saw everything on behalf of Tan, a fact.

The Campbell deal was done so that he could leave after six months if we didn't get promoted. We should have got him to sign a new deal once promoted but maybe we did and he rejected it, he certainly would have wanted more in wages signing a contract in the premier league. If I was Campbell I wouldn't have signed a new contract unless offered megabucks because he is now able to sign whatever offer he fancies.

The caulker deal is excellent business if we get our money back, got a quality player for a year and don't lose any money when relegated. Compare that to some other recently relegated clubs who got next to nothing for players they payed big money for.

the more I see of our transfer dealings under Malky and Moody, the more I am sympathetic as to why VT was so determined to get rid of them. The two ongoing at the moment are Campbell and Caulker, now surely on signing Campbell the deal that was put together left nothing in the deal for the club? How did they manage to insert a measly £800K release clause, its pathetic when you think about it, especially when you consider we were probably paying him £30-35K, it wasn't as if he was coming to a club that was desperate, the guy has got to be worth £3-£4 million, having got over his injuries and had a full season in the Premiership? Now Caulker, again, we weren't a desperate club, so why have a release clause for the same amount that we paid for him, no increase? So if we had stayed up, his value would be closer to £15 million and whats he on £40k? I know that some on here will blame the CEO, but Moody and Malky were the football men, who had the most knowledge of how these deals work. VT was properly taken the piss out of

Kind of agree with you but vt should have had a football man as CEO not one of his puppets from another business. Both sides need to share a portion of blame and tan should have sorted the sacking out behind closed doors and not aired his dirty linen in public.

Clearly Malky is tarnished by this affair and has made mistakes which is why he hasn't got a job yet.

the more I see of our transfer dealings under Malky and Moody, the more I am sympathetic as to why VT was so determined to get rid of them. The two ongoing at the moment are Campbell and Caulker, now surely on signing Campbell the deal that was put together left nothing in the deal for the club? How did they manage to insert a measly £800K release clause, its pathetic when you think about it, especially when you consider we were probably paying him £30-35K, it wasn't as if he was coming to a club that was desperate, the guy has got to be worth £3-£4 million, having got over his injuries and had a full season in the Premiership? Now Caulker, again, we weren't a desperate club, so why have a release clause for the same amount that we paid for him, no increase? So if we had stayed up, his value would be closer to £15 million and whats he on £40k? I know that some on here will blame the CEO, but Moody and Malky were the football men, who had the most knowledge of how these deals work. VT was properly taken the piss out of

I don't disagree with a lot of what you say here, but Caulker was still tied to Spurs in that anything over the £8m purchase would be split 50/50 so as long as he commands £8m, happy days. The Campbell one is another thing! If not daft, it is regrettable.

People forget that cambell was a gamble buy considering the injury problems he has had in the past. Also he was bought in January of our promotion season and scored some vital goals for us which potentially got us promoted.

I agree the release clause is a bit low but it is still more than what we paid for him.

That's precisely the point, Campbell was a gamble as he had injury issues, yet we only got to insert a clause that we make £150K on any transfer So if he had banged in 15 goals last year a £15 million pound player would still go for £800k, if you lot think that's good business then thank feck your running the club

Your all missing the point though?? Caulker is worth more thhan £8 million, I have never heard anything so ridiculous as people stating that £8 million is good as anything over we would share 50/50 with Spurs If he had gone for £10 million, which he should have done, then we make £1million, the way the deal has been set up gives Caulker £15k a week on top of what he should be getting as the transfer fee is lower than it should be. Thats the magic of Malky and Moody

Your all missing the point though?? Caulker is worth more thhan £8 million, I have never heard anything so ridiculous as people stating that £8 million is good as anything over we would share 50/50 with Spurs If he had gone for £10 million, which he should have done, then we make £1million, the way the deal has been set up gives Caulker £15k a week on top of what he should be getting as the transfer fee is lower than it should be. Thats the magic of Malky and Moody

I'm not saying they are good contracts, quite the opposite,I agree with you, but thats the Magic of Simon Lim CEO on behalf on Tan

the more I see of our transfer dealings under Malky and Moody, the more I am sympathetic as to why VT was so determined to get rid of them. The two ongoing at the moment are Campbell and Caulker, now surely on signing Campbell the deal that was put together left nothing in the deal for the club? How did they manage to insert a measly £800K release clause, its pathetic when you think about it, especially when you consider we were probably paying him £30-35K, it wasn't as if he was coming to a club that was desperate, the guy has got to be worth £3-£4 million, having got over his injuries and had a full season in the Premiership? Now Caulker, again, we weren't a desperate club, so why have a release clause for the same amount that we paid for him, no increase? So if we had stayed up, his value would be closer to £15 million and whats he on £40k? I know that some on here will blame the CEO, but Moody and Malky were the football men, who had the most knowledge of how these deals work. VT was properly taken the piss out of

Kind of agree with you but vt should have had a football man as CEO not one of his puppets from another business. Both sides need to share a portion of blame and tan should have sorted the sacking out behind closed doors and not aired his dirty linen in public.

Clearly Malky is tarnished by this affair and has made mistakes which is why he hasn't got a job yet.

Agreed Gareth, a football man should have been the CEO, maybe things are different with Dalman, as he does know the business to a certain extent, but in VTs defence, I believe he kept Malky and Moody in place because they convinced him that they could broker all the deals as they had the knowledge. The CEO was merely there to sign them off in the belief that they had done the best deal on the clubs behalf. Naive from VT but understandable. Just look at the cock ups Fernandez at QPR has been duped into

I havent read your post in full, as off out, but just so you know, if Caulker is sold to QPR, we have not lost one pence

We should be making money on Caulker mate, if Luke Shaw is worth £30 million then surely Caulker is worth £12 million??

Your all missing the point though?? Caulker is worth more thhan £8 million, I have never heard anything so ridiculous as people stating that £8 million is good as anything over we would share 50/50 with Spurs If he had gone for £10 million, which he should have done, then we make £1million, the way the deal has been set up gives Caulker £15k a week on top of what he should be getting as the transfer fee is lower than it should be. Thats the magic of Malky and Moody

I'm not saying they are good contracts, quite the opposite,I agree with you, but thats the Magic of Simon Lim CEO on behalf on Tan

I don't agree with blaming Lim, I think that the only reason VT kept Malky and Moody in place was because they convinced him that they could broker all the deals as THEY were the football men with the knowledge of how transfers work If anything VT was naive and has learned that the hard way, but not as hard as Fernandez at QPR

:thumbup:

Your all missing the point though?? Caulker is worth more thhan £8 million, I have never heard anything so ridiculous as people stating that £8 million is good as anything over we would share 50/50 with Spurs If he had gone for £10 million, which he should have done, then we make £1million, the way the deal has been set up gives Caulker £15k a week on top of what he should be getting as the transfer fee is lower than it should be. Thats the magic of Malky and Moody

I'm not saying they are good contracts, quite the opposite,I agree with you, but thats the Magic of Simon Lim CEO on behalf on Tan

I don't agree with blaming Lim, I think that the only reason VT kept Malky and Moody in place was because they convinced him that they could broker all the deals as THEY were the football men with the knowledge of how transfers work If anything VT was naive and has learned that the hard way, but not as hard as Fernandez at QPR

Lim was our CEO of our football club, Tan appointed him, so are you saying your not blaming none of them?

Also I know for a fact from directors that Simon Lim was all over the contracts and studying them on behalf of Tan, who appointed him.

the more I see of our transfer dealings under Malky and Moody, the more I am sympathetic as to why VT was so determined to get rid of them. The two ongoing at the moment are Campbell and Caulker, now surely on signing Campbell the deal that was put together left nothing in the deal for the club? How did they manage to insert a measly £800K release clause, its pathetic when you think about it, especially when you consider we were probably paying him £30-35K, it wasn't as if he was coming to a club that was desperate, the guy has got to be worth £3-£4 million, having got over his injuries and had a full season in the Premiership? Now Caulker, again, we weren't a desperate club, so why have a release clause for the same amount that we paid for him, no increase? So if we had stayed up, his value would be closer to £15 million and whats he on £40k? I know that some on here will blame the CEO, but Moody and Malky were the football men, who had the most knowledge of how these deals work. VT was properly taken the piss out of

im not backing malky at all,but these clauses were probably put in by the players agent and nothing malky could do if he wanted these players...

I havent read your post in full, as off out, but just so you know, if Caulker is sold to QPR, we have not lost one pence

We should be making money on Caulker mate, if Luke Shaw is worth £30 million then surely Caulker is worth £12 million??

Really bad comparison. Luke Shaw has been at Southampton since he was 8 years old and did not have the clause written into his contract that Caulker did.

Do you really think that players like Caulker would have signed for us without getting everything he wanted inserted into the contract. He knew the chances of relegation were high when he signed....if he was signing for say Arsenal or Everton then those clauses would not have been in there. We were a big risk for someone like Caulker and he had to have a fallback plan.

Your all missing the point though?? Caulker is worth more thhan £8 million, I have never heard anything so ridiculous as people stating that £8 million is good as anything over we would share 50/50 with Spurs If he had gone for £10 million, which he should have done, then we make £1million, the way the deal has been set up gives Caulker £15k a week on top of what he should be getting as the transfer fee is lower than it should be. Thats the magic of Malky and Moody

What I'm saying is that there was no loss on Caulker. The release clause was at the insistence of Spurs and Caulker's reps. Would have been great to get £12m for him, £2m profit for the club.

Don't forget Caulker was being followed by a number of clubs at the time so he and Spurs were in the driving seat. Caulker has ended up with a "partial Bosman", nit that there is such a thing, but you know what I mean. Whacked up signing on fee or higher wages, incentive bonuses etc.

I havent read your post in full, as off out, but just so you know, if Caulker is sold to QPR, we have not lost one pence

We should be making money on Caulker mate, if Luke Shaw is worth £30 million then surely Caulker is worth £12 million??

Why?

Weve just been relegated, were lucky weve got all our money back

I havent read your post in full, as off out, but just so you know, if Caulker is sold to QPR, we have not lost one pence

We should be making money on Caulker mate, if Luke Shaw is worth £30 million then surely Caulker is worth £12 million??

Why?

Weve just been relegated, were lucky weve got all our money back

Exactly!

We won't lose a penny on Caulker and Medel. We may even make a small profit from the two. Brayford will hopefully show this season why he was rated as the best right back in the Championship and prove the 1.5 million to sign him was a bargain. I would say we will probably get our 2 million back on Catherine too if we sell him. To me, it seems we will only lose money from the Cornelius and Odemwingie deals, so for you to slate Malky for "several" signings that you say we will lose money on is highly unfair and untrue.

Let's not forget amandorin signed on the transfer deadline day. He's on good money but played two development games last year and is contracted to June 2017

I cant believe that people post on here that they are happy with the deal because Spurs dont get anything from the sale.

If we sold him for for 2 mill more it would still be 1 mill profit to us but who cares about that? We are Cardiff so we dont need it right!

I havent read your post in full, as off out, but just so you know, if Caulker is sold to QPR, we have not lost one pence

We should be making money on Caulker mate, if Luke Shaw is worth £30 million then surely Caulker is worth £12 million??

Why?

Weve just been relegated, were lucky weve got all our money back

I've just showed you why, because if Luke Shaw is worth £30 million, then Caulker, an England international and who many think in the right circumstances could be an England regular has got to worth £10-£12 million??
So your blaming Caulker for our relegation? Your more bananas than I thought

I cant believe that people post on here that they are happy with the deal because Spurs dont get anything from the sale.

If we sold him for for 2 mill more it would still be 1 mill profit to us but who cares about that? We are Cardiff so we dont need it right!

Mad aint it??

Thought a release clause was to say they can then talk. Not that is the amount we have to except. He is worth what we say he is. Most probably wrong. But it's Tans staff so the buck stops with Tan. A bad tradesman always blames his tools. Now Tan is blaming his tools

I havent read your post in full, as off out, but just so you know, if Caulker is sold to QPR, we have not lost one pence

We should be making money on Caulker mate, if Luke Shaw is worth £30 million then surely Caulker is worth £12 million??

Why?

Weve just been relegated, were lucky weve got all our money back

Bye the way, you say lucky to get our money back, yet 3, maybe more clubs have met the release clause. That's some piece of luck

I cant believe that people post on here that they are happy with the deal because Spurs dont get anything from the sale.

If we sold him for for 2 mill more it would still be 1 mill profit to us but who cares about that? We are Cardiff so we dont need it right!

Mad aint it??

That isn't what I meant as I explained. Of course 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. But in the real world, Caulker would not have signed for Cardiff under any other conditions. He had other options and had no previous loyalty to us.