John souttar

[kingantti1874]

15 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

You said we should "speculate to accumulate". 

 

That's not a controlled and studied approach to build. 

 

It's the exact opposite. 

You're all over the place. 

 

Do you even know what your original point was or did you just trigger and melt all over JKB? 

 

I’ve been consistent since my first point, unlike you and your borderline pathetic attempts at deflection.
 

you said above I haven’t set a limit.  £10k is reasonable in my opinion for a player of Souttar ability.  If the club offered £10k and soapy leaves I don’t think we could be too disappointed in that.  Content that the club have done their best.  
 

What’s you limit?  
 

Now choose carefully becuase if you say £8k I’m going to laugh at you for suggesting the club can’t afford an additional £100k and if you say £3k I’m going to laugh at you because i would hazard quite of a lot of people on this thread earn more than £3k per week

Edited November 13, 2021 by kingantti1874

[kingantti1874]

6 minutes ago, FarmerTweedy said:

You're arguing to do exactly that. Pay wages we can't afford and hope a big transfer fee comes along in the future to get us out of trouble is exactly what you're arguing for!

 

Ach, carry on, nobody at the club will be remotely stupid enough to be thinking along similar lines, so just you enjoy your demented rambling!

How much can we afford ? What’s your limit? 

[FarmerTweedy]

1 hour ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

If we get into Europe regularly then we can "push the boat" out a bit more, but we aren't there yet and no matter what- if Blackburn and the likes of Stoke are interested we aren't competing with them, they'll offer £20k plus no bother. 

 

Like you say We can't pay players that. 

 

If the difference was £1 or £2k then we could compete but it's £10's of thousands. 

 

 

Correct. 

 

We have to be able to bring in the money first. And we should be heading in the right direction. With Budge paid back, fans back in the ground, hospitality apparently selling well, FoH contributions at a record high, benefactors still backing us, and the club looking good for our highest league placing in a few years, we should be well placed just now to start stretching the top end of the wage structure a bit. If we can secure a league finish that guarantees us group stage European football, we should then be able to push it even further in the summer.  And if we do happen to get a big transfer fee for someone, we can then use that to push it further still.  We have to secure the income first though, then push the spending, not start spending and just hope the income then accrues accordingly, because we're screwed if it doesn't. 

 

 

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, kingantti1874 said:

then we will lose (or fail to secure) another great asset who could make the club millions.
 

I’m not advocating for wild spending. I’m advocating for controlled and studied investment which will help the club build. 
 

we should be looking to increase our maximum wages year on year

£10-£12k a week for a centre back with an injury history and hardly any caps is the very definition of wild spending. It’s a massive gamble. We can’t afford it. We shouldn’t even consider it. The club have already said they won’t, so, nice wee dream theory but not happening in the real world

[kingantti1874]

1 minute ago, FarmerTweedy said:

Correct. 

 

We have to be able to bring in the money first. And we should be heading in the right direction. With Budge paid back, fans back in the ground, hospitality apparently selling well, FoH contributions at a record high, benefactors still backing us, and the club looking good for our highest league placing in a few years, we should be well placed just now to start stretching the top end of the wage structure a bit. If we can secure a league finish that guarantees us group stage European football, we should then be able to push it even further in the summer.  And if we do happen to get a big transfer fee for someone, we can then use that to push it further still.  We have to secure the income first though, then push the spending, not start spending and just hope the income then accrues accordingly, because we're screwed if it doesn't. 

 

 

Ah so you do agree but you are waiting for European income first..  waiting for a tomorrow that may never arrive if we lose our best players on the cheap.

 

Paying John Souttar a decent wage won’t “bankrupt” the club FFS
 

 

[JimmyCant]

8 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

How much can we afford ? What’s your limit? 

I imagine we are already paying at the limit of what we can afford. Otherwise we’d be banking serious money we haven’t spent year on year . No ?

[kingantti1874]

2 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

£10-£12k a week for a centre back with an injury history and hardly any caps is the very definition of wild spending. It’s a massive gamble. We can’t afford it. We shouldn’t even consider it. The club have already said they won’t, so, nice wee dream theory but not happening in the real world

so what is the limit for our best player.  Lots of people saying we can’t afford £10k per week for our best player but refusing to share an opinion on what we should offer him.

 

[Bull's-eye]

1 hour ago, Boyces beard said:

Yip i agree, but we actually need at least 3 if Souttar leaves because Kingsley will go back to left wing back when Cochrane goes back down the road and Smith is getting on a bit although could still do a job as centre half, not so sure he could go another season after this one as a wing back though. We could be left with just Halkett as our only recognised centre half, but like you say Savage will sort out whatever is needed and has not let us down yet. the future is bright, thats for sure.

 

 

Far too positive for this forum I'm afraid.

 

You're not welcome, don't come back, cheers.

[JimmyCant]

Just now, kingantti1874 said:

Ah so you do agree but you are waiting for European income first..  waiting for a tomorrow that may never arrive if we lose our best players on the cheap.

 

Paying John Souttar a decent wage won’t “bankrupt” the club FFS
 

 

It send out a bad message to current players and agents. Pay Souttar £10k a week and you’ll have a queue at your door of another 10 players wanting the same

[JimmyCant]

2 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

so what is the limit for our best player.  Lots of people saying we can’t afford £10k per week for our best player but refusing to share an opinion on what we should offer him.

 

You’d have to ask someone who knows the current wage structure and knows who our top earner is and how much they are on (not someone pretending to know) also, I’d take issue with the assertion that Souttar is our best player

Edited November 13, 2021 by JimmyCant

[So Make Some Noise..]

These hopeful threads... the boy will be gone, just like others before him and others still to come. My hope is that he insists on a sell on clause or something in his contract like Callum Paterson did. That's the best we can hope for in my view, unless ofcourse he picks up another injury and it turns off his Souttar's (excuse the pun 🤓)

[kingantti1874]

7 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

I imagine we are already paying at the limit of what we can afford. Otherwise we’d be banking serious money we haven’t spent year on year . No ?

Our turnover will be materially up this year due to gates + TV + sporting income.
 

FOH contributions are at record levels over £140k per month (enough to top up soapys salary no?) 

 

In addition, I would expect some big earners such as Jamie Walker will be off the wage bill in the summer.   We could of course sign another squad player or 2 OR we could secure our best players..

 

 

Edited November 13, 2021 by kingantti1874

[kingantti1874]

3 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

It send out a bad message to current players and agents. Pay Souttar £10k a week and you’ll have a queue at your door of another 10 players wanting the same

.. show me a club on earth who doesn’t pay their best, most established players the most. 
 

hopefully, it would show them that if they do well consistently they would be rewarded.. who knows maybe some of them will warn Bigger wage and a big money move 

[FarmerTweedy]

20 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

But we are ploughing £150k/month. 
 

An old question but what is that money going to be used for?

It's probably already being used to help the general running of the club, up until recently we've had a huge hole in our income thanks to demotion, and all the impacts from covid on revenue such as ticket sales, hospitality, etc. We're thankfully now getting back towards 'normal' in that regard, but having signed a raft of players in the summer of significantly higher quality than we had before, the likelihood is that it's already helping fund the wages of our current squad!

[Boyces beard]

4 minutes ago, So Make Some Noise.. said:

These hopeful threads... the boy will be gone, just like others before him and others still to come. My hope is that he insists on a sell on clause or something in his contract like Callum Paterson did. That's the best we can hope for in my view, unless ofcourse he picks up another injury and it turns off his Souttar's (excuse the pun 🤓)

Made me laugh 🤣

[kingantti1874]

7 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

You’d have to ask someone who knows the current wage structure and knows who our top earner is and how much they are on (not someone pretending to know)

That’s right.  Putting aside the hypothetical numbers you would agree that John Souttar is worth pushing the boat out for ? Because he is a good player? Arguably our best player? And if he was tied to a decent contract he would be worth a lot.. 

 

a simple yea or no will be fine.. 

Edited November 13, 2021 by kingantti1874

[Batistuta87]

Whatever we were paying Naismith should be the ceiling for key players. We know we can afford that and it was good enough to draw him. Souttar is a key player and IMO is worth every penny we were paying SN. 

 

If we're fannying around offering him another £500 a week then we need to take a look at how we table a contract offer. It would be well worthwhile investing something like £500k pa in Souttar in the hope that we only actually pay him that for a season or so, and then sell him for £4-5M. 

 

[kingantti1874]

2 minutes ago, Batistuta87 said:

Whatever we were paying Naismith should be the ceiling for key players. We know we can afford that and it was good enough to draw him. Souttar is a key player and IMO is worth every penny we were paying SN. 

 

If we're fannying around offering him another £500 a week then we need to take a look at how we table a contract offer. It would be well worthwhile investing something like £500k pa in Souttar in the hope that we only actually pay him that for a season or so, and then sell him for £4-5M. 

 

👏 

[WageThief]

6 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

That’s right.  Putting aside the hypothetical numbers you would agree that John Souttar is worth pushing the boat out for ? Because he is a good player? Arguably our best player? And if he was tied to a decent contract he would be worth a lot.. 

 

a simple yea or no will be fine.. 

 

Can you explain what pushing the boat out means?  If it doesn't mean taking on debt, then it must mean saving the money elsewhere.  I presume we should cut the size of the squad to 16 and pay Souttar, Beni, Devlin, and Woodburn all 10k a week?

[JimmyCant]

14 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

Our turnover will be materially up this year due to gates + TV + sporting income.
 

FOH contributions are at record levels over £140k per month (enough to top up soapys salary no?) 

 

In addition, I would expect some big earners such as Jamie Walker will be off the wage bill in the summer.   We could of course sign another squad player or 2 OR we could secure our best players..

 

 

Or we could realise that there is a potentially huge rebuilding job coming in the summer with so many players out of contract or loans ending and save our money for that, instead of a player who only wants to stay if he gets money we simply don’t want to pay him.

[JimmyCant]

16 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

That’s right.  Putting aside the hypothetical numbers you would agree that John Souttar is worth pushing the boat out for ? Because he is a good player? Arguably our best player? And if he was tied to a decent contract he would be worth a lot.. 

 

a simple yea or no will be fine.. 

No he isn’t worth ‘pushing the boat out’ for, whatever that actually means in your mind. We don’t have a big enough boat.

Edited November 13, 2021 by JimmyCant

[Boyces beard]

2 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

That’s right.  Putting aside the hypothetical L numbers you would agree that John Souttar is worth pushing the boat out for ? Because he is a good player? Arguably our best player? And if he was tied to a decent contract he would be worth a lot.. 

 

a simple yea or no will be fine.. 

If Souttar had not had his injuries we would have cashed in already and made a tidy sum at that. Again if Souttar had not had the injuries and was still a Hearts player under his current contract then yes i agree that he is arguably our best player and it would be well worth giving him a new deal on 10k a week knowing we would get millions for him in the very near future.

 

The problem is the injuries, we can not take a risk on paying Souttar so much knowing that he could break down at any minute as has happened all through his Hearts career.

Your point is totaly valid and most folk would agree with pushing the boat out but his injury history does not make this an option for a club like Hearts.

 

I know all clubs insure there players but i dont know the in's and out's of how it works and if its only for career ending injuries ect. But even then i would imagine that the club already pay a large premium to insure Souttar compared to the other players at the club.

[Rocky jamboa]

1 hour ago, FarmerTweedy said:

It is fantasy land.

 

'No brain' is the only part of your post that's relevant, quite frankly.  You're absolutely clueless if you think we can just stick Souttar on that sort of money without everyone else we ever try to get to sign a contract in the future setting their demands and expectations based on what we're then paying Souttar. Want to try to get Cochrane, Woodburn or Moore to join us permanently after their loans? They'll all be expecting the same deal as Souttar. And Bristol City's expectations for a transfer fee will for Moore will go up significantly if they think we've that sort of money. Want a new striker in January or next summer? They'll be demanding the same, if not more (strikers tend to be expensive). Beni or Devlin to sign an extension at any point? Same sort of demands. We can't afford that sort of wage bill.

 

And back to the injury point, I don't believe clubs have cover for every single injury absence a player could have, rather there's cover for if a player has to give up their career, but even if I'm wrong, so what?  If Souttar got an injury that put him out for a few months, and he then came back not the same player, but still able to play football (like Berra, for instance), we'd be stuck paying his unaffordable wages for years, and there'd be nothing we could do about it.

 

And finally, if you think we should be following Romanov's business plan again (which is what you're basically arguing for when you start talking about Gordon's deal), then any sane Hearts fan can only hope you're never anywhere near being in the running for a FoH board seat!

Oooooh. Someone's got a bit stroppy at a post on a football forum! 😁

 

My point is that Souttar is one of our most valuable assets and we should be pushing our budget to get him to sign a longer deal, which we will benefit from in future. I would be surprised if a business woman like Budge hasn't already done that. 

 

I get your point about others wanting bigger wages (it's good to accept other people's opinions - you should try it sometime) so there is maybe another way they could structure his contract, such as he gets a percentage of any future transfer fee.

 

He might want to go regardless of what we offer, but we should do what we can to stop a £4m asset walking out the door for free.

[FTH]

I think some people need a reality check at the moment. I keep seeing comments (here and social media) along the lines of "I'm not ready to lose Souttar", "break the bank to keep him", "I'll be inconsolable when he leaves" etc.

 

John Souttar is a good defender, yes, but he seems to be made out to be some kind of messiah at the moment. If he has a better offer on a the table and doesn't want to sign for us again then cheerio. I'll not lose any sleep over it, we'll move on and replace him. If we get some cash for him great and if he just runs down his contract to get a better deal for himself at the end of the season then good for him.

 

Was probably more disappointed when we didn't manage to extend Jimmy Dunne's loan deal a few seasons ago than I am about potentially losing John Souttar.

[kingantti1874]

7 minutes ago, Boyces beard said:

If Souttar had not had his injuries we would have cashed in already and made a tidy sum at that. Again if Souttar had not had the injuries and was still a Hearts player under his current contract then yes i agree that he is arguably our best player and it would be well worth giving him a new deal on 10k a week knowing we would get millions for him in the very near future.

 

The problem is the injuries, we can not take a risk on paying Souttar so much knowing that he could break down at any minute as has happened all through his Hearts career.

Your point is totaly valid and most folk would agree with pushing the boat out but his injury history does not make this an option for a club like Hearts.

 

I know all clubs insure there players but i dont know the in's and out's of how it works and if its only for career ending injuries ect. But even then i would imagine that the club already pay a large premium to insure Souttar compared to the other players at the club.

cool at least we are getting somewhere. You don’t think Souttar specifically is worth the risk to hearts because of his injuries whereas I do. 

 

thats a different debate and whilst I don’t agree with your opinion, it’s a completely valid one

Edited November 13, 2021 by kingantti1874

[karipidis]

19 minutes ago, FTH said:

I think some people need a reality check at the moment. I keep seeing comments (here and social media) along the lines of "I'm not ready to lose Souttar", "break the bank to keep him", "I'll be inconsolable when he leaves" etc.

 

John Souttar is a good defender, yes, but he seems to be made out to be some kind of messiah at the moment. If he has a better offer on a the table and doesn't want to sign for us again then cheerio. I'll not lose any sleep over it, we'll move on and replace him. If we get some cash for him great and if he just runs down his contract to get a better deal for himself at the end of the season then good for him.

 

Was probably more disappointed when we didn't manage to extend Jimmy Dunne's loan deal a few seasons ago than I am about potentially losing John Souttar.

More disappointed about dunne than Souttar? Really? We have potentially a £5 million player on our books and we could lose him for free. Not to mention the change in performances and results since he’s come back from injury. Our best player and will be difficult to replace. 

[KyleLafferty]

A player on 10k a week at hearts is fantasy and stupid. It’s like people have forgot why got into admin. I’d imagine the top earner at hearts will be half of that and will be Craig Gordon.

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, Batistuta87 said:

Whatever we were paying Naismith should be the ceiling for key players. We know we can afford that and it was good enough to draw him. Souttar is a key player and IMO is worth every penny we were paying SN. 

 

If we're fannying around offering him another £500 a week then we need to take a look at how we table a contract offer. It would be well worthwhile investing something like £500k pa in Souttar in the hope that we only actually pay him that for a season or so, and then sell him for £4-5M. 

 

Naismith was a seasoned experienced international and the most talented player in the team by a distance, probably one of the most talented, most experienced players we’ve ever signed. I’ve no idea how much we paid him. I suspect the deal , or part of it, was financed by a benefactor anyway

[Byyy The Light]

1 hour ago, Batistuta87 said:

Whatever we were paying Naismith should be the ceiling for key players. We know we can afford that and it was good enough to draw him. Souttar is a key player and IMO is worth every penny we were paying SN. 

 

If we're fannying around offering him another £500 a week then we need to take a look at how we table a contract offer. It would be well worthwhile investing something like £500k pa in Souttar in the hope that we only actually pay him that for a season or so, and then sell him for £4-5M. 

 

I’d guess the club have offered Souttar the top wages they can. Which is probably about 1/3 of what a Championship club could give him.

 

£20k per week no problem for Souttar down south. Hearts can’t compete with that. 

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, karipidis said:

More disappointed about dunne than Souttar? Really? We have potentially a £5 million player on our books and we could lose him for free. Not to mention the change in performances and results since he’s come back from injury. Our best player and will be difficult to replace. 

He isn’t our best player. He is also an injury risk so we’ll struggle to get £5million. If he no longer wants to play for Hearts for the money we’ve offered, the rules are in his favour and he can leave. Breaking the bank to keep him isn’t an option. The club have said so and most people agree with the clubs view, particularly those that helped rescue the club and still contribute

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, karipidis said:

More disappointed about dunne than Souttar? Really? We have potentially a £5 million player on our books and we could lose him for free. Not to mention the change in performances and results since he’s come back from injury. Our best player and will be difficult to replace. 

Christ sake is it not dawning on people yet that he’s not signing and he’s going to move for at least 3 times what we could pay him

[Psychedelicropcircle]

2 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:

But we are ploughing £150k/month. 
 

An old question but what is that money going to be used for?

Heard SW is saving up for a Death Star!

[Cruyff]

If we lose Soapy we need to try and get Moore on a permanent deal. Moore is probably not as good as John but certainly like for like. 

[Pasquale for King]

5 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

£4 million for Steven Fletcher too.

Glad they didn’t really kick on with that money. Farmer wanted out even back then and wanted his money back . They contributed quite a few players to the international team back then, barely any since, none in the class of Souttar anyway. 

Edited November 13, 2021 by Pasquale for King

[Nookie Bear]

1 hour ago, JimmyCant said:

Naismith was a seasoned experienced international and the most talented player in the team by a distance, probably one of the most talented, most experienced players we’ve ever signed. I’ve no idea how much we paid him. I suspect the deal , or part of it, was financed by a benefactor anyway

That gives me an idea 💡 

[Nookie Bear]

2 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

It send out a bad message to current players and agents. Pay Souttar £10k a week and you’ll have a queue at your door of another 10 players wanting the same

Happens at practically every club. You want to earn more? Prove your worth and get a new contract. 

[JimmyCant]

3 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Happens at practically every club. You want to earn more? Prove your worth and get a new contract. 

True, but all but a few elite clubs have a ceiling and a structure they stick to more or less. If we were to put a player on £10k a week, that’s probably at least  double what anyone else is on

Edited November 13, 2021 by JimmyCant

[Nookie Bear]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

True, but all but a few elite clubs have a ceiling and a structure they stick to more or less

Of course. 
 

The unknown we fans have is what our ceiling is. 
 

Can we afford to pay £10k/week? Unlikely. 
How about £6k/week…with the income flow we have?

 

 

[JimmyCant]

Just now, Nookie Bear said:

Of course. 
 

The unknown we fans have is what our ceiling is. 
 

Can we afford to pay £10k/week? Unlikely. 
How about £6k/week…with the income flow we have?

 

 

£6k probably wouldn’t be that much of a stretch but is that going to keep a player like Souttar who doubtless already has options elsewhere on the horizon 

[soonbe110]

3 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

I’ve been consistent since my first point, unlike you and your borderline pathetic attempts at deflection.
 

you said above I haven’t set a limit.  £10k is reasonable in my opinion for a player of Souttar ability.  If the club offered £10k and soapy leaves I don’t think we could be too disappointed in that.  Content that the club have done their best.  
 

What’s you limit?  
 

Now choose carefully becuase if you say £8k I’m going to laugh at you for suggesting the club can’t afford an additional £100k and if you say £3k I’m going to laugh at you because i would hazard quite of a lot of people on this thread earn more than £3k per week

I think your plan makes  sense for players other than ones with Soutars injury history. He is another Levein. Would have made millions(relatively speaking) from him had he avoided serious injury. Soutar, good though he is, isn’t worth the risk imo. If we can £500k plus a very optimistic sell on clause in January we have to take it. 

[Savage Vince]

3 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

£10-£12k a week for a centre back with an injury history and hardly any caps is the very definition of wild spending. It’s a massive gamble. We can’t afford it. We shouldn’t even consider it. The club have already said they won’t, so, nice wee dream theory but not happening in the real world

 

Nor should it. Good post. 

[Nookie Bear]

6 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

£6k probably wouldn’t be that much of a stretch but is that going to keep a player like Souttar who doubtless already has options elsewhere on the horizon 

Probably not. 
 

Decisions to be made in January. It may be worth keeping him and losing him for nothing if it means 3rd place or even better. 

[JimmyCant]

7 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

I think your plan makes  sense for players other than ones with Soutars injury history. He is another Levein. Would have made millions(relatively speaking) from him had he avoided serious injury. Soutar, good though he is, isn’t worth the risk imo. If we can £500k plus a very optimistic sell on clause in January we have to take it. 

It doesn’t make sense at all. We’re not in the ballpark of £10k week for a player unless we win the league this season and get the £30million goody bag that comes with it.

[JimmyCant]

6 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Probably not. 
 

Decisions to be made in January. It may be worth keeping him and losing him for nothing if it means 3rd place or even better. 

True, but if you hold a player to the last few months of a deal when he has a big deal he has to turn down, your relying on him still turning up for work. Not that this would be an issue for Souttar. Doesn’t strike me as the type to down tools. If we’re in with any chance of the league I’d keep him rather than punt him for half a million

 

We have both OF teams in the next few weeks. If we don’t lose to either of them and win the rest, IMO we have a shot at the league 

Edited November 13, 2021 by JimmyCant

[Bazzas right boot]

3 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

I’ve been consistent since my first point, unlike you and your borderline pathetic attempts at deflection.
 

you said above I haven’t set a limit.  £10k is reasonable in my opinion for a player of Souttar ability.  If the club offered £10k and soapy leaves I don’t think we could be too disappointed in that.  Content that the club have done their best.  
 

What’s you limit?  
 

Now choose carefully becuase if you say £8k I’m going to laugh at you for suggesting the club can’t afford an additional £100k and if you say £3k I’m going to laugh at you because i would hazard quite of a lot of people on this thread earn more than £3k per week

 

 

We might have offered him around £10k and put our best offer forward. 

 

Also laugh if you must regarding the extra £2k but it's a lot, for example

If we want to build a good team with like players we can have 10 key players on £8k or 8 on £10k.

That would  mean we couldn't have afforded the likes of McKay and Moore this season as we'd already spent the money on Beni, Cochrane, Souttar, Gordon etc. 

£2k on £8k is 25% increase, that is massive. 

 

To play along I'd say £10k is a lot, but not impossible but Likley about 8-10% of our total playing budget at the current time. 

That's a massive chunk. 

Spending that on a injury prone player is a massive risk. 

Your putting all your eggs in one basket. 

Could work could go tits up with a few key injuries. 

 

£10k is also less than the likes of championshio clubs can offer and is, where you seem to be arguing with yourself. 

If we offer him £10k but Stoke offer him £20k then this debate is pointless unless you think we should go further and close that gap, do you? 

 

The gap is also  probably bigger than you imagine. 

Shef wed have numerous players on over £20k, some over £30k.

 

 

 

[kingantti1874]

21 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

I think your plan makes  sense for players other than ones with Soutars injury history. He is another Levein. Would have made millions(relatively speaking) from him had he avoided serious injury. Soutar, good though he is, isn’t worth the risk imo. If we can £500k plus a very optimistic sell on clause in January we have to take it. 

thats fair enough mate. 

[JimmyCant]

3 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

thats fair enough mate. 

Whaddya mean fair enough ? You’ve just been arguing the opposite for about 4 hours now ?

[Pasquale for King]

26 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

I think your plan makes  sense for players other than ones with Soutars injury history. He is another Levein. Would have made millions(relatively speaking) from him had he avoided serious injury. Soutar, good though he is, isn’t worth the risk imo. If we can £500k plus a very optimistic sell on clause in January we have to take it. 

Have to agree. 

[kingantti1874]

3 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

We might have offered him around £10k and put our best offer forward. 

 

Also laugh if you must regarding the extra £2k but it's a lot, for example

If we want to build a good team with like players we can have 10 key players on £8k or 8 on £10k.

That would  mean we couldn't have afforded the likes of McKay and Moore this season as we'd already spent the money on Beni, Cochrane, Souttar, Gordon etc. 

£2k on £8k is 25% increase, that is massive. 

 

To play along I'd say £10k is a lot, but not impossible but Likley about 8-10% of our total playing budget at the current time. 

That's a massive chunk. 

Spending that on a injury prone player is a massive risk. 

Your putting all your eggs in one basket. 

Could work could go tits up with a few key injuries. 

 

£10k is also less than the likes of championshio clubs can offer and is, where you seem to be arguing with yourself. 

If we offer him £10k but Stoke offer him £20k then this debate is pointless unless you think we should go further and close that gap, do you? 

 

The gap is also  probably bigger than you imagine. 

Shef wed have numerous players on over £20k, some over £30k.

 

 

 

I’m not arguing with myself at all so quit the nonsense.  You and pretty much everyone else have agreed with me though for some reason we have to wait for regular European competition which will never ever happen unless we can retain our top players.  

 

nope I do not think we should pay £20k per week.
I just want the club to do the absolute maximum we can do. The the absolute minimum we should do would be to make JS our highest or joint highest earner whatever that number is.  

I think you will be surprised by our wage bill.. our turnover this season. Will be between 15-20million.  There is no way our wage bill will be anything close to 33% of turnover. I’ll go right ahead and guess that our wage bill will be closer to £10million than £5.. a fair chunk of it wasted on players who do not contribute

 

[chrystaf]

1 hour ago, JimmyCant said:

Christ sake is it not dawning on people yet that he’s not signing and he’s going to move for at least 3 times what we could pay him

Exactly.  The guy has had horrendous injuries and is naturally concerned that any recurrence could spell the end of his career.  He has therefore got to for the big money and that's down south.

Even if he ends up in just the championship he will at least treble is wage.

There are apparently at least three teams sussing him out, including Stoke where his young brother plays.

Hearts focus should be on making sure we are able to get a decent fee for him, rather than dangling peanuts.