conor wickham

chelsea have just had bid accepted of 3.4 mil plus clauses accepted,surely this is to low???

What year is it? Contract status? Happiness? Transfer listed? Chelsea's financial situation? Etc etc

well im still only in jan first season,no immediate plans for the future in short term hapiness and contract to 2013,i dont care theres no way he would go for this cheap in real life,also im on patch 11.3 so surely they would have his reputaion higher and therefore his valuation increasing???

A club like Ipswich probably would accept this as the clauses are probably very lucrative (to Ipswich at least) i.e. money after x league/international games, money after x goals, percentage of sell on fee, etc., also if they rejected, it would come back to bite them in the arse as it would undoubtedly upset Wickham if the champions of the country came calling and his club told them where to stick it when they are a much lower team.

A club like Ipswich probably would accept this as the clauses are probably very lucrative (to Ipswich at least) i.e. money after x league/international games, money after x goals, percentage of sell on fee, etc., also if they rejected, it would come back to bite them in the arse as it would undoubtedly upset Wickham if the champions of the country came calling and his club told them where to stick it when they are a much lower team.

the bids are gradually going up,city and cheski are in a bidding war but still only at 5million so far

i have placed a bid myself saying as it is so low and went through the process of offering the contract,at the end his agent said "ill sort out the formalaties with your clubs administrative staff and finalise the deal in the near future" despite chelski and city offering deals is this indicating to me that he will sign for me???

Ipswich would never accept a fee like this, at his age and potential they would want at least £10m and over, that is defo way too low

Ipswich would never accept a fee like this, at his age and potential they would want at least £10m and over, that is defo way too low

thats what i would of thought but my bid of 4mil has also been accepted and contract offered

Sorry mate, I read that as Chelsea accepted a bid for him. Don't see why they wouldn't sell him for 5 mil+, not bad money for a 17 year old.

Sorry mate, I read that as Chelsea accepted a bid for him. Don't see why they wouldn't sell him for 5 mil+, not bad money for a 17 year old.

yeah but irl young english players generally seem overpriced

Ipswich would never accept a fee like this, at his age and potential they would want at least £10m and over, that is defo way too low

You seriously think ANY Championship player is worth £10m plus??? Only an idiot would pay that amount.

Expected to go for upwards to 12 million IRL. Think thats a very much over inflated fee, over rated IMO. Same with Oxlade Chamberlain. Expected to go for 10 million after only performing in League One, dont think hes worth anywhere near 10 mill.

Ipswich would never accept a fee like this, at his age and potential they would want at least £10m and over, that is defo way too low

You honestly think that they'll get that much for him?

Really?!

You seriously think ANY Championship player is worth £10m plus??? Only an idiot would pay that amount.

That Chamberlain fella was tagged at £14M or so iirc.

I think I paid £4M for Wickham in the first season.

That Chamberlain fella was tagged at £14M or so iirc.

I think I paid £4M for Wickham in the first season.

Uhhh... I think you'll find he has gone anywhere yet and the £14 mil is paper talk.

maybe they want to avoid losing him on a free at the end of his contract a la beckford

Danny Haynes was talked about in the same way at 17/18. He hasn't been a huge money player nor has he made it at the top. There's still time but he wasn't quite the prodigal son they were making out at Ipswich. Victor Moses one of the biggest talents around and goes for a couple of million, and has hardly set the premiership alight since.

Theo Walcott and Gareth Bale went for £5m up front plus add ons up to £10m in 2006/7, though eventually both fees reduced slightly as Soton needed the cash up front due to financial trouble. At today's prices £12m altogether sounds about right, so £3.4m up front sounds a bit low really, especially as I would imagine Ipswich don't have any financial issues?

Uhhh... I think you'll find he has gone anywhere yet and the £14 mil is paper talk.

I never said he was transferred for £14M, he was just tagged for around that price (I think). Read posts before you reply to them.

I paid £3.5m for him in the first season.

I never said he was transferred for £14M, he was just tagged for around that price (I think). Read posts before you reply to them.

I did mate, which is exactly why I said what I said. If you need me to spell it out then you probably need to redo you grade school education, however if you really need it:

You said:

That Chamberlain fella was tagged at £14M or so iirc.

This to me meant that that was the price that he was tagged at as you put it. I decided that I should point out that he's not gone anywhere however and as such that price is just paper talk and hype by the club and as such you don't know how much he would actually go for, hence:

Uhhh... I think you'll find he has gone anywhere yet and the £14 mil is paper talk.

If that still isn't clear, I can make a childrens book type of slideshow for you... Education is the way forward, no child [or the like] left behind and all that.

i have placed a bid myself saying as it is so low and went through the process of offering the contract,at the end his agent said "ill sort out the formalaties with your clubs administrative staff and finalise the deal in the near future" despite chelski and city offering deals is this indicating to me that he will sign for me???

well i have just got the news that he has accepted my offer and rejected both city and chelski,so his agent must have knew he was gonna accept my offer whenever he dropped the quote above.

It is difficult to say if tis is undervalued or not if you don't know what the clauses are. It may be that there will be substantial payments after appearances, caps, goals and a possible large next fee %, so it could still addd up to a lot of money for a Championship side and still a very good deal for a youngster who is still to prove himself at the top level.

Theo Walcott and Gareth Bale went for £5m up front plus add ons up to £10m in 2006/7, though eventually both fees reduced slightly as Soton needed the cash up front due to financial trouble. At today's prices £12m altogether sounds about right, so £3.4m up front sounds a bit low really, especially as I would imagine Ipswich don't have any financial issues?

fair point espically with regards to gareth bale

It is difficult to say if tis is undervalued or not if you don't know what the clauses are. It may be that there will be substantial payments after appearances, caps, goals and a possible large next fee %, so it could still addd up to a lot of money for a Championship side and still a very good deal for a youngster who is still to prove himself at the top level.

i have just signed him for 4million all in.

I did mate, which is exactly why I said what I said. If you need me to spell it out then you probably need to redo you’re grade school education, however if you really need it:

Alright, that’s a bit arrogant of you, but you really do need to read I said, for a third time, and possibly understand the context I wrote it in. By the way, fixed your little mistake above, please re-do your grade school education, quite a glaring error for someone who rides such a high horse.

This to me meant that that was the price that he was tagged at as you put it. I decided that I should point out that he's not gone anywhere however and as such that price is just paper talk and hype by the club and as such you don't know how much he would actually go for, hence:

From what I have read, paper talk or not, was that he had around 14M pricetag, not that he had been sold, nor that a bid had been placed. Just a pricetag, from the limited news I get here in Perth. So really, you’ve completely mis-read my post. However I do completely agree with you, he has not gone anywhere, but what you wrote made you seem like you assumed otherwise.

If that still isn't clear, I can make a childrens book type of slideshow for you... Education is the way forward, no child [or the like] left behind and all that.

I’m pretty sure what I said is clear now, and having read back a lot of your posts, you do like to argue. Try and keep the snarky comments to yourself mate, they really don’t contribute anything to the forum.

Alright, that’s a bit arrogant of you, but you really do need to read I said, for a third time, and possibly understand the context I wrote it in. By the way, fixed your little mistake above, please re-do your grade school education, quite a glaring error for someone who rides such a high horse.

Whilst I was tempted to start with a simple reply to your correction of my "grammar" (I will get back to this) I think it's better that I cover the point at hand first.

You stated:

That Chamberlain fella was tagged at £14M or so iirc.

To which I replied:

Uhhh... I think you'll find he has gone anywhere yet and the £14 mil is paper talk.

So let us see what you had to say about my reply (outside of the "grammar". Again, I'll get back to this):

From what I have read, paper talk or not, was that he had around 14M pricetag, not that he had been sold, nor that a bid had been placed. Just a pricetag, from the limited news I get here in Perth. So really, you’ve completely mis-read my post. However I do completely agree with you, he has not gone anywhere, but what you wrote made you seem like you assumed otherwise.

Which I would simply as this as saying; it is just talk until he's been sold. As such the reponse of:

I never said he was transferred for £14M, he was just tagged for around that price (I think). Read posts before you reply to them.

So, why is what I said important you ask? Because a player can be touted at as much as the club dream up, but he could end up going for bugger all. You can't say that because the club or the papers said "He's worth £14 mil" that he actually is. More annoyingly you responded by questioning whether I read your post right, which it is clear that I did, yet ironically you failed to do the same with mine and in fact, you post lackes any new content, which is interesting to say the least. Actually, that's not fair, you mentioned you were from Perth, which explains a lot actually. Also, if you think that what I wrote, which I will requote for clarity:

Uhhh... I think you'll find he has gone anywhere yet and the £14 mil is paper talk.

Now the confusion here probably came about because I mentioned that he hadn't gone anywhere. Why did this confuse you... Well, you are from Perth, but aside from that it seems that you confused me mentioning that nothing has happened yet and that it was paper talk. Why did I mention that when you clearly mentioned that it he was being "tagged at £14 mil"? To make it obvious what my point was [ironically]. For those playing along at home... or from Perth; the reason for saying that was to point out the fact that since he hadn't been sold yet, any value quoted was meaningless. But hey, it's not like this will be the third time this had been said, though now its in far greater detail that hopefully won't get confused.

I’m pretty sure what I said is clear now, and having read back a lot of your posts, you do like to argue. Try and keep the snarky comments to yourself mate, they really don’t contribute anything to the forum.

I'm the one who likes arguing here? Ha! Re-read the dialogue mate! You made the first snarky comment between the two of us.

Anyhow, back to the grammar buisness though... The original text was:

I did mate, which is exactly why I said what I said. If you need me to spell it out then you probably need to redo you grade school education, however if you really need it:

This is a quite clear typo. Annoying, but when you're doing more than just posting on a forum you're likely to make one here and there. Now, it should have read your, but hey... But wait, you did correct me here... But you were wrong in your correction. Let's have a look at it again:

I did mate, which is exactly why I said what I said. If you need me to spell it out then you probably need to redo you’re grade school education, however if you really need it:

Do you see the problem here. Let's remove the contraction and see what it says:

I did mate, which is exactly why I said what I said. If you need me to spell it out then you probably need to redo you are grade school education, however if you really need it:

Hmmm... It should actually be, as mentioned above your as in "your hat", "your cat" or even "your mistake". However you seemingly corrected it as 'you're' as in "you're in need of a proper education" or "you're going to have a really red face reading this". You see 'your' is the possessive, like "your grade school education". However, 'you're' is the contraction of 'you are' and "you are grade school eduacation" doesn't even make sense on it's own...

Anyhow, I don't really care about typos these days, when I was younger I did, but I realised that everyone will make typos and there really isn't a point in pointing them out. If an entire post is mangled beyond understanding, that's annoying, but simple typos can be ignored. Even the ol' 'you're'-'your' mistake can be overlooked. However pointing it out and getting it wrong just makes you look silly. Have a nice day.

Usually when some-one puts "tagged at" it refers to what the papers and other media sources believe the player will go for, which is normally relatively accurate due to the clubs having close media connections, but can be miles off, it's just a reference point for the public to picture how much players may go for, not an actual "asking price", so saying £14m is just paper talk you're infact just backing up Gandy's original statement

Enough of the sniping and personal comments please

Now now ladies, put the handbags down and chill.

In response to the original post - i do believe that fee is very low for a player of Wickhams potential.

Some Guy, I cannot be bothered reading, nor replying to that. If you have a problem, PM me, but I stand by what I said.

Some Guy, I cannot be bothered reading, nor replying to that. If you have a problem, PM me, but I stand by what I said.

What, you honestly think that it should have been 'you're' and not 'your' in that sentence? Wow... have fun with that.

Pathetic argument.

"This country......"

So is Conor Wickham any good then or what?

I think it's an OK deal if the clauses are good, but I do think it should be higher.

As for the Oxlade-Chamberlain £10m deal or thereabouts - seriously. Transfer fees are inflated in this country but £10m is miles off what he will actually go for in the end.

I think £5m plus solid clauses will be the absolute maximum at which he goes for in reality.

The AI doesn't really seem to know how to ask for clauses other than monthly installments or % of future profit though.

Birmingham bought him for 2.1m in my Arsenal save in 2011.Now at Man u for 15m in 2016