Jump to content

P3te

Full Members
  • Content Count

    7,341
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by P3te

  1. P3te

    Wage Bill

    Depends how much, if anything, City were paying of his wages while he was at the club, and if we gave him a pay rise over what he earned there (unlikely?) or parity (maybe?) or a pay reduction (most likely?)
  2. Not only is the picture 100% NOT a fake who anybody with even the slightest knowledge of photo manipulation could tell you I'm a graphic designer It's fake you tart
  3. Look at the man with the clipboard. Same clothes as the "Delph photo", but with blazer on in the above one. Same shirt, same collar. Now we've got Fabian Delph wearing the same clothes, with the same fit, as Sterling, and that other guy wearing the same clothes, coincidentally on "different" days. Occam's razor ffs people. Is it? It's on the BBC. Again. http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/33571351 Yes, it is
  4. So where's the original? I dunno, I haven't got time to go looking. What are the odds that Delph is wearing the exact same thing as Sterling (albeit with a few minor colouring/brightness adjustments) that fit the exact same way? People need to stop getting their knickers in a twist. It's not real.
  5. It's 100% a fake picture. 100%. People need to chill the **** out. It's a retouched shot of Sterling that likely took all of 10 minutes in Photoshop
  6. I've just proven its fake with 5 mins in photoshop You haven't proven anything. You've changed the colour of his jeans and trainers. That doesn't mean it's fake.. Oh come off it
  7. I've just proven its fake with 5 mins in photoshop
  8. Because I didn't Photoshop the head
  9. haven't been bothered to change the head, but with a few minutes simple shopping, the jeans and shoes now match, helped by the very low file quality similar to the image posted on twitter
  10. Guarantee they're reporting it based on the photo though
  11. Wrong trainers and Delph is wearing dark jeans. Trainers are almost identical less the fact that you can't see the nike swoosh. Head and jeans would've been shopped. Jeans are the exact same fit and cut. What are the odds on Fabian wearing the same get up with darker jeans to a medical as sterling wore to his medical a few fays previous? Fake for me
  12. No exif data on the photo file to see the date taken, which was the first thing I did
  13. P3te

    Wage Bill

    Probably another 3/4 of a million a year between them
  14. I don't know what kind of business "dealings" you have been involved in but that's absolutely nothing like my experience. As an actual business owner. Payment terms don't have to be "all up front or whenever you like". In fact they never are. The terms will be stated in the clause. I've run a couple of businesses, so I'm in much the same position as you. You're failing to realise that this isn't a regular transaction, this is a transaction arising from contractual obligation. If there's negotiation there's not obligation. The two aren't compatible. You can't negotiate something you're obliged to accept. We MIGHT accept what Liverpool are offering in terms of payment plan, but there's no way we HAVE to. If they bid the full amount up front, we will HAVE to If that's in the clause. The clause might say "a promise to pay £32.5m within X days of completion". See what I'm saying? Absolutely, but do you think there's a high chance we've put that into the release clause of our most valuable asset? Also, if that WAS the case, then there would be no negotiation with Liverpool, as the reports are suggesting. We'd have been obligated to accept the bid
  15. I don't know what kind of business "dealings" you have been involved in but that's absolutely nothing like my experience. As an actual business owner. Payment terms don't have to be "all up front or whenever you like". In fact they never are. The terms will be stated in the clause. I've run a couple of businesses, so I'm in much the same position as you. You're failing to realise that this isn't a regular transaction, this is a transaction arising from contractual obligation. If there's negotiation there's not obligation. The two aren't compatible. You can't negotiate something you're obliged to accept. We MIGHT accept what Liverpool are offering in terms of payment plan, but there's no way we HAVE to. If they bid the full amount up front, we will HAVE to
  16. Robinho had hair when he signed for City
  17. Is this it? https://twitter.com/PurelyFootball/status/622015658285473794 That's the one. You know what, that DOES look like their main training ground building However who's to say that's not a photo from last week when he was supposed to have met with them before deciding against a move?
  18. Is this a player I've never heard of, or Augero spelt weird? Google says he plays in Argentina
  19. P3te

    Wage Bill

    Yep that is about right although your missing Bunn. So around £14m a year reduction as it currently stands, should about cover Adebayor 10 players out who contributed very little, with the scope to bring 6 very, very good players in at the same cost on the wage bill. That's what I call wiggle room!
  20. If a payment plan needs to be agreed by both clubs then it's not a release clause, it's an obligation to negotiate with no obligation to agree That makes a lot of sense. If there can be negotiation of any kind with us, it seems to negate the idea of a release clause. Exactly. A release clause is an obligation, if there's negotiation involved then there's no obligation
  21. I haven't seen the clause obviously, but I've got a reasonable idea how contracts work from business dealings, and it would fly in the face of any reasonable business mentality for a release clause that obligates a club to sell to allow partial payments. That's not meeting the clause amount.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â