Apparently we bid 6mil for Cahill

Captain Fabregas · Post by **Captain Fabregas** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:26 pm

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/transfe ... 90412.html

Wengerball · Post by **Wengerball** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:28 pm

WTF???!!!!

If this is true then Wenger is taking the piss- Â£6m for the 6% ticket increase.

Sounds like a fair deal

Deise Gooner · Post by **Deise Gooner** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:34 pm

If this is true then Gazidis, Wenger and whoever are involved in transfers can fuck off it is just taking the piss and Bolton should tell them to fuck off frankly

MadRich · Post by **MadRich** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:34 pm

They are having a laugh if they think he is worth Â£17.5m.

Â£6m for a decent/not great defender with one year left on his contract is not good, but its not bad either.

Enrique went to Liverpool for Â£6m

Deise Gooner · Post by **Deise Gooner** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:37 pm

MadRich wrote:They are having a laugh if they think he is worth Â£17.5m.

Â£6m for a decent/not great defender with one year left on his contract is not good, but its not bad either.

Enrique went to Liverpool for Â£6m

Dont you think its a bit hypocritical when we made City pay Â£24m for Nasri with a year left to then turn around and offer that for Cahill.

bradders · Post by **bradders** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:49 pm

Â£6m

Its times like this i feel embarrassed to be a gooner....

M-50 · Post by **M-50** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:51 pm

Mirrorfootball> hardly the most reliable of sources, u guys seriously read that sh*t? what a load of bollocks they print

pure f*cking seo sh*te

safcftm · Post by **safcftm** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:52 pm

IMO he is better than Jagielka, but having said that he isnt worth Â£17m when he's in the last year of his contract. Cahill is a good player, but he's hardly a world beater, he's a solid PL defender who hasnt been tested against the best in Europe and the world as he hasnt played CL football and has barely played for England. Fact is, a lot of lads who are nothing more than big, powerful beasts can look good in the PL but would get torn apart in Europe. Obviously the PL is the bread and butter but despite recent events, Arsenal should still be planning to try and compete on all fronts.

I think for a player untested at CL level in the last year of his contract but who has potential, a bid of about Â£10m would be fair. Lets be honest, Bolton get an average attendance of about 22,000 people and their prices are cheap, probably averaging around Â£20 when you take into account concessions. That means their whole gate receipt turnover is only Â£8.4m a year or so, so I dont think they can sniff at Â£10m coming in for one player who could leave for nothing in the summer. If, as the article suggests, they are happy to sell in January as he is still CL eligible I think they're in for a shock. Teams left in the CL after christmas will not be pinning their hopes of success on the untested Gary Cahill, and if they are they wont spend much money on him since they could get him for nothing in the summer.

So Â£10m would be fair, but then the article says "Â£6m plus extras", so not just Â£6m then. The extras might take it up to nearer Â£10m depending on success, or they might guarantee Bolton a good % of any sum above Â£6m that he is sold for, which could be highly lucrative for them. Plus a lot of clubs accept less money if the purchasing club offers to pay it in one go as opposed to the majority of clubs who stagger the value over a few years. So basically Bolton overvalue him and whilst Arsenals bid looks low, it might actually be reasonable depending on the extras involved and the payment terms (having just sold two players for big money, I'm sure there is Â£6m free that could be spent immediately). To me it looks like the media just wanting a stick to beat Arsenal and Wenger with, but I've been wrong before

bradders · Post by **bradders** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:57 pm

Wenger does my fucking head in

Why he is dithering over value for money cos we must be self sustainable

Chelski will jump in and blow us out the water

Supagoon · Post by **Supagoon** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:58 pm

we know he aint worth 17M

But we also know 6M is a waste of time and fax paper.

Not sure if the story is true or not.

6 days left ..sort it out.

Post by **I Hate Hleb** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:01 pm

Fantastic analysis there safcftm and more or less spot on.

MadRich · Post by **MadRich** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:03 pm

Deise Gooner wrote:
MadRich wrote:They are having a laugh if they think he is worth Â£17.5m.

Â£6m for a decent/not great defender with one year left on his contract is not good, but its not bad either.

Enrique went to Liverpool for Â£6m
Dont you think its a bit hypocritical when we made City pay Â£24m for Nasri with a year left to then turn around and offer that for Cahill.

City tax! Man city prices don't count , we did sell Clichy for Â£7m

MegaGooner · Post by **MegaGooner** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:04 pm

safcftm wrote:IMO he is better than Jagielka, but having said that he isnt worth Â£17m when he's in the last year of his contract. Cahill is a good player, but he's hardly a world beater, he's a solid PL defender who hasnt been tested against the best in Europe and the world as he hasnt played CL football and has barely played for England. Fact is, a lot of lads who are nothing more than big, powerful beasts can look good in the PL but would get torn apart in Europe. Obviously the PL is the bread and butter but despite recent events, Arsenal should still be planning to try and compete on all fronts.

I think for a player untested at CL level in the last year of his contract but who has potential, a bid of about Â£10m would be fair. Lets be honest, Bolton get an average attendance of about 22,000 people and their prices are cheap, probably averaging around Â£20 when you take into account concessions. That means their whole gate receipt turnover is only Â£8.4m a year or so, so I dont think they can sniff at Â£10m coming in for one player who could leave for nothing in the summer. If, as the article suggests, they are happy to sell in January as he is still CL eligible I think they're in for a shock. Teams left in the CL after christmas will not be pinning their hopes of success on the untested Gary Cahill, and if they are they wont spend much money on him since they could get him for nothing in the summer.

So Â£10m would be fair, but then the article says "Â£6m plus extras", so not just Â£6m then. The extras might take it up to nearer Â£10m depending on success, or they might guarantee Bolton a good % of any sum above Â£6m that he is sold for, which could be highly lucrative for them. Plus a lot of clubs accept less money if the purchasing club offers to pay it in one go as opposed to the majority of clubs who stagger the value over a few years. So basically Bolton overvalue him and whilst Arsenals bid looks low, it might actually be reasonable depending on the extras involved and the payment terms (having just sold two players for big money, I'm sure there is Â£6m free that could be spent immediately). To me it looks like the media just wanting a stick to beat Arsenal and Wenger with, but I've been wrong before

Well said Marra

Post by **brazilianGOONER** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:07 pm

I Hate Hleb wrote:Fantastic analysis there safcftm and more or less spot on.

by the way, i also agree with the mackem.

Post by **I Hate Hleb** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:08 pm

Deise Gooner wrote:
MadRich wrote:They are having a laugh if they think he is worth Â£17.5m.

Â£6m for a decent/not great defender with one year left on his contract is not good, but its not bad either.

Enrique went to Liverpool for Â£6m
Dont you think its a bit hypocritical when we made City pay Â£24m for Nasri with a year left to then turn around and offer that for Cahill.

No - because we never 'made' City pay the fee. We told them what we wanted for the player and eventually an agreement was reached. Although in this case you may feel the offer for Cahill is too low, there's nothing stopping Bolton turning it down if they want in the hope of getting a better offer. However, they also run the risk of not receiving one and thus losing Cahill for even less in January.