UK time is: 14:54:09
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

Not Much Left in the Kitty!

It`s being reported that the deal to take Daniel Sturridge to Liverpool is all but concluded.

Apparently Sturridge has had a medical and his salary has been agreed, all that`s left is for the fee to be announced.

However, it appears that whatever fee we receive will be seriously eroded.

For starters, following his arrival at Stamford Bridge from Manchester City, it was decreed that Manchester City would get 15% of any sell-on fee.

Also, because Sturridge never actually asked for a transfer he is entitled, so the tabloid press are saying, to have the remainder of his contract paid up, a cool £1.5 million.

So whatever we get from Liverpool, I reckon we`ll actually bank less than £10 million!




Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!



Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

The Journalist

Writer: Merlin Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Monday December 24 2012

Time: 9:55AM

Your Comments

Disappointed to see him go but good luck to him not against us though.
Elbowz
Glad he's getting paid that £1.5m. The guy deserves it for us wasting his time and therefore kick starting his career...good luck dan!
Ess...DaBison
Sad to see you go...goodluck dan
Seunayo
2006-2011 Andy Carroll - 1 goal every 2.8 games, commanded a 35 million quid transfer. That's six seasons of 91 appearances and 33 goals. 2007-2012 Danny - 1 goal every 3.6 games, commanding a 12 million quid transfer. That's six seasons of 138 appearances and 38 goals. This is just illustrating what Andy commanded after six seasons and what Danny is commanding now after six seasons. So, Andy had a 36% chance of scoring in a game when he commanded 35 million meanwhile Danny has a 27% chance of scoring in a game. The numbers are close enough to show us that 36 % = 35 million and 27% = 26 million. Take 15% of that and give it to City, leaves us with 22 million quid. That's what we should be selling him for taking into consideration his stats and the market value for them. We are getting ripped off big time.
ForeverChels
Sorry forgot to mention these are just BPL stats and if memory serves me right re: Carroll, he is just as injury prone as 'ol Danny boy. So if someone at CFC can please explain to me why we are selling 12 million quid below market value I would really appreciate it.
ForeverChels
We shouldve sold him to liverpool for 50million euros, then we'll know we've got a deal akin to the torres deal.. On a serious note, danny will probably have a great time at pool than with us, gooduck to him
Desmondadonis
@Foreverchelsea...you analysis will be a bit more robust if the duration of contract in both cases were the same or close...that also plays a huge role in arriving at fair value of transfer fees..nice thinking though...
layorh12
I thought Danny was leaving for a 5 yr deal or thereabouts..?
ForeverChels
I also reckon we should put in a buy back clause too.
Elbowz
Liverpool take our players for little or nothing but we pay through our nose to get their players..we should have sold danny to them for £50mil so they know how it hurts to fork out such amount for an overpriced goods
Ken4CFC
Bad business, he worth more than 12M.... Sad he's leaving, wish him all the best. He isn't even the one pushing for a move, contrary to what most people here claim....
Latunvic
I am still baffled. Carroll signed a 5.5 yr deal, or 11 half years at a 35 million quid fee. 35/11 = 3.18 m every half year (6.36 m every year). Danny is going for a 3.5 yr deal, or 7 half years at a 12 m fee supposedly. 12/7 = 1.7 m every half year (3.4 m every year). The fee is suggesting that Carroll is almost twice as good as Sturridge. All this math is probably fecked up anyways, can't help me from feeling we're being robbed though.
ForeverChels
@Lat, fifth paragraph, cheers - http://www.faniq.com/blog/Chelsea-agree-upon-the-transfer-of-Daniel-Sturridge-to-Liverpool-Blog-59348
ForeverChels
@forever,i share your pain..i cant believe we are selling sturridge to loserfool(of all clubs) for a cheap price when they make us pay ridiculous fees just to sell us flops
Ken4CFC
he is better than fkin walcott so why sell him for 10m and buy walcott for 15m? if that happens. also pato is in talks with an unnamed club its either us or corinthians. for 12m would be worth a gamble
Humza_96
Well, maybe they've since realised that Carroll wasn't worth that much and will only pay accordingly... Actually, Carroll's was a special case as they had just sold Torres and desperately needed a new first striker (i.e. a double deal that earnt them some 12 million GBP). And Carroll was under a long term contract at Toons. Whence a hefty price tag. Sturridge will provide cover for Luis Suarez in the absence of Borini (i.e. a deal that will set them back 12 million GBP). And Studge's contract is expiring by the summer. Whence cheap'ish.
Maestrinho
The more i learn about this deal the uglier it gets. So it is now clear Danny did not even ask for a transfer..we are essentially shipping him out as punishment for not renewing his contract with us. Others have already said how much we undervalued him and are essentially selling him for near peanuts compared to other English players sold recently. Then worse we are enriching both Liverpool and City by this deal and i doubt our board will be wise enough to include a buy back clause or other stipulations that would allow us benefit if and when he thrives at Liverpool. Then we essentially get the deal done even before the transfer window opens giving him maximum time to gell with his new club who are fellow competitors in the BPL and to date his replacement is still a subject of speculation because we dont have anyone actually set, done and delivered yet..this just looks ridiculous..any way best wishes Danny boy..i cannot but wish him well.
GabeU
@maestrinho i know for a fact that danny's contract with us is expiring not summer 2013 but rather summer of 2014. This is part of what makes this whole thing so ridiculous.
GabeU
This will be the one and only time I type *SMH*. Too cliché these days..
ForeverChels
Nt a gud deal imo. Y can we sell fantastic player with 1 and half yr left on his contract 4 just 12milion 2 d club who sold flop to us 4 a heavy fee. Sellin danny 4 12m nd chasin walcot wit 6month left on his contract 4 15m make no sense 2 me.
Abidemi
Glad to see him go,brainless player.
THEBREEZE
chelsea board are the idiot in this whole world.signing flop players for crazy price and selling good players for penny....they are burning roman pockets for fun...
shlok27
Ridiculous deal it is,except there is more to the deal than meets the eye
Ken4CFC
"Brainless", "no football brain". I see trend I don't like here.
foreign_viewer
@schlok27, I think Chelsea has learned from the Torres r4pe therefore our bids have been quite efficient as of late. Hazard, Oscar, Moses, Cahill, Marin, Mata, Azpi et al, all value for the money we spent. There's a saying that never buy a stock that is on fire (e.g. Kaka -> RM, Sheva -> us, Torres -> us, Henry -> Barca, etc) that may just be true in Falcao's situation. Of course there are exceptions.. The pressure of that fee just may crush Falcao - then again I am just being cautious..
ForeverChels
@forever yaa this season we spent well but when it come to sell our players we act like a dumb asss....a player like drogba went for free..kalou boswing all went for free...our selling policy seckss big time....how many players we have let them for free....we have let joe cole for free and bought beayoun for 5 million i think so...what a joke...we cant act like fool when it come to sell...we have to act smart...thats why i dont want falco here at chelsea we dont need 50 million striker now with the midfield we have now....you can get two or three good players in that price....
shlok27
Agree with you, it's concerning how many players we let go free. Just goes to show you that there is no real concrete plan to integrate players into positions which are going to be vacant soon so we end up being fecked instead of selling the out of contract player before their time is up. And when we do sell we suck at it.
ForeverChels
We're like a lad at a school dance - music comes on, boys go find a girl, but our boy Jonny is very picky and is certain he can find a hottie so he passes up several attractive birds in hopes of finding one. He thinks he sees one so he walks over to the shadowy being. It turns out to be Crystal - a behemoth of a girl. Jonny feels bad that every boy has a girl and vice versa so he takes Crystal's hand and proceeds to dance lethargically. Jonny never learns and repeats this process the whole night.
ForeverChels
@forever,kaka and torres went to RM and us respectively when they were waning and injury plagued,sheva came to us when he was waning,henry was not on fire when he left arsenal infact his last season was injury plagued and i dont think he did bad at barca..so the aforementioned names arent on fire when they left their respective clubs please use concrete examples to emphasize your point
Ken4CFC
@Ken, get your facts right m8. Before Kaka's move to RM he was coming off a season where he had 16 goals, 10 assists, in 36 matches. Torres had a niggle but still managed 9 goals in 26 appearances before he came to us. Sheva was coming off a season where he scored 28 goals in 40 appearances. Henry managed 12 goals in 27 appearances before moving to Barca. If they weren't at or around the top of their game, why would these players command such high fees?
ForeverChels
You cannot tell me if Leo Messi had the same injury Torres had when he bought him, he still wouldn't command a gigantic transfer fee which would suggest that he is expected to get back to his best. Point I am trying to make, in Torres's case, is that the quality was there no doubt, it was just a matter of shrugging off the injury which for a lad in his mid 20's shouldn't be a big deal. And his fee backs that point up. So I don't know what you're getting at.
ForeverChels
@forever,2 seasons before 48 appearances scored 18goals and had 9assists,the next season he made 41appearances scored 19 goals and had 12 assists..dont that tell u about his form and fitness??to some players injury makes them stronger i.e messi,rvp and co but to others injury takes away the shine from them(kaka belongs to that class).... Torres was strugglin for form and injury before he came to us hence he wasnt on fire..sheva was on the other side of his career when he joined us...henry's 27 app and 12goals where his lowest in an arsenal shirt(apart 4rm last season loan spell).he was struglin with injuries and therefore declinin..they were not on top of their game,they command huge fees because they were simply overpriced....
Ken4CFC
@Ken, then before he went to RM he had 36 apps, 16 goals and 10 assists. A fair ratio compared to his previous 2 seasons. So, yea, there is every reason to believe he was at the top of his game. Torres was struggling for form due to his knee surgery but still managed 9 goals in 26 apps, pretty damn good I would say after coming off surgery and who's to say he wasn't going to get back to his best if he didn't make the switch to the bridge? Sheva was arguably at the top of his game when he came to us at age 30, in his prime - 28 goals in 40 appearances. I'm not counting his Dynamo Kiev days... And yea, Henry had 12 goals but he also only had 27 apps. And saying they had huge fees because they were overpriced is nonsense. So, in effect, Barca, Chelsea, Real Madrid, all made the SAME mistake of paying over the odds albeit in DIFFERENT years? Their performances had no influence? Quite a coincidence if you tell me..
ForeverChels
It is obvious that no other team is willing to pay more than 12M for him...Is he liked by his team mates? What about his attitude? I don't know this at all but couldn't these other issues come into play as to his market value?
lamarochs
Good point lam, quite possibly.. His attitude is much like Wilshere, very cocky and seems to always have a chip on his shoulder. Which in a striker is good but only to a certain extent. How he gets on with his mates is another thing. I don't want to speculate but I will say that if he was getting on fine then he wouldn't be pushing for a move; rather, pushing to unseat Torres (the same way Torres pushed to unseat Didi) so he could play on the pitch with them. Who knows though.
ForeverChels
@forever,i admit sheva was bought at his prime,but the rest were waning tanks to injury,so they werent on top of their game when they where bought however henry did a great job at barca and was a good value for £16mil,he was the clubs top scorer in his debut season and was 2nd to messi in assist..henry formed a deadly trio alongside messi and eto that dominated laliga then while our £50mil investment and kaka have spent a greater part of their contract yrs stil tryin to stay fit and rediscover their form.
Ken4CFC
@Ken, 16 goals & 10 assists in 36 appearances for Milan wasn't top of the game for Kaka? Why then did City put in an outrageous bid, with RM soon to follow? In Torres's case considering he was coming back from knee surgery he was putting up great numbers and before Henry's injuries set in he was also putting up great statistics. I don't think we'll ever agree on this but I think we both can agree that we want Torres to find that form of old.
ForeverChels
@forever,yea i dont think we would agree but its been very nice and educative debatin with u,thanks mate for keepin it civil
Ken4CFC
@forever,yea i dont think we would agree but its been very nice and educative debatin with u,thanks mate for keepin it civil
Ken4CFC
Yea cheers mate, merry christmas
ForeverChels
I really enjoyed the argument between @Ken and @Forever...quite interesting and matured of course...dope stuff!!
layorh12
Wish u the same...lookin forward to a succesful day at norwich
Ken4CFC
Probably other clubs not interested because of his high wage demands. Maybe also Rogers at Liverpool has convinced his board he is worth it.
Since1963
 

Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account

Recent Chelsea Articles

So How Did You Vote? (Friday October 31 2014)

Name the Starting XI - QPR (h) (Friday October 31 2014)

Chelsea At Derby (Thursday October 30 2014)

This Beautiful Thing Of Ours (Thursday October 30 2014)

Fantastic Team, Fantastic Opponent (Wednesday October 29 2014)

January Pique Bid? (Wednesday October 29 2014)

Cole's Return With Rivals? (Wednesday October 29 2014)

The Shrewsbury Chronicles; Post script (Wednesday October 29 2014)

Stats: Shrewsbury v Chelsea (Tuesday October 28 2014)

Chelsea Trio (And Mourinho) Nominated (Tuesday October 28 2014)

Archived Chelsea Articles

List All Vital Chelsea Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll

Vital Members League (view all)

1. Bharath Narayanan 162
2. BOTUM 143
3. BlueMIA 105
4. Ikdaniels 103
5. The Persian 103
6. kolagold25 53
7. CobhamBlue 43
8. Chelsea Anorak 42
9. merlin 40
10. nelyvanile 38

League Results (view all)

Latest Results
Man Utd 1 - 1 Chelsea
Crystal Palace 1 - 2 Chelsea
Chelsea 2 - 0 Arsenal
Chelsea 3 - 0 Aston Villa
Man City 1 - 1 Chelsea
Chelsea 4 - 2 Swansea

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
1. Chelsea 9 7 2 0 +15 23
2. Southampton 9 6 1 2 +15 19
3. Man City 9 5 2 2 +9 17
4. West Ham 9 5 1 3 +5 16
5. Arsenal 9 3 5 1 +4 14
6. Swansea 9 4 2 3 +3 14
7. Liverpool 9 4 2 3 +1 14

Breaking League News

The Villa Times - 31/10/2014
» Aston Villa : 31/10/2014 13:00:00
Arsenal v Burnley Match Preview
» Arsenal : 31/10/2014 12:29:00
Eto`o set to trigger new deal
» Everton : 31/10/2014 12:00:00
AVFC - This Season v Last Season (9 Games)
» Aston Villa : 31/10/2014 11:38:00
Villa Injury Update Ahead Of Spurs Clash
» Aston Villa : 31/10/2014 11:10:00

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

Costa is back but should he START v QPR ahead of Drogba?
Suggested By:  Josh_Mou
Yes 25%
No 0%
Undecided 25%
Who cares, we'll win anyway! 50%