The mancityfans.net football forum

Wonderwall wrote:just got an email from the club telling me I can buy a Sterling shirt for £72, how nice of them. I think I will wait for Mike Ashley to get them in store!

They should throw in a free balloon with it at that price.

Wonderwall wrote:just got an email from the club telling me I can buy a Sterling shirt for £72, how nice of them. I think I will wait for Mike Ashley to get them in store!

he has them now. I paid 69e for mine in a sports shop in ireland only 55e off mr ashley :(

The dippers have taken over the middle of my town today. They had a display in front of our City Hall. I walked through checking it out whilst wearing my City jacket. What I would have given in that moment for a Sterling shirt.

dazby wrote:The dippers have taken over the middle of my town today. They had a display in front of our City Hall. I walked through checking it out whilst wearing my City jacket. What I would have given in that moment for a Sterling shirt.

what a shame, I agree that would have been a quality moment worthy of being filmed!

Looks like red scouse are going to spunk nearly all the Stirling money on Benteke.

patrickblue wrote:Looks like red scouse are going to spunk nearly all the Stirling money on Benteke.

Steady. They'll have a whopping £2.7m left or thereabouts (not counting wages and their previous transfer expenses).

They will be able to get Rickie Lambert's brother with that.

If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

An interesting thought AS and quite an intriguing perspective.

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

Yea, but Benteke is a world beater and Sterling is shit and Ibe is better already anyway...

I think this purchase of Benteke has the potential to be slightly tragic for a club with such eestry

Still never mind

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

You're right in terms of year 1. Of course in the end it all amounts to Liverpool making a £6m trading surplus if you consider them as like for like replacements.

But from an accounting perspective, of course it looks rather worse for us in year 2-5

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

You're right in terms of year 1. Of course in the end it all amounts to Liverpool making a £6m trading surplus if you consider them as like for like replacements.

But from an accounting perspective, of course it looks rather worse for us in year 2-5

have you factored the revenue from sterling shirt sales into your calculations?

Nigels Tackle wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

You're right in terms of year 1. Of course in the end it all amounts to Liverpool making a £6m trading surplus if you consider them as like for like replacements.

But from an accounting perspective, of course it looks rather worse for us in year 2-5

have you factored the revenue from sterling shirt sales into your calculations?

highly unlikely we would sell more sterling shirts than Liverpool would sell of benteke. Last season Liverpool sold around 800,000 and were in 6th or 7th place globally for short sales. We weren't even in the top 12 on the list which was Inter at 300,000

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Nigels Tackle wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

You're right in terms of year 1. Of course in the end it all amounts to Liverpool making a £6m trading surplus if you consider them as like for like replacements.

But from an accounting perspective, of course it looks rather worse for us in year 2-5

have you factored the revenue from sterling shirt sales into your calculations?

highly unlikely we would sell more sterling shirts than Liverpool would sell of benteke. Last season Liverpool sold around 800,000 and were in 6th or 7th place globally for short sales. We weren't even in the top 12 on the list which was Inter at 300,000

You are wrong .Since when have Scouse II followers ever paid for anything ?

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Nigels Tackle wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

You're right in terms of year 1. Of course in the end it all amounts to Liverpool making a £6m trading surplus if you consider them as like for like replacements.

But from an accounting perspective, of course it looks rather worse for us in year 2-5

have you factored the revenue from sterling shirt sales into your calculations?

highly unlikely we would sell more sterling shirts than Liverpool would sell of benteke. Last season Liverpool sold around 800,000 and were in 6th or 7th place globally for short sales. We weren't even in the top 12 on the list which was Inter at 300,000

i was taking the piss

john@staustell wrote:I think this purchase of Benteke has the potential to be slightly tragic for a club with such eestry

Still never mind

It's going to be a repeat of last season, isn't it.
A tragedy of epic proportions to be sure.

Nigels Tackle wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Nigels Tackle wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote:

Alex Sapphire wrote:If this is true, and bearing in mind Sterling will prolly have a c18.8 million impact when reported in our annual accounts (being his reported wages for the year and 1/5th of the initial price of his registration),

and scouse will have to report all of the QPR money (8.8mill) , plus 1/5th of Benteke's transfer fee (>7mill) PLUS his wages...which must be a total greater than 19 mill

who actually gets the better deal?

Or am I missing summat (JF are you there?)

You're right in terms of year 1. Of course in the end it all amounts to Liverpool making a £6m trading surplus if you consider them as like for like replacements.

But from an accounting perspective, of course it looks rather worse for us in year 2-5

have you factored the revenue from sterling shirt sales into your calculations?

highly unlikely we would sell more sterling shirts than Liverpool would sell of benteke. Last season Liverpool sold around 800,000 and were in 6th or 7th place globally for short sales. We weren't even in the top 12 on the list which was Inter at 300,000

i was taking the piss

My point stands either way

patrickblue wrote:

john@staustell wrote:I think this purchase of Benteke has the potential to be slightly tragic for a club with such eestry

Still never mind

It's going to be a repeat of last season, isn't it.
A tragedy of epic proportions to be sure.

Benteke would be a lot better than lambert and balotelli. Not a bad player at all.

The latest anti-sterling, anti-city bile.

What a bitter rag...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... paign=1490