Curtains Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Its a lot for this leagueIt's all about getting back to the Premier League for all them riches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Ram Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I don't know Ovis, how much did Forest pay (or not pay, not sure if they've coughed up) Peterborough for that Assamabalonga chappie, it was over 5 million I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 No chance it will be £6m - I reckon 3-3.5The DET reckons it'll be our new transfer record, so anywhere between £3.5 - 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovis aries Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I don't know Ovis, how much did Forest pay (or not pay, not sure if they've coughed up) Peterborough for that Assamabalonga chappie, it was over 5 million I think. Yeah but their chairman /owner does not know what he's doing . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEL Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 £4m+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Bringing in Tom Ince means it's eather 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 - as they know they wouldn't spend such vast sums and play him in a conventional 4-4-2 where he'd be wasted.Could have implications for Bent/Martin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjonesdcfc Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 When Hull loaned out Ince to us, he was not getting in the Hull team, recently just flopped at Nottingham Forest and Hull knew that when he returned he would only have a year remaining on his contract.The clause will certainly have been for derby to sign Ince if we went up, in fact I believe it was just that. Hull sent Ince to us when we are top and probably believed that we were certain to go up, therefore agreed the clause to ensure they get some money for him, even if he had not performed well at derby.Hull would have been thinking, right we can get rid of Ince here for at least what they bought him for (2.3m), and I don't believe it will be much more than that (3.5m maximum.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 When Hull loaned out Ince to us, he was not getting in the Hull team, recently just flopped at Nottingham Forest and Hull knew that when he returned he would only have a year remaining on his contract.The clause will certainly have been for derby to sign Ince if we went up, in fact I believe it was just that. Hull sent Ince to us when we are top and probably believed that we were certain to go up, therefore agreed the clause to ensure they get some money for him, even if he had not performed well at derby.Hull would have been thinking, right we can get rid of Ince here for at least what they bought him for (2.3m), and I don't believe it will be much more than that (3.5m maximum.) You don't think there would be a few teams looking at Ince for just a couple of million? I say again, I'd have thought this clause would have only been to Hulls benefit if it was a substantial amount otherwise it would be in their interest to offer him around and start a bidding war. They paid 2.3 million after it went to tribunal. After Fulham and Blackburn have altered the market with their crazy signings Ince is worth more than £2.3 million based on his Blackpool form alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yani P Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I agree that's why I reckon it will be 3 and a half ish...he was a total flop at Hull so cant believe they would have put a loan then £6m tag on him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 No chance it will be £6m - I reckon 3-3.5What about the goalkeeper...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambitious Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 It's said to be more than our record transfer record fee, but less than the £6m fee quoted. I'm keen to see us get this snapped up before McClaren starts dropping hits at Newcastle, though. Let's just hope this one doesn't get injured like our last big signing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernRam Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I don't think it'll be huge - Hull fans on Twitter seem to wish the clause hadn't been set in the original deal, as they reckon they won't get there money's worth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjonesdcfc Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 You don't think there would be a few teams looking at Ince for just a couple of million? I say again, I'd have thought this clause would have only been to Hulls benefit if it was a substantial amount otherwise it would be in their interest to offer him around and start a bidding war. They paid 2.3 million after it went to tribunal. After Fulham and Blackburn have altered the market with their crazy signings Ince is worth more than £2.3 million based on his Blackpool form alone.As I say, when they sold him to us, he was not performing well, and after his stint with derby he proved he is absolutely worth more than 2.3 million.But I still believe that the time that Hull sold him, they would have been looking for guaranteed money for someone who they didn't believe was capable.It was only once he started scoring that Bruce was saying that he had a future at Hull, and now this clause seems to have been activated, Hull are trying to get more for their money, simply because of how he performed and the fact that we didn't fully activate the clause by getting promoted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjonesdcfc Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 It's said to be more than our record transfer record fee, but less than the £6m fee quoted. I'm keen to see us get this snapped up before McClaren starts dropping hits at Newcastle, though. Let's just hope this one doesn't get injured like our last big signing! Where has this been quoted? Do you have a link? Claude Davis was 3 million, and I do not think that Ince will be much more than that, 3.5 max Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambitious Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Where has this been quoted? Do you have a link?Claude Davis was 3 million, and I do not think that Ince will be much more than that, 3.5 max DERBY County will have to break their club record transfer fee paid for a player in order to land Tom Ince from Hull City.The most the Rams have spent on an individual signing is currently £3.5m for striker Robert Earnshaw, who arrived from Norwich City in June 2007.Derby want to bring Ince to the iPro Stadium on a permanent basis following an impressive loan spell last season.They are understood to be willing to exercise a buy-out clause that was included in the loan deal.Reports in the national newspapers suggest the fee will be £6m.That it thought to be higher than the figure set but it is believed to exceed the amount paid for Earnshaw.Ince scored 11 goals in 18 appearances during his time at Derby in 2014-15.The 23-year-old also collected the Rams' young player of the year award.He found his chances limited at Hull last term but manager Steve Bruce is keen to hang on to the forward following relegation from the Premier League.Ince, son of former England midfielder Paul, has 12 months left on his current contract, having joined the Tigers when his contract with Blackpool expired last summer.New Rams chairman Mel Morris has said that head coach Paul Clement will have funds available to strengthen his squad ahead of the 2015-16 season.Derby have already recruited striker Darren Bent and defender Alex Pearce on free transfers.And they are also closing in on Aston Villa forward Andreas Weimann. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEL Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Where has this been quoted? Do you have a link?Claude Davis was 3 million, and I do not think that Ince will be much more than that, 3.5 max It's on DET site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete2 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Still think the best signings w can make this summer are martin and Thorne. Get these two fit for the Start of the season and it will be like signing two new players after the debacle of the end of last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovis aries Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Still think the best signings w can make this summer are martin and Thorne. Get these two fit for the Start of the season and it will be like signing two new players after the debacle of the end of last season. Must get another , proper D/M , its imperative , IMO . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEL Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Must get another , proper D/M , its imperative , IMO .We got Thorne/Eustace (heard he agreed the deal but who knows it might change though) so what the point of getting another one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 As I say, when they sold him to us, he was not performing well, and after his stint with derby he proved he is absolutely worth more than 2.3 million.But I still believe that the time that Hull sold him, they would have been looking for guaranteed money for someone who they didn't believe was capable.It was only once he started scoring that Bruce was saying that he had a future at Hull, and now this clause seems to have been activated, Hull are trying to get more for their money, simply because of how he performed and the fact that we didn't fully activate the clause by getting promotedIf Hull have any business sense then they would have factored in him potentially performing well with us. I'd imagine there would be more than us sniffing around if all Hull wanted to do was make their money back and sell him for a couple of million. If he performs with us then the highest bidder wins. If he doesn't perform well what difference does it make? It's not like we have to buy him just because of this clause.This clause only makes sense from Hulls point of view if the agreed amount is a sizeable one. Maybe not £6 million or perhaps £6 million in instalments, but Hull would be mad to just insert a clause just to make their money back when there was potentially a profit to be made. For me, everything pointed towards this being a biggish fee the moment a clause was mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.