Charlie Austin - joined QPR on loan

[Ramslaar]

7 minutes ago, rammieib said:

A pre-contract means the start of next season, so another 12 months. He's 29, so another year older and so on.

Plus, we're all looking at the fact that there is a strong chance we can't sign up after January because there is no freedom of EU movement. Just imagine how expensive UK players will be in January then.

Agree on the risk/reward and we obviously did cap that at £1 million (based on media information). Just find that decision a little strange - if his club wanted £3 Million then fine I get it, but for £800k, it's not a lot of money.

Again agree will all you say but I'm led to believe it was less about the money and more about them finding a replacement.as it happened they were not able to find one hence we could of offered 10mil but they may still of said no

[RYRAM]

to be honest I think if this was going to happen it would be done by now. could be wrong just a feeling 

[TomG]

15 minutes ago, RYRAM said:

to be honest I think if this was going to happen it would be done by now. could be wrong just a feeling 

You're right, RYRAM.  If he's said, as has been reported, that that he doesn't want to come on loan then I for one don't want him anywhere near our club!

[Ramarena]

2 hours ago, rammieib said:

Not really. Surely 800k extra for the striker the club have most likely identified as their number one prospect isn't that much in reality.

Are you saying therefore lets write this season off now and plan for next season?

Plus, there is zero guarantee that given EU rules and being outside the EU we'd even be allowed to sign him in the summer.

I'm just confused that if we think this is the striker we need and we've done our homework, that we then turn around and say "Despite the fact he is our number one target, the man we think would suit our system and score goals for us, we only think £ 1 million is the right number and not £1.8 Million" - I don't get that. If our budget is literally only £1 million then I can understand that but a refusal to increase the offer if we have the cash, no, I can't get my head around it.

We don’t really know what the exact figure was. Also it’s been mentioned that his club wanted a replacement in before letting him go.

Its all speculation only the clubs know. The net result is we clearly decided not to give his club what they were asking for As it wasn’t worth it for us and that’s good enough for me!

[Ghost of Clough]

On 07/10/2020 at 22:59, Macintosh said:

Six weeks ago I thought there was a huge crop we were looking at, a whole world of players. Yet when it boils down to choice, it really is a pretty small pond to fish from. You can't even say the best one were quickly gobbled up.

Is this in reference to Rosenior saying he watched 1000 players during lockdown? To give that figure some context, 721 different players featured in Championship games last season, with 441 already playing in the 4 rounds of games this season.

[Eddie]

5 hours ago, S8TY said:

Apologies for going off thread topic with my post above  but I'm genuinely not interested in signing Austin IF its true that hes not keen on joining us 

Here's me thinking that the slave trade had been abolished too.

[Premier ram]

think people should bae a little more patient regarding any incoming striker , i feel any club we are dealing with be it WBA or Villa or any other want a replacement in before letting players go , this may go to the wire for The Rams but im sure the manager and the club are working hard to secure any signings we require

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

5 hours ago, rammieib said:

Not really. Surely 800k extra for the striker the club have most likely identified as their number one prospect isn't that much in reality.

Are you saying therefore lets write this season off now and plan for next season?

Plus, there is zero guarantee that given EU rules and being outside the EU we'd even be allowed to sign him in the summer.

I'm just confused that if we think this is the striker we need and we've done our homework, that we then turn around and say "Despite the fact he is our number one target, the man we think would suit our system and score goals for us, we only think £ 1 million is the right number and not £1.8 Million" - I don't get that. If our budget is literally only £1 million then I can understand that but a refusal to increase the offer if we have the cash, no, I can't get my head around it.

But maybe we have a budget, maybe that would leave less on wages etc, I don’t think our financial position is great. If Derby feel that figure is too much I get that, especially in current circumstances. 

[Sparkle]

33 minutes ago, Theres’s Only Wan Chope said:

But maybe we have a budget, maybe that would leave less on wages etc, I don’t think our financial position is great. If Derby feel that figure is too much I get that, especially in current circumstances. 

Exactly- there is only one person paying the losses 

[Joe]

well even in 2009 on here.....

 

Posted December 31, 2009

We have been linked with a move for Charlie Austin 6ft 2" 20 year old striker from Swindon - along with Forest and Ipswich - the Mirror have been busy today !

[Amberram]

Can someone end this thread it’s getting a bit boring.

[papa_lazarou]

This may do the trick!

[BobdeBilder]

2 minutes ago, papa_lazarou said:

This may do the trick!

Nah,that looks like a .308 FMJ.  What you need is a 300 WSM rapid expansion protected hollow point, that'll do the trick.

[papa_lazarou]

5 minutes ago, BobdeBilder said:

Nah,that looks like a .308 FMJ.  What you need is a 300 WSM rapid expansion protected hollow point, that'll do the trick.

Was banking on the its qualities as being made from silver...... damn! I stand corrected. Charlie seems to have a hint of Lycanthrope about him. More so with the new hair do!

[Rev]

25 minutes ago, BobdeBilder said:

Nah,that looks like a .308 FMJ.  What you need is a 300 WSM rapid expansion protected hollow point, that'll do the trick.

I thought it was a fancy pen!

Mont Blanc .22 perhaps?

[Comrade 86]

On 09/10/2020 at 09:27, rammieib said:

A pre-contract means the start of next season, so another 12 months. He's 29, so another year older and so on.

Plus, we're all looking at the fact that there is a strong chance we can't sign up after January because there is no freedom of EU movement. Just imagine how expensive UK players will be in January then.

Agree on the risk/reward and we obviously did cap that at £1 million (based on media information). Just find that decision a little strange - if his club wanted £3 Million then fine I get it, but for £800k, it's not a lot of money.

How many times do you need to be told that Darmstadt refused to allow him to move until they had signed a replacement? In any case, you have had plenty to say about us overpaying for other players in the past but when it suits, you're quite happy for us to pay a fee 80% higher than our own valuation on a player you know next nothing about. If we'd been quoted £5 million for Jozwiak, would you have advocated spending £9 mill if that's what Lech had demanded?

On a final note, since when was £800,000.00 'not a lot of money'? One minute you're saying we're skint, the next you're looking to spaff another 800K of Mel's hard-earned. Fickle much? 

[Ramslaar]

1 hour ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

How many times do you need to be told that Darmstadt refused to allow him to move until they had signed a replacement? In any case, you have had plenty to say about us overpaying for other players in the past but when it suits, you're quite happy for us to pay a fee 80% higher than our own valuation on a player you know next nothing about. If we'd been quoted £5 million for Jozwiak, would you have advocated spending £9 mill if that's what Lech had demanded?

On a final note, since when was £800,000.00 'not a lot of money'? One minute you're saying we're skint, the next you're looking to spaff another 800K of Mel's hard-earned. Fickle much? 

To be fair I think he means not alot in football terms which I agree, on the face of it in football it is not alot but if your trying to balance income and outcome it's a huge amount especially when in 4 months you wouldn't need to pay that.people need to realise that not just us but every club is up against it and will be as long as fans are not allowed through the gates. unfortunately some people on here have a real strange view on alot of things and their independent pendulum swings so far in both directions because they post reactionary stuff. Engaging fingers on keyboard before brain.its just the way it is and I believe most mean well as they just love their club. Others I'm afraid not so much. They always seem to be the ones at a game that for some strange reason see a totally different game to the other 30 odd thousand. The strange nature of opinions i guess.

[Woodley Ram]

I think he will come to Derby in January, for the same price as we offered and no doubt they will have identified a replacement ? Dursun that is 

[rammieib]

On 11/10/2020 at 06:23, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

How many times do you need to be told that Darmstadt refused to allow him to move until they had signed a replacement? In any case, you have had plenty to say about us overpaying for other players in the past but when it suits, you're quite happy for us to pay a fee 80% higher than our own valuation on a player you know next nothing about. If we'd been quoted £5 million for Jozwiak, would you have advocated spending £9 mill if that's what Lech had demanded?

On a final note, since when was £800,000.00 'not a lot of money'? One minute you're saying we're skint, the next you're looking to spaff another 800K of Mel's hard-earned. Fickle much? 

Wow - Is this a case of saying something because it fits your narrative because I would love you to find one post where I have written this in the past? But I can save you the bother mate - because you won't find it.

That whole post is you saying stuff because it fits your narrative that it actually makes me chuckle.

And to answer your question - no I wouldn't advocate spending £9 million on a player. I would advocate spending 1.8 Million on a player. In the Championship, 1 million pound players are not generally good enough to get you out of this league but you'll end of spending your season in mid season. So I don't back away from my opinion that if we genuinely believe this was the player we felt fitted our system, would provide the goals/assists/general play for us to be successful and if we had the money (a big if) I would have spent 1.8 Million.

We will never know if Darmstadt would have sold at 1.8 million so feel free to keep saying that line. They said we never met their asking price. Had we met it, they might have sold. Every player has a price regardless of whether you have a replacement lined up or not.

[DCFC_Sloth]

There is a lot of discussion in this thread (and in the Dursun one too) about the club’s apparent refusal to pay out an extra £800,000 to secure his services immediately, with some posters thinking we should have gone ahead and others thinking the club made the right move. 

I have to say that I am firmly in the second camp with this one. Paying 80% above what we believe is a fair valuation for a player seems mad to me. We are currently in an unprecedented time, no idea when fans are coming back into stadia (we are one of the top 20 supported teams in the country - its a lot of money we are losing), and no way of knowing if the country is going to stop football being played again. The financial future is really uncertain and that means that 800k stops being a small sum to throw about and becomes a major part of the budget, which I think is half the incoming bogle and Lowe cash (11m+ raised, 4.5-5m spent). 

Also, by spending 80% more to ‘just get the deal done’ we take a step back towards the Butterfield and Johnson days. As we all remember that policy led to us being quoted over twice as much for Oli Watkins as Brentford were as Exeter (rightly) believed we would just pay it. Repairing that damage has clearly taken a long time and I feel that it is still somewhat attached to us. 

Furthermore, we will need to add this guy to the books and if he flops he will leave far less of an ffp shaped dent in our losses coming in for £1m than he would for nearly twice that. If he is released after a year of a three year contract with a £1m transfer fee, we take a £666,666 hit, if he is signed to the same deal but cost £1.8m, that hit is £1.2m (if we are using straight line amortisation), which is practically double.

All this is for a player who will be free next summer, when, if he flops after a year, there will be no hit to the books, no fee will have been paid. The future is so uncertain at this level that an £800,000 fee could have a massive knock on effect. So the club has decided to get a loan player in for a year and Austin looks to be the first choice. Fingers crossed he is The Austin who banged them in for fun at this level a few years ago.