Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The Grass Is Greener. said:

If he left for nothing right now, he would still been worth every penny we paid for him. A Scottish Cup Winning Legend. 

 

What a pic.

IMG_0091.JPG

It was old hat for him , he had already won a trophy at Hampden 3 years before , his expession was the exact same that day too ! ................... and there were no fannies on the park afterwards disrupting our celebrations !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, billyg said:

It was old hat for him , he had already won a trophy at Hampden 3 years before , his expession was the exact same that day too ! ................... and there were no fannies on the park afterwards disrupting our celebrations !

That was the wee cup, m9.

IMG_0692.JPG

Edited by The Grass Is Greener.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, billyg said:

Love it ! Maybe Petrie played it down at the AGM 'cos he hasn't told Farmer yet ! :P

Bear in mind this was tweeted after Gilmour's tenure connected to the club had ended. If he'd been pulling wool over the eyes of disgruntled fans, there'd be no need to continue the charade given that he's no longer affiliated with St. Mirren, he could have easily said 'oh by the way it's only 20%, no 33%'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Grass Is Greener. said:

St Mirren fans getting a bit defensive here, do they need the money that badly?

I wouldn't say so. Pulled in around £500k from McAllister and Mallan transfers, would have made another £300k from the cup tie at the piggery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Grass Is Greener. said:

St Mirren fans getting a bit defensive here, do they need the money that badly?

Are we? I suggested that the 33% sell on would be a cracking boost if Hibs held out and this figure was rounded on by the 'PETRIE SAYS THAT'S BOLLOCKS' folks rather quickly.

As a full time club operating out of the championship, I'd say we're always in a position where we need money coming in, we've done well in the last six months between player sales and a decent cash return from a cup tie at Parkhead. Any money from the future sales of Kenny McLean and John McGinn are welcome bonuses and not budgeted so of course we're going to take interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Grass Is Greener. said:

Anyway, do we even know if there was really a bid? Don't Hibs usually make a statement if a bid has been rejected? 

 

 

Think it depends on the situation. In the Scott Allan case we only dealt with it publicly because it was the ****. Be interesting to see what happens in the next couple of days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, djchapsticks said:

Are we? I suggested that the 33% sell on would be a cracking boost if Hibs held out and this figure was rounded on by the 'PETRIE SAYS THAT'S BOLLOCKS' folks rather quickly.

As a full time club operating out of the championship, I'd say we're always in a position where we need money coming in, we've done well in the last six months between player sales and a decent cash return from a cup tie at Parkhead. Any money from the future sales of Kenny McLean and John McGinn are welcome bonuses and not budgeted so of course we're going to take interest.

Petrie doesn't f**k about when it comes to money. He usually gets the best deals for our players, its spending the money where he cant be trusted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hibeesbounce75 said:

Petrie doesn't f**k about when it comes to money. He usually gets the best deals for our players, its spending the money where he cant be trusted.

I'm not denying that for a second. However, despite McGinn being out of contract, we held all the cards where negotiating with Hibs - or any other club wanting him for that matter - came about. We offered him improved terms which he rejected. This meant we could hold out for a rather large development fee or effectively freeze him out of football indefinitely.

To that end, he'd come off a bad season and never had too many admirers and Hibs understandably weren't willing or able to part with the money required (approx £250k I believe it was given he'd been with us since 7 or 8 years old), so we accepted a much reduced development fee (around half if reports at the time were accurate) for a much boosted sell on with the thinking that if he goes on and does well at Hibs, it's a win-win scenario for both clubs. Not such a far-fetched notion really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, djchapsticks said:

I'm not denying that for a second. However, despite McGinn being out of contract, we held all the cards where negotiating with Hibs - or any other club wanting him for that matter - came about. We offered him improved terms which he rejected. This meant we could hold out for a rather large development fee or effectively freeze him out of football indefinitely.

To that end, he'd come off a bad season and never had too many admirers and Hibs understandably weren't willing or able to part with the money required (approx £250k I believe it was given he'd been with us since 7 or 8 years old), so we accepted a much reduced development fee (around half if reports at the time were accurate) for a much boosted sell on with the thinking that if he goes on and does well at Hibs, it's a win-win scenario for both clubs. Not such a far-fetched notion really.

I think most people think there is a 33% sell on, it makes sense and looks like it'll be a good deal for everyone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Grass Is Greener. said:

I think most people think there is a 33% sell on, it makes sense and looks like it'll be a good deal for everyone. 

Agreed. Think most St. Mirren fans were happy with this because Hibs carry the weight - even in the championship - of being a club who won't accept wee piddly amounts for their assets whereas we'd never be able to hold out for high values on our players. I said at the time that Hibs and Aberdeen were the two best clubs that McGinn could have gone to because when the time is right, those two clubs will always do right by themselves in the transfer fees they draw and by proxy, will do us right too.

For a recent example of this, see Steven Mallan and Liam Boyce leaving Saints and County respectively for a fraction of Jason Cummings going to Forest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

I'm not denying that for a second. However, despite McGinn being out of contract, we held all the cards where negotiating with Hibs - or any other club wanting him for that matter - came about. We offered him improved terms which he rejected. This meant we could hold out for a rather large development fee or effectively freeze him out of football indefinitely.

To that end, he'd come off a bad season and never had too many admirers and Hibs understandably weren't willing or able to part with the money required (approx £250k I believe it was given he'd been with us since 7 or 8 years old), so we accepted a much reduced development fee (around half if reports at the time were accurate) for a much boosted sell on with the thinking that if he goes on and does well at Hibs, it's a win-win scenario for both clubs. Not such a far-fetched notion really.

obviously at the time he may have been seen as a bit of a risk but now it seems mental that we could've had him for 250k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...