Stokes price (merged)

[KiddA]

So according to bbc Hibs will be receiving around about 800,000 pound.

Does he have a clause in his contract:confused:

If not why are Hibs accepting a bid like that :bitchy:

Depressing times down Easter Road way :boo hoo:

[Richard Scott]

So hes away to Celtic so I read on the BBC. But £800k?:confused: I mean, I know he's no David Villa, and he doesn't exactly set the world of Football ablaze, but £800k? Hes worth a LOT more than that. I thought we were supposed to be the club with the tactically astute chairman? Has Rod Petrie lost his marbles completely this time round? :confused:

[Gala Foxes]

Local Radio here said £1.2m

[The Silver Fox]

There should be no secrets with this deal. There must be something in the samll print of his contract or Hibs would be daft to sell at less than a million. In England he is not rated but to have a guaranteed 20 goals a season it is worth more than £1m.

I would like some sort of explanation as it disheartens the fans when none is offered. Having said that Petrie does not have previous for offering reasons why.

[scoopyboy]

Local Radio here said £1.2m

I honestly can't see it being any less.

If Celtic offered £800,000 last Wednesday or Thursday then I can't see Rodders negotiating for 4 days and not getting Celtic to budge.

I think the media are simply guessing cos they have no info from either club to work with.

The fact that they are all coming out with different amounts kinda backs this up.

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

It is 1.2 million and I hope he keeps some of his signing on fee for cushions for his erse :greengrin he's gonna need them once the smellies get on his back if he doesn't do the business

[Pete70]

£1.2m according to Sky Sports News

[scoopyboy]

I still haven't seen confirmation anywhere that he has actually signed.

[stubru59]

For fairly obvious reasons, we'll be quoting the lowest figure as the fee. Clauses in Stokes contract will have prevented us from screwing the b.......

[Capt Mainwaring]

I agree - £800k seems very light considering he's proven SPL goalscorer.

It might well be that the Stokes Contract had a pre-set transfer figure that made negotiation difficult to enhance. Would welcome the Board being straight with the fans on this point at what point does our "rock solid" finances allow us to go out and actually pay a transfer fee for players in contact that allows us an advantage over most othe SPL clubs.

The PR spin from the Board has only just started, with the announcement of Duffy on loan. I suspect the Stokes story is currently being drafted. Will probably get the Centre half from Utrecht story next as the official drip feed continues over the next 24 hours.

The key however is what is the 3 year plan for the football team ( not the Club). Allowing star players to depart to be replaced by loan signings ( let's leave the discussions about their adequacy until we seem them play) does not seem to me to be a very positive and sustainable plan to enhance progress.

Week started badly and is getting worse by the day!

[H18sry]

It maybe is 1.2 but Sunderlands cut may be 33% :wink: therefore we get 800,000

[Capt Mainwaring]

He's crap.Better off without him. Disruptive,Jack the Lad about town,I reckon within three years he'll be in footballing obscurity:agree:

Aye right enough. You've seen a lot of 20+ goals a season players at hibs haven't you!

Better to bring in some clean cut mediocity then.

Let's get rid of Riordan whilst were at it - agree?:rolleyes:

[lyonhibs]

The way I see it, whilst £1.2 million is less than one would expect for Stokes, IF that amount has arisen as the result of a clause in his contract, the knee-jerk reaction is to yelp "well what the hell was Petrie doing accepting the insertion of that clause, argghhhhh nae ambition, argghhhhhh :grr::grr:" and so on and so forth.

However, think of the situation at the time of the Stokes signing. He did have a pretty good pedigree, played in the Premiership, even if he wasn't a roaring success, and scored for fun in the SPL - cost Sunderland £2 million IIRC. I remember being very, very surprised at the time that we got him. He was young, on the verge of a full cap (maybe even capped??), ambitious and taking a fair hit in the wage department to come to us.

Given as - for the next 3/4 years anyway, he has probably shot his bolt re: becoming a Premiership striker, the Old Firm were always going to be his most likely transfer after Hibs, and I doubt he - or more probably his agent - wanted him to sign a 3 year contract without some sort of clause that would facilitate any move along the M8 in the event - as was the case - that he had a good 1st season with us. Petrie is a reknowned hard-nose at the negociating table, in a "no-strings attached" situation, so maybe Stokes/his agent wanted to attach some strings from the get-go.

This would have been unpalatable for RP, but can you imagine if a) we'd let the signing of Stokes slip, and it became known that this was because of a refusal to insert a clause - .net pandemonium, meltdown, end of the world and subsequently b) we'd gone through last season WITHOUT Stokes' 23 goals??? Doesn't really bear thinking about.

Of course, if there was no such clause in Stokes' contract, and RP has accepted a bid of £1.2 million for the SPL's 2nd top scorer with 2 years left on his contract, then some serious questions should be asked at the next AGM.

[Speedway]

Maybe it's £1.2m because Wilson's coming the other way? :wink:

[BEEJ]

Maybe it's £1.2m because Wilson's coming the other way? :wink:
Is Wilson not seriously crocked through injury?

[IWasThere2016]

Is Wilson not seriously crocked through injury?

Yup

[Kevvy1875]

I reckon the fee was 1.2mil a 1/3 of which went directly to Stokes having been negotiated at the start of his contract with Hibs. I also think he would have had a clause where if a club came in at £xxx then he had the option to go.

Put yourself in Petrie's position. If a striker with Stokes pedigree turns up at the door with an offer like that then Hibs couldn't really lose. We got him for free and got a cracking season out of him then made close on 1mil for him.

Still ****ing annoying to lose another player to the OF though.:grr:

[hibs1875]

Yet another sad day at hibs if true ! :grr:

1.2m is chicken feed for a 20+ goalscorer !

How do we ever compete if we cant hold on to our good players !

We would of been better getting another session out of him ! than cashing in on him !

We'll never be able to replace him for that sort of money ! :boo hoo:

Just been talking to a mate of mine ! who's been a session ticket holder for 40 years and thats the straw thats broke the camels back for him ! sad sad day :boo hoo:

[blairwallace]

So hes away to Celtic so I read on the BBC. But £800k?:confused: I mean, I know he's no David Villa, and he doesn't exactly set the world of Football ablaze, but £800k? Hes worth a LOT more than that. I thought we were supposed to be the club with the tactically astute chairman? Has Rod Petrie lost his marbles completely this time round? :confused:

how much would you say he's worth then?

[blackpoolhibs]

Yet another sad day at hibs if true ! :grr:

1.2m is chicken feed for a 20+ goalscorer !

How do we ever compete if we cant hold on to our good players !

We would of been better getting another session out of him ! than cashing in on him !

We'll never be able to replace him for that sort of money ! :boo hoo:

Just been talking to a mate of mine ! who's been a session ticket holder for 40 years and thats the straw thats broke the camels back for him ! sad sad day :boo hoo:

When did we last compete? :confused: Yip you are right we can never expect to replace him with what we can pay, this was the case when fletcher left too.

[.Sean.]

Taking into account the fact that Stokes scored 20-odd goals last season and that there is still 2 years left on his deal, I fail to see any reason whatsoever for Petrie selling him for 1.2 million.




If the figure is as low as this, I think it's fair to say there's been more is to Stokes' time at the club than meets the eye :agree:

[stubru59]

how much would you say he's worth then?

He's worth what the buyers willing to pay - subject to clauses in his contract.

[chrisski33]

maybe stokes had a exceptionally good season last year as he didnt perform to well down south and perhaps when hes on the bigger stage with more pressure he cannae handle it so may flop at celtic (hopefully) and we will have made a good profit from selling as got him for nowt!
still annoying to lose him to celtic but i reckon that was his game plan all the long whne he came to Hibs!
we need to stop selling to celtic! end of!

[bingo70]

Yet another sad day at hibs if true ! :grr:

1.2m is chicken feed for a 20+ goalscorer !

How do we ever compete if we cant hold on to our good players !

We would of been better getting another session out of him ! than cashing in on him !

We'll never be able to replace him for that sort of money ! :boo hoo:

Just been talking to a mate of mine ! who's been a session ticket holder for 40 years and thats the straw thats broke the camels back for him ! sad sad day :boo hoo:

We 'compete' as we sell our best players for a massive profit, then spread that profit through the rest of the squad so we are continually trying to improve all areas of the team rather than hang onto players until theyre contracts run out get nothing for them then continually get worse as our budget decreases instead of increases.

If your mates been a season ticket holder for 40 years he's probably picked the wrong time to give up as presumably he's already bought it for this season?

[basehibby]

So according to bbc Hibs will be receiving around about 800,000 pound.

Does he have a clause in his contract:confused:

If not why are Hibs accepting a bid like that :bitchy:

Depressing times down Easter Road way :boo hoo:

The BBC will maybe get the accurate info up there about a week after everybody else - it's ONLY Scottish football afterall so they don't think it's important enough to bother checking.

As for the reported £1.2M fee - still seems very low and I'd like to hear the reasons behind accepting this bid - would also like to see Hughes given the chance to spend most of it bolstering the squad as it desperately needs bolstering.

PS - for any numpty about to claim that he'd only waste it - remind me who signed Stokes in the first place.

[Prawn Sandwich]

Perhaps the answer is pure cash flow? Maybe Rodders had budgeted £1 million income in September from the sale of a player and it wasn't Stokes they expected to sell, but Bamba? Maybe there hasn't been bids for Bamba and they have been forced to sell Stokes. Stokes, Bamba and maybe Riordan are the only players Hibs can sell for hard cash?
Let's see if Bamba is sold in the next 24 hours. Maybe Stokes is the cost of building the new east stand to make a short fall?
Selling a 20+ goals a season player for £800k - £1.2 million with two years on his contract doesn't make sense to me?

[DH1875]

Selling a 20+ goals a season player for £800k - £1.2 million with two years on his contract doesn't make sense to me?

:agree:
Joke absolute, joke.
Any word yet if it's gone through.

[truehibernian]

I am always a wee bit realistic when it comes to incoming transfer fees. With Fletcher, Brown and Thomson we had three players where at least both the OF and clubs down south (and abroad) were noting interest. This, in simple economics, drives up the value. I think all three of those players are and always will be better than Anthony. The fact that only Celtic made a concrete offer for him means that there was hardly a clamour of clubs in for him which in turn means we are not in a position to demand an astronomical fee. He had 2 years to run yes, but if we had held firm who is to say his head drops, his off field stuff continues, and his goals and effort dries up. Will Celtic recoup a vast amount of money selling him on ? I seriously question whether they will because I seriously question how much game time he will get. If Lennon gets the sack at any point then again AS could fall out of favour. There are so many parameters. Good business for Hibs on and off the field. We get money, squad is freshened up, and a player who does not want to be at the club leaves. I think with this transfer we have to also look beyond the money we got to see what effect it will have at Easter Road and East Mains. Really not too downhearted with this one and we just get on with things. I am however downhearted that Hughes is going to escape the firing line. He is the bigger problem in my eyes.

[Prawn Sandwich]

Stokes is due for medical tomorrow. The transfer will go through after that.

[lyonhibs]

:agree:
Joke absolute, joke.
Any word yet if it's gone through.


What's equally as pertinent to this whole debate is whether or not there was a pre-arranged clause in Stokes' contract that obliged Hibs to let him talk to them.

Some folk are going to look a wee bit daft if we discover (surely one of the "in the know" folk could do some digging) that the board had to take £1.2 million or whatever because there was a buy-out clause written into his contract.

[blackpoolhibs]

What's equally as pertinent to this whole debate is whether or not there was a pre-arranged clause in Stokes' contract that obliged Hibs to let him talk to them.

Some folk are going to look a wee bit daft if we discover (surely one of the "in the know" folk could do some digging) that the board had to take £1.2 million or whatever because there was a buy-out clause written into his contract.

:agree: Then the same folk will say it was a joke for letting him have the clause in his contract. We all know petrie will have got the best deal he could, why folk are doubting this is silly.

[3pm]

Chaps, I thought we might have renegotitaed that figure in the summer. Maybe we tried. It's all irrelevant now in any case.

[Perspective]

Take it with a pinch of salt if you want, but been told there's no clause in his contract. Yogi sanctioned the sale.

'Disruptive influence' or not, it still amazes me that a 21-year-old, 23-goal striker can go for as little as £800,000 to a desperate, cash-rich team like Celtic.

[RickyS]

Take it with a pinch of salt if you want, but been told there's no clause in his contract. Yogi sanctioned the sale.

'Disruptive influence' or not, it still amazes me that a 21-year-old, 23-goal striker can go for as little as £800,000 to a desperate, cash-rich team like Celtic.

this is the part which baffles me the most, got me thinking about the values of strikers from the SPL and their stats, done a wee bit digging and it makes me a hell of a lot worse:grr:

Price App goals
Stokes 1.2m 40 22
Scott McDonald 3.5m 88 51
Lee Miller 600k 119 32
Alan Gow 245k 1 0
Daniel Cousin 1.7m 28 11
Cillian Sheridan 300k 14 4
Marc Fortune 2.2 m 30 10
Steven Naismith 1.9m 57 9
Gaz O'Connor 2.1m 138 46
David Clarkson 800k 219 50

[ScottB]

Take it with a pinch of salt if you want, but been told there's no clause in his contract. Yogi sanctioned the sale.

'Disruptive influence' or not, it still amazes me that a 21-year-old, 23-goal striker can go for as little as £800,000 to a desperate, cash-rich team like Celtic.

So what was he doing firing his mouth about not wanting to sell him then?

If Hughes turns out to have pushed Stokes and Riordan out the door the carnage on here and at the ground doesn't bare thinking about...

[Kaiser1962]

minimal information.
Stokes wanted away, what's the deal with Sunderland, Maybe Hughes wants to sell, maybe we had to sell. The truth will be slow in coming out I fear.

Absolutely right H18SVG. Theres too much going on in the background here. Stories of gambling, fighting, not turning up for training and so on. It will be interesting to see how this affects the team dynamic as it has not been good of late.

[down-the-slope]

I reckon the fee was 1.2mil a 1/3 of which went directly to Stokes having been negotiated at the start of his contract with Hibs. I also think he would have had a clause where if a club came in at £xxx then he had the option to go.

Put yourself in Petrie's position. If a striker with Stokes pedigree turns up at the door with an offer like that then Hibs couldn't really lose. We got him for free and got a cracking season out of him then made close on 1mil for him.

Still ****ing annoying to lose another player to the OF though.:grr:

:agree: indeed great business in all the circumstances...but still irritating (consider had it been say Newcastle he was off to.....much less irritation)

[Septimus]

The only money we can be fairly sure of is Stokes' wage. He will be waking up tomorrow with an income something like three times what he was getting at Easter Road.

[big-mo]

While not apologising for the sale of Stokes, many have said that a 20+ goal scorer is worth more that the £800,000 that we will receive for him, correct, but we do need a settled dressing room where players get along on the pitch as well as off. Stokes is not a complete player and has many flaws; perhaps he was lucky to get his 20+ goals last season. Who knows what he will do at Celtic, I would predict that he will be no where near that number.

Also remember Killen, he has 15 goals before he was injured just after Christmas, if he had stayed fit he would have got more that 20 possibly 25 by the end of the season, we lost him for he-haw to the Smelltic and he only managed to score a grand total of 2 goals in his 26 appearances. I see that he has managed to score 2 goals in 4 games so far this season for Shenzhen Ruby. (Always remember him saying he was too big a player to play for Hibs).

[Callum_62]

so what exactly has stokesy allegedly been up to??

[Caversham Green]

Take it with a pinch of salt if you want, but been told there's no clause in his contract. Yogi sanctioned the sale.

'Disruptive influence' or not, it still amazes me that a 21-year-old, 23-goal striker can go for as little as £800,000 to a desperate, cash-rich team like Celtic.

No offence intended, but pinch of salt taken. It's worth remembering that the only people who know for certain what was in his contract are Stokes, his agent and representatives of Hibs. Each will have an agenda as to what they tell other people, so unless your source has actually seen the contract his information is no more reliable than anybody else's on this forum.

The same goes for the transfer fee - journalists only go on what they are told by their contacts. In cases like this the reported fee will depend on what those contacts want the public to think.

Questions at the AGM are also ulikely to bear fruit as the answer will undoubtedly be "we don't comment on transfer fees." That's normally a policy I agree with, but in this case some sort of explanation really ought to be forthcoming even if it's just a brief comment like "we were contractually bound to sell him for the fee that was offered."

[rightwinger]

The timing certainly isn't ideal.

The destination compounds things.

The price also seems low but probably reflects compromises the club had to make when they brought him in a year ago - it was an impressive signing.

I know of fellow season ticket holders who've seen Stokes about his daily routine on a weekday afternoon - so the rumours on here don't surprise me.

Stokes, like Riordan, was a typical Hibs player. Talented, mercurial, dangerous, exciting, lazy, unfit, waster. Your biggest strength is your biggest weakness IMO. Riordan and Stokes are our biggest strength - goals - and our biggest weakness - a complete attitude/workrate liability when they are not scoring or creating goals. Too many fans lap them up when they're scoring and blame Rankin when we're under the cosh.

So what do we do? Get a hardworking huddy who helps the team defend more and scores only 9 or 10 a season? Nish? His biggest strength and biggest weakness is that he's a hardworking huddy. We end up in the same place! What our players tend to give on one hand they take away with the other.

Hibs problem is we cant work out who we are or what we want to be. Do we want to be a team of mercurial wasters or a team of hardworking huddies? Finding something in between is a hard task - we'd end with something like the Alex Miller team of 1994 (Darren Jackson, Michael O'Neill, Kevin McAllister trying to gel with David Farrell, Willie Miller and Graeme Mitchell). That team finished 5th too. The only complete Hibs team I've seen in 20 years was McLeish's - where two great talismen were surrounded by a nice variety of experienced, mature, and relatively well-paid pros.

For me though all that can be a bit of red herring. It's more to do with mentality. Can you win big games against fierce rivals at crunchtime in the season? The answer for us is always no and I came to that conclusion long before we sold Stokes...or Brown, Murphy, O'Connor, Stein or Baker for that matter.

So this season will be as usual. We'll lose quite a few, win a few, draw the rest and finish mid-table. There might be the odd big result around the middle part of the season to grab a headline or two. Maybe a decent run to lift us up the table in October. After flatter to deceive comes the failure. The usual cup exit (either to a big team at the first hurdle or a wee team later on). And more soul-destroying derby disappointments. We might just squeeze into a Euro place come the end of it - not that that will last though.

Sounds a bit like last season, and the one before, and the one before.

So the relevance is arguable - Stokes, Riordan, Miller, Rankin, Nish - they're all just numbers. Plenty more where they came from.

The one constant is Chris Hogg. He'll always be in the team. That's what keeps me renewing.

Roll on the next game.

[Crazyhorse]

The timing certainly isn't ideal.

The destination compounds things.

The price also seems low but probably reflects compromises the club had to make when they brought him in a year ago - it was an impressive signing.

I know of fellow season ticket holders who've seen Stokes about his daily routine on a weekday afternoon - so the rumours on here don't surprise me.

Stokes, like Riordan, was a typical Hibs player. Talented, mercurial, dangerous, exciting, lazy, unfit, waster. Your biggest strength is your biggest weakness IMO. Riordan and Stokes are our biggest strength - goals - and our biggest weakness - a complete attitude/workrate liability when they are not scoring or creating goals. Too many fans lap them up when they're scoring and blame Rankin when we're under the cosh.

So what do we do? Get a hardworking huddy who helps the team defend more and scores only 9 or 10 a season? Nish? His biggest strength and biggest weakness is that he's a hardworking huddy. We end up in the same place! What our players tend to give on one hand they take away with the other.

Hibs problem is we cant work out who we are or what we want to be. Do we want to be a team of mercurial wasters or a team of hardworking huddies? Finding something in between is a hard task - we'd end with something like the Alex Miller team of 1994 (Darren Jackson, Michael O'Neill, Kevin McAllister trying to gel with David Farrell, Willie Miller and Graeme Mitchell). That team finished 5th too. The only complete Hibs team I've seen in 20 years was McLeish's - where two great talismen were surrounded by a nice variety of experienced, mature, and relatively well-paid pros.

For me though all that can be a bit of red herring. It's more to do with mentality. Can you win big games against fierce rivals at crunchtime in the season? The answer for us is always no and I came to that conclusion long before we sold Stokes...or Brown, Murphy, O'Connor, Stein or Baker for that matter.

So this season will be as usual. We'll lose quite a few, win a few, draw the rest and finish mid-table. There might be the odd big result around the middle part of the season to grab a headline or two. Maybe a decent run to lift us up the table in October. After flatter to deceive comes the failure. The usual cup exit (either to a big team at the first hurdle or a wee team later on). And more soul-destroying derby disappointments. We might just squeeze into a Euro place come the end of it - not that that will last though.

Sounds a bit like last season, and the one before, and the one before.

So the relevance is arguable - Stokes, Riordan, Miller, Rankin, Nish - they're all just numbers. Plenty more where they came from.

The one constant is Chris Hogg. He'll always be in the team. That's what keeps me renewing.

Roll on the next game.

Excellent post and largely agree. The only difference is that under Miller our average crowd was half what it is today and the stadium was a sh*thole. As many posters point out we have excellent infrastructure now and little debt so perhaps we can push on out of the circle of despair you describe. It doesn't seem like it this week but I think we are the best placed Scottish club to do an FC Twente, AZ Alkmar or even a Utrecht who now seem to have a committed businessman behind them.

Whether we can do it will Yogi (and even Petrie) remains to be seen.

[St.Kristopher]

I just typed in Hibs into Google and the News ticker stated that we got 12M for Stokes - Petrie is a God!!

[Hibby Kay-Yay]

I just typed in Hibs into Google and the News ticker stated that we got 1.2M for Stokes - Petrie is a God!!

fixed it for you :wink:

[hibee92]

disgraceful! worth at least £15m! PEEETRIE! :grr:

[hibbymac]

Where's your point caller?

[St.Kristopher]

fixed it for you :wink:

Eh thanks for "fixing it for me" Jim, but that is what the headline on the ticker actually said. I thought that it was mildly amusing so I thought I would draw attention to it.

If you worked on the set of a Laurel and Hardy film would you have fixed it so that the ladder didn't hit someone on the back of the head? Or stopped the front of that house falling over Buster Keaton?

[Future17]

Eh thanks for "fixing it for me" Jim, but that is what the headline on the ticker actually said. I thought that it was mildly amusing so I thought I would draw attention to it.

If you worked on the set of a Laurel and Hardy film would you have fixed it so that the ladder didn't hit someone on the back of the head? Or stopped the front of that house falling over Buster Keaton?

:greengrin

[sesoim]

Stokes has a much better SPL record than Steven Fletcher, who is now valued at £6M. I know there is more to a player than scoring goals, but for me Stokes is worth around £2 to £2.5M.

There must either be a trigger in his contract that forced us to sell him or maybe we have agreed a smaller immediate price so that we can get a a higher percentage og whtever fee Celtic sell him for. I hope so, because at the moment it looks like we have handed Celtic a gift signed a lower Division reject as a replacement.

[Hibby Kay-Yay]

Eh thanks for "fixing it for me" Jim, but that is what the headline on the ticker actually said. I thought that it was mildly amusing so I thought I would draw attention to it.

If you worked on the set of a Laurel and Hardy film would you have fixed it so that the ladder didn't hit someone on the back of the head? Or stopped the front of that house falling over Buster Keaton?

mildly being the apropriate word :cool2: and yes, those Laurel and Hardy films were just an accident waiting to happen :bitchy:








:devil:

[marinello59]

Stokes has a much better SPL record than Steven Fletcher, who is now valued at £6M. I know there is more to a player than scoring goals, but for me Stokes is worth around £2 to £2.5M.

There must either be a trigger in his contract that forced us to sell him or maybe we have agreed a smaller immediate price so that we can get a a higher percentage og whtever fee Celtic sell him for. I hope so, because at the moment it looks like we have handed Celtic a gift signed a lower Division reject as a replacement.

Fletcher is a much better footballer than Stokes so the comparision is pointless. Stokes (Sunderland reject?:wink:) will have fetched the best price we could realistically have received from Celtic.

[cockneymike]

Fletcher is a much better footballer than Stokes so the comparision is pointless. Stokes (Sunderland reject?:wink:) will have fetched the best price we could realistically have received from Celtic.

Leaving aside a futile Fletcher comparison, the question is why are Hibs accepting a relatively low bid for such a high scoring SPL player?

£2m for Thomson
£2m for Whittaker
£4.4m for Brown
£1.2m for Stokes it just doesn't add up?

[Hibernia Na Eir]

Perhaps the recession is a reason?

[lyonhibs]

Leaving aside a futile Fletcher comparison, the question is why are Hibs accepting a relatively low bid for such a high scoring SPL player?

£2m for Thomson
£2m for Whittaker
£4.4m for Brown
£1.2m for Stokes it just doesn't add up?

It does if there was a release clause written into Stokes contract when he signed from Sunderland. I can't be arsed re-writing out why I think that is a probable scenario, but I think that's why Stokes has gone for what seems a relatively poor amount of money.

[sesoim]

Fletcher is a much better footballer than Stokes so the comparision is pointless. Stokes (Sunderland reject?:wink:) will have fetched the best price we could realistically have received from Celtic.


:bitchy: Goals win you games. Stokes might not have made it in the EPL, but he is still only 22. If he knocks in 30 goals a season at Celtic (which he is capable of) they will get £5M for him.

I just hope we get a cut.

[marinello59]

:bitchy: Goals win you games. Stokes might not have made it in the EPL, but he is still only 22. If he knocks in 30 goals a season at Celtic (which he is capable of) they will get £5M for him.

I just hope we get a cut.

Thanks for the insight.
Why do you think Hibs settled on the price quoted? (And we have no means of getting a truly accurate figure.)

[AgentDaleCooper]

i'd like to know for sure, because £800,000 for a player with 2 years left on his contract (it was a 3 year deal he signed IIRC) and who's goals to game ratio in the SPL is around the same if not better that boyd...if there wasn't a clause then we might as well just give up. :confused:

[HibeesLA]

i'd like to know for sure, because £800,000 for a player with 2 years left on his contract (it was a 3 year deal he signed IIRC) and who's goals to game ratio in the SPL is around the same if not better that boyd...if there wasn't a clause then we might as well just give up. :confused:

was there a release clause on one of the other threads that allowed this one to be added? Can't we merge them all?


**EDIT** - Seems that I managed to get that merge request in just before the window closed!

[DH1875]

£1.2 million for Stokes with 2 years on his contract is a JOKE and no one on here can tell me different. I hope there was a clause as if not it looks like Rod could be losing his touch.
Remember that mob got £9.5 million for McGeady a couple of weeks ago :bitchy:.

[Velma Dinkley]

I thought the fee was undisclosed:confused:

[marinello59]

£1.2 million for Stokes with 2 years on his contract is a JOKE and no one on here can tell me different. I hope there was a clause as if not it looks like Rod could be losing his touch.
Remember that mob got £9.5 million for McGeady a couple of weeks ago :bitchy:.

Hibs got a realistic price for the player, all things considered. Or do you really think our board let us get done out of millions?

[flash]

It is undisclosed not that it will in any way calm the moronic hysteria on this forum.

[marinello59]

It is undisclosed not that it will in any way calm the moronic hysteria on this forum.

Exactly, the press have made a few guestimates. I think I have seen about five different figures reported.

[AgentDaleCooper]

Exactly, the press have made a few guestimates. I think I have seen about five different figures reported.

i'm think it's fair to assume that the press, whilst being pretty unreliable, will be in the right ball park - have any of the prices been what you would deem acceptable?

i don't think there's anything moronic about what i'm saying - i'm just a tad concerned.

[AgentDaleCooper]

Hibs got a realistic price for the player, all things considered. Or do you really think our board let us get done out of millions?

what is it that you're considering here?

(not trying to pick on you by the way :greengrin)

[marinello59]

i'm think it's fair to assume that the press, whilst being pretty unreliable, will be in the right ball park - have any of the prices been what you would deem acceptable?

.

I think, all things considered, the fees being quoted do sound realistic. IMHO of course.:greengrin

[blackpoolhibs]

Does anyone think Rod did not get the most he could have? If so how much did we actually get, and why did Rod not get the best deal?

[AgentDaleCooper]

I think, all things considered, the fees being quoted do sound realistic. IMHO of course.:greengrin

but what is it you're considering?

[Sir David Gray]

It's now a couple of hours since Stokes signed for Celtic and there's still no mention of the move on the Hibs website. :bitchy:

[CropleyWasGod]

It's now a couple of hours since Stokes signed for Celtic and there's still no mention of the move on the Hibs website. :bitchy:

There very rarely is when a player moves on.

[hibee_nation]

It's now a couple of hours since Stokes signed for Celtic and there's still no mention of the move on the Hibs website. :bitchy:

ffs not this old chestnut again, how many times after we have sold a player are we gonna get someone greeting it's not on the hibs website. Rightly or wrongly we don't do it. We proclaim the new signings and stay schtum when the bassas leave, quite right too. :cool2:

[Sir David Gray]

ffs not this old chestnut again, how many times after we have sold a player are we gonna get someone greeting it's not on the hibs website. Rightly or wrongly we don't do it. We proclaim the new signings and stay schtum when the bassas leave, quite right too. :cool2:

I happen to think that it's a bit unprofessional not to officially announce that a player has left. Whilst every Hibs fan probably knows by now that Stokes is away, it might be nice just to have a couple of lines from the club just confirming what has happened.

[Franck Stanton]

Selling a player that scores 20+ goals per season fo a paltry £1.2 million is totally absurd. Now, if we as supporters can see this dont you all think that the Tache can see it. Of course he can - which leads me to think the release clause in Stokes contract was/is around this price and if so, our hands were tied re this. Lets just stop all the doom and gloom , better players than Stokes have been moved on and we/Hibs are still here as usual. As for all these supporters not renewing their season tickets because of this - OH REALLY< when you are a Hibby then sorry lads, it's for life, doesn't make sense, but it gets into the blood and cant/wont be moved - { I remember saying that my world had come to an end and wouldn't be going back when they did the dirty on Stanton, but hey, was still there the very next game and all the games since.} No I dont like it when our best players make the journey anong the M8 - but in Scotland thats how it's always been and I don' see it changing very soon.

[Brads Laing]

Petrie would never agree to that unless there was a clause in his contract. Some people may complain about petrie but he's no daft. If it was up to him, he would hold out for at least 2.5m. There has to be a clause in his contract. Unless he was disruptive and refused to play in future games if he wasn't sold.

[judas]

So according to bbc Hibs will be receiving around about 800,000 pound.

Does he have a clause in his contract:confused:

If not why are Hibs accepting a bid like that :bitchy:

Depressing times down Easter Road way :boo hoo:

It better be a ****uing good clause.

One that involves an extra £1.2m.

:wink:

[Kaiser1962]

I honestly have no idea what Stokes eventually went for but Rod has a history of getting the best deal for Hibs.

[Brando7]

I honestly have no idea what Stokes eventually went for but Rod has a history of getting the best deal for Hibs.

:agree:

[Captain Trips]

I honestly have no idea what Stokes eventually went for but Rod has a history of getting the best deal for Hibs.

The best deal for Hibs is not selling your top scorer to a club in same league IMO of course, so for me the fee is a bit of a non issue.

[Kaiser1962]

The best deal for Hibs is not selling your top scorer to a club in same league IMO of course, so for me the fee is a bit of a non issue.

So what do you propose? That Hibs hold him against his will and he turns in performances like he did on Sunday? By all accounts there was enough disruption in the squad when the guy was happy to be here, never mind after we deny him the move to the team he supports. Or perhaps we should match Celtic's wages? Speculate to accumulate eh? Like Hearts? Alternatively we could lock him up at East Mains till he sees sense?

[1875godsgift]

The best deal for Hibs is not selling your top scorer to a club in same league IMO of course, so for me the fee is a bit of a non issue.
I would wish him all the best luck in the world if he had signed for a premiership, or championship, or foreign club. However, he has signed for one of the twin cheeks, therefor I hope he rots on the bench till his arse has piles.

[scoopyboy]

The best deal for Hibs is not selling your top scorer to a club in same league IMO of course, so for me the fee is a bit of a non issue.

In an ideal world you are 100% correct.

However we don't live in that and the bottom line is that Celtic were the only team that were interested in signing him. It was a case of taking their money cos it was the only option.

You have to ask the question how come a young player who scored 23 goals in a season only had one team interested in signing him?

[DC_Hibs]

You have to ask the question how come a young player who scored 23 goals in a season only had one team interested in signing him?

One look at his stats on wikipedia from England will answer that - before any alleged off field nonsense is taken into account.

Did absolutely nowt down there incl his two loan spells and one good goalscoring season in our league won't enhance his reputation too much down south.

Young guy though so there is plenty time but needs to screw the nut and work on the rest of his game which is pretty poor. Trappatoni picking Sheridan ahead of him must have been a wake up call.

Couldnt give a fek about him now he has chosen the M8 path!

[scoopyboy]

One look at his stats on wikipedia from England will answer that - before any alleged off field nonsense is taken into account.

Did absolutely nowt down there incl his two loan spells and one good goalscoring season in our league won't enhance his reputation too much down south.

Young guy though so there is plenty time but needs to screw the nut and work on the rest of his game which is pretty poor. Trappatoni picking Sheridan ahead of him must have been a wake up call.

Couldnt give a fek about him now he has chosen the M8 path!

Good answer and to me explains the size of the transfer fee.

[Captain Trips]

So what do you propose? That Hibs hold him against his will and he turns in performances like he did on Sunday? By all accounts there was enough disruption in the squad when the guy was happy to be here, never mind after we deny him the move to the team he supports. Or perhaps we should match Celtic's wages? Speculate to accumulate eh? Like Hearts? Alternatively we could lock him up at East Mains till he sees sense?


Thats all well and good if that all happens to suit your argument, I can easily then suggest that he would be dissapionted but gets on with it and is determined to play in order to see if gets another move later on. Your points have as much merit as mine as its purely guesswork.

[Captain Trips]

In an ideal world you are 100% correct.

However we don't live in that and the bottom line is that Celtic were the only team that were interested in signing him. It was a case of taking their money cos it was the only option.

You have to ask the question how come a young player who scored 23 goals in a season only had one team interested in signing him?

It isnt the only option, the other is not to sell surely?

[Kaiser1962]

Thats all well and good if that all happens to suit your argument, I can easily then suggest that he would be dissapionted but gets on with it and is determined to play in order to see if gets another move later on. Your points have as much merit as mine as its purely guesswork.

Thats fair enough. But he did state that it affected his performance on Sunday and has since stated how happy he is to be joining Celtic, whilst being complimentary about Hibs. While I agree with you that I would rather he had gone elsewhere it is difficult situation to be in and, I suspect but do not know, there were other factors at play here.

[Captain Trips]

Thats fair enough. But he did state that it affected his performance on Sunday and has since stated how happy he is to be joining Celtic, whilst being complimentary about Hibs. While I agree with you that I would rather he had gone elsewhere it is difficult situation to be in and, I suspect but do not know, there were other factors at play here.

Im not saying it would not affect IMO it would have settled down soon enough and he would know that not playing at his best there would be no transfers later on. If we allowed Celtic to talk to all our players there would be 1 or 2 left, what he says I would expect to be said. The first part of the battle is not talking to Celtic.