Transfer News and Gossip Transfer Rumours Thread 2023-24 (Part 2 - Back in Business. Oh no we’re not)

[danbowen]

A lot of people asking what the hold up is with Danny Waldron signing for the club.

As I said yesterday, the deal is still on.

I've been told that the delay is a result of Southend moving the goalposts from the offer that was previously accepted - we've now upped our opening offer apparently, but removed the performance based bonuses relating to number of appearances & goals.

The urgency to get the deal done shifted slightly when there were question marks over whether the Wealdstone game would go ahead as the plan was to try and get him in before that.

Great to hear we are still in for him. However my concern here is this is the second transfer in a row where we have agreed something and then tried moving the goalposts. It seems like something we would have done under the old regime.

 

[BoyWonder2]

Great to hear we are still in for him. However my concern here is this is the second transfer in a row where we have agreed something and then tried moving the goalposts. It seems like something we would have done under the old regime.

We didn’t change anything with Crowther. Morton was nice and straight forward too.

 

[CaptainSmudger]

So other than Waldron hopefully signing, is there any other rumours? I’d love to See Hayes back but I know he’s on loan somewhere, I’m not sure if that was till the end of the season or what but he was great I thought, perfect competition for Colin imo.

I would like to see Waldron and lastly Josh Walker from Burton added to our Squad, Then, Playoffs and Promotion to EFL within reach. COYB UTB

 

[rlb999]

Amazing how the tone has changed on here since the takeover (which still hasn't happened) was announced.

The first team is doing really well all things considered, and in recent weeks we've been able to extend the contracts of a couple of players and add 2 permanent signings and 2 loans in key positions.

But some people seem mildly cheesed off that there haven't been more incoming (note that the 2 permanent signings aren't guaranteed starters). Do people really want to go back to having a large squad given how well we're doing with a small one? And do people realise that every new player is an increased wage bill and less money to spend on other things around the club? So with that considered do we REALLY need a third goalkeeper when Colin is fit, David Martin is a capable understudy, and Maher doesn't really name keepers on the bench. If Colin got injured, we could quickly loan a keeper in, which is far more cost effective than employing someone permanently.

Given what we've been through in recent years, why are so many people keen to spend, spend, spend?

Then there's selling players on. There was some talk earlier in the week of Noor being off for £100k which I agree was likely complete nonsense given the source. But if a league club did give us decent money for a player, surely that's good business for us - we've brought one in cheaply, got some good use out of him, and sold him on - making a profit that can be used to repair the ground or similar. We're in the unusual position of having a recruitment team that I would 100% back to replace any player - and for that reason I'm not bothered if a couple do move on provided we make a return on them. Why do some fans panic when they see a player rumoured to be exiting? Surely if we lose one, we'd back this management team to bring in a good replacement?

 

[Jasrod]

Great to hear we are still in for him. However my concern here is this is the second transfer in a row where we have agreed something and then tried moving the goalposts. It seems like something we would have done under the old regime.

Perhaps knowing that they need to build a stand I think it’s been said by the end of March we thought that more up front would be more beneficial to them? Just a thought

 

[londonshrimper.]

Great to hear we are still in for him. However my concern here is this is the second transfer in a row where we have agreed something and then tried moving the goalposts. It seems like something we would have done under the old regime.

I'd take what the King's Lynn manager said with a pinch of salt given the financial predicament they were in at the time (before very recent Singaporean investment). The club disagreed with that assertion and were not too happy about the King’s Lynn manager coming out and saying it, as well as the local press reporting on it and giving it substance. Plus, we were dealing with Stephen Cleeve which could not have been easy by all accounts.

 

[rlb999]

Great to hear we are still in for him. However my concern here is this is the second transfer in a row where we have agreed something and then tried moving the goalposts. It seems like something we would have done under the old regime.

Or maybe Kidderminster have just appointed a new manager, seen that we're in for Waldron, and chucked their hat in the ring too?

That would give Rushall Olympic and Waldron himself another opportunity / set of figures to think about. He probably wouldn't have to move house if he went to Kiddie, for instance - but he's joining a club on much more of a roll if he goes to Southend. Is one offering more than the other? Or offering a longer contract? Has get got a wife and kids to consider? It's not necessarily a case of goalposts being moved at our end.

 

[Streaky]

Omar Mussa is another one.

Did we have photos done on “big” John Akinde before he got cold feet and stayed at gillls?

 

[danbowen]

We didn’t change anything with Crowther. Morton was nice and straight forward too.

Wasnt it mentioned that Kings Lynn said we had moved the goalposts? if not, apologies but I am sure that was mentioned by CP and also people on here too.

 

[Tommy2holes]

A lot of people asking what the hold up is with Danny Waldron signing for the club.

As I said yesterday, the deal is still on.

I've been told that the delay is a result of Southend moving the goalposts from the offer that was previously accepted - we've now upped our opening offer apparently, but removed the performance based bonuses relating to number of appearances & goals.

The urgency to get the deal done shifted slightly when there were question marks over whether the Wealdstone game would go ahead as the plan was to try and get him in before that.

So why would the club make an offer and then change it?

That seems really poor practice and doesn't show us in a good light at all.

 

[Supershrimper]

I'd take what the King's Lynn manager said with a pinch of salt given the financial predicament they were in at the time (before very recent Singaporean investment). The club disagreed with that assertion and were not too happy about the King’s Lynn manager coming out and saying it, as well as the local press reporting on it and giving it substance. Plus, we were dealing with Stephen Cleeve which could not have been easy by all accounts.

Perhaps we adjusted our offer on the price of oil increasing which would have resulted in only 5 barrels of crude oil rather than the agreed 7 barrels. And he needs the extra 2 barrels to ensure this luscious locks are as slick as ever.



Stephen Cleeve also makes Ron look like a saint in comparison. At least Ron managed to get planning permission (eventually) Stephen looks to have previously offered land for sale for housing as an investment opportunity knowing that there was no chance of it ever being used for housing.

Hetherington: Candidate quits after probe

Would-be MP Stephen Cleeve has been trading as Commercial Land. But it's new name, same old game as our investigator probes the suspect businessman

www.thisismoney.co.uk

 

[kentblues]

I think I agree with the overall message here - that we’re not usually privy to the finer details of how protracted transfer negotiations can be. I’d also add into the mix I don’t think we, as fans, would be as bothered by delays like this if it were June or early July.

However it’s not the close season, it’s a key part of the season and our top scorer is out injured and in our last game we’ve scraped a victory despite enough chances to win 3 or 4 games. That good fortune won’t happen every week and sooner or later a lack of firepower catches up with a team.

We know that this transfer could have been tied up in time for Waldron to start away at Barnet. That was 3 weeks ago. Which suggests that the majority of the deal was agreed some time ago. I think it’s natural for fans to get a bit nervous if we’ve been at the “exchange of contracts” stage of a purchase for 3 weeks and haven’t yet got the keys.

In the end this is taking some time, and the player is being very professional no doubt and not putting the pressure on some might. But these things happen as those who know more than me about these things have said.

Hopefully at the same time we are pursuing plan B and C from the whiteboard so we wouldn’t go back to square one. And if plan B is all sorted and ready to go then we may need to walk from the Waldron deal. That’s life.

 

[JD]

So why would the club make an offer and then change it?

That seems really poor practice and doesn't show us in a good light at all.

Rushall hadn’t accepted the offer??

So this sounds like a balanced restructure of our first offer.

Rushall have three choices.

1) accept it
2) reject it
3) counter it

It is what it is.

 

[Medway Blue]

Incorrect, although he is someone we chased briefly.

Izzy Irekpen, former Swansea and West Ham centre half, was someone we chased for a very long time under Tilson. Did his medical, agreed terms, shook hands on the deal, photos done etc. The day he was due to turn up to Roots Hall to sign contracts and then be “unveiled” as a new signing, he didn’t turn up. No reason, no phone call, nothing. Just blanked Tilson and the Club. He would have been a superb signing, but for whatever reason he decided against it.

I also remember the time that we got to a similar stage with Gabby Zakuani when he was at Fulham back in 2008/09. We were in for him on loan with a view to a permanent move. He'd been down, verbally agreed terms, had a medical and shook hands. Ron Martin was then "uncontactable" to get final sign-off on the deal and he ended up going to Peterborough.

 

[sufc4life21]

A lot of people asking what the hold up is with Danny Waldron signing for the club.

As I said yesterday, the deal is still on.

I've been told that the delay is a result of Southend moving the goalposts from the offer that was previously accepted - we've now upped our opening offer apparently, but removed the performance based bonuses relating to number of appearances & goals.

The urgency to get the deal done shifted slightly when there were question marks over whether the Wealdstone game would go ahead as the plan was to try and get him in before that.

Is ratty still involved when it comes to transfers?

 

[kentblues]

So why would the club make an offer and then change it?

That seems really poor practice and doesn't show us in a good light at all.

Agree that would be disappointing- especially if we thought the Wealdstone game gave us a few days to “renegotiate”. Hopefully done in the right way & we can just revert back to the original deal if Rushall don’t bite. Presented as we have a deal but we have been thinking would it help you to get more of the fee up front/guaranteed as part of the fee

That said there is a trade as I said before between money up front verses down the road- it’s not a £ for £ trade.

Trouble is time is always working for someone- let’s hope not a third party

 

[annie1954]

I also remember the time that we got to a similar stage with Gabby Zakuani when he was at Fulham back in 2008/09. We were in for him on loan with a view to a permanent move. He'd been down, verbally agreed terms, had a medical and shook hands. Ron Martin was then "uncontactable" to get final sign-off on the deal and he ended up going to Peterborough.

didn`t take him long to work ron out one meeting was enough .

 

[Jai]

Amazing how the tone has changed on here since the takeover (which still hasn't happened) was announced.

The first team is doing really well all things considered, and in recent weeks we've been able to extend the contracts of a couple of players and add 2 permanent signings and 2 loans in key positions.

But some people seem mildly cheesed off that there haven't been more incoming (note that the 2 permanent signings aren't guaranteed starters). Do people really want to go back to having a large squad given how well we're doing with a small one? And do people realise that every new player is an increased wage bill and less money to spend on other things around the club? So with that considered do we REALLY need a third goalkeeper when Colin is fit, David Martin is a capable understudy, and Maher doesn't really name keepers on the bench. If Colin got injured, we could quickly loan a keeper in, which is far more cost effective than employing someone permanently.

Given what we've been through in recent years, why are so many people keen to spend, spend, spend.

Then there's selling players on. There was some talk earlier in the week of Noor being off for £100k which I agree was likely complete nonsense given the source. But if a league club did give us decent money for a player, surely that's good business for us - we've brought one in cheaply, got some good use out of him, and sold him on - making a profit that can be used to repair the ground or similar. We're in the unusual position of having a recruitment team that I would 100% back to replace any player - and for that reason I'm not bothered if a couple do move on provided we make a return on them. Why do some fans panic when they see a player rumoured to be exiting? Surely if we lose one, we'd back this management team to bring in a good replacement?

It's not that amazing. Have you ever met football fans?

 

[kentblues]

Rushall hadn’t accepted the offer??

So this sounds like a balanced restructure of our first offer.

Rushall have three choices.

1) accept it
2) reject it
3) counter it

It is what it is.

According to London Shrimper they had accepted it

 

[Grayson]

So why would the club make an offer and then change it?

That seems really poor practice and doesn't show us in a good light at all.

I'm speculating, but perhaps trying to give more upfront gets you a discount on other future clauses, such as the disputed sell-on clause. It seemingly worked for other clubs buying players from RM when we were selling.