what do they mean growing doubts about their financial clout?

If anything I think we told them where to go. Understand it was £1m loan fee, plus £4m in Jan and Paterson on loan for the season. I'm glad we're not being held to ransom like that!

seems to me they dont want to sell sako full stop..

Wolves are taking the Michael......I think being willing to pay around £4m shows the financial clout that we do have. Not willing to go up to £5m plus whatever else, especially for a league 1 player, just shows we have some sense. Potentially they now have a player sitting on £25k a week in League 1 who doesn't want to be there.....could work out messy for them. Wouldn't be surprised if we sign him in January and if his reason for not turning up at training yesterday was not genuine I could even see him refusing to play for them.

Bob.....seems like that to me as well. I'm surprised they can afford to keep him tbh. If he really wants to leave and tries to force it, it will be interesting to see what they do then.

It has the same ring to it as the Boyd transfer! Deal almost done then Forest snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by trying to change something at the last minute! It means clubs start to doubt out integrity and whether we actually have any money at all! Starting to get a bad reputation for ourselves in transfer dealings!

Although it could all be shy t and we will sign him by the end of the day!

It's nothing like Boyd. Boyd got treated badly but Billy (who knew he was about to become manager) didn't want him. Billy wants Sako but Wolves are holding us to ransom and Fawaz is right for not letting this happen because then it sets a precedent.

Reds - I'm not sure that's the case. People know we have money and seem to think they can demand excessive fees. Rightly so, we are refusing to pay over the odds.....look at Holt for example - it would have only cost us a few hundred thousand to sign him, which we could afford easily but refused to be taken to the cleaners, and why should we. Leicester paid £5m for Matt Mills, we don't want to be going down the same route as that. Just because we have money, doesn't mean we should throw it away.

First it was 3m, then they bumped it up
Then it was 3.5m, then they bumped it up
Then it was 4m, then they bumped it up
Now their asking for 5m?!

For a league one player? We could get a half decent sidlined out and out prem striker or a recognised champ striker, never mind a good but not fantastic winger.

They're taking the micheal and if they're gonna chase sako with this amount of money the end of this window will look very binked no what has been a fanastic window.

Wolves asked for 4 million in the summer - can't remember whether it was Fulham who came in for him but the story was they offered £3m but were knocked back. Forest then came in with an 'opportunist' bid of £3.5m.

The talk is this time that Forest have come in again for a loan with a view to buy, but it's no higher than their previous bid - and they want the convenience of getting him now but not paying anything until January.

I don't know where you all get your info about how much we have offered and what wolves are asking for? Sounds a bit like speculation.

I don't want to be right but I think we sometimes don't do deals in the right way. Wolves released a statement saying we were in talks. That never happens unless the clubs are very close. So it's my belief that Wolves were ready to sell and that maybe there was a few minor details to sort. No it seems something has changes and I can't see it being wolves. I am not criticising the board necessarily as thy have bought a lot of players but it seems dodgy to me.

The Boyd deal has nothing to do with Billy not wanting him. Why would we Boyer trying to sign him and then change our minds all in the same day? Makes no sense. We then tried to loan him or the season instead!

I am just hoping something similar is not going on!

*boyd not Boyer!

No, the talk is they want £4m plus £1m loan fee and want Pato on loan

The Boyd deal has nothing to do with Billy not wanting him. Why would we Boyer trying to sign him and then change our minds all in the same day? Makes no sense. We then tried to loan him or the season instead!
---------------------------------------------
Because this is when it was decided Billy was coming back

I am just saying they wouldn't have released the statement if they had not agreed a fee or at least agreed something in principle. Makes no sense. They would just say they had rejected a bid like they did last time!

What they decided billy was coming back at 10pm on transfer deadline day? But a few hours earlier they hadn't decided and where still bidding on players Mcleish wanted?

Have a word with yourself!

Why was Boyd waiting around and the medical took ALL day?

But even if the Boyd deal had nothing to do with Billy, the Sako deal is still nothing like it. A fee had been agreed for Boyd, a fee hasn't been agreed for Sako so how are they similar?

The link in the original post, from their local paper, states that they believe Wolves wanted a deal worth £5m plus Pato. This has been reported elsewhere too. Wolves statement did say we were in negotiations but it also said (and they have maintained all along) that they did not want to lose him. It sounds like a simialr thing happened with Fulham......so is it both us and Fulham or is it perhaps Wolves that are the ones being unrealistic??
As for Boyd, this is very different and I think it's too much of a coincidence that Billy returned just after that saga for him not to have pulled the plug on it.

Also, if we are that difficult to do business with, would we be geting the likes of Chaolobah when other teams such as Watford, Wigan and Reading are alos competing for him?

still think this is all down to wolves. they do not want to sell him they dont need the money. if we offered 5 mill they would still want more

5 mill plus Pato basically. Get bent.

It's not a coincidence billy returned though is it? McLeish walked out because of the Boyd fiasco and then billy was appointed!

I might not be right about Sako, I just find it off they released a statement. That didn't happen with Fulham. They didn't release a statement saying we are in negotiations with Fulham!

I don't get why they wouldn't just say "forest have not met out valuation of the player"! Simple! Saying we are in negotiation suggests to me a deal is agree in principle.

Like I said I could be wrong. Hope I am.

Seems quite a one-sided article with Wolves bleating to the media withthis lazy journo not mentioning the inflated price tag.

Doesn't help with us being a closed shop in terms of media speculation but then again we don't need a Martham type, either.

Reds are everywhere, as Teg mentioned the whole Boyd incident seemed orchestrated because of talks with BD, well before we knew.

I hope wolves get the comeuppance for being greedy baastards.

Wolves valuations have not changed.
If you think he's overpriced go elsewhere.
If you can't pay the price don't go in the shop.