They didn’t comment on it though-they just repeated what was said really…
Trusted source but
On a par with Fabrizio
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 3 minutes ago
doesn't sound like a fact...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds nothing remotely like fact
‘Rodgers Confirmed’
Does that mean he made his First Holy Communion last time
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The reaction being to point out that has just been made up on the spot, and goes against both Scottish and German reports?
It’s usually us getting in trouble for cancelling contracts without compensating, but apparently sound the other way round
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They get excited about a made up fee. Remember Morelos was going to China for £40M but they turned it down?
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The reaction being to point out that has just been made up on the spot, and goes against both Scottish and German reports?
It’s usually us getting in trouble for cancelling contracts without compensating, but apparently sound the other way round
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think by your own admission, it hasn’t came from a German outlet. Folk are taking what the rangers review are saying as being factual.
I don’t know-all I said was that I was sure I’d read a while ago that the selling club would also have a clause that they didn’t need to sell. Cue abuse and meltdown.
Now, it’s a clause that’s meaning money for rangers so it’s all good now?!
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It could well be true, but if we’re going to believe fan media, then there were reports that Tillman didn’t want to come back anyway, so irrespective of any bid, Bayern didn’t need to offer anything. If the player says no, then they just keep him and sell him on when they want.
Good business if it’s true though.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s a clear timeline for all of this.
Bayern having a buyback clause, to cancel our buy clause was reported at outset of deal by German media.
The reported deal was 6m euros, so 5.2m GBP.
There is reported interest in him from likes of Brighton, Brentford etc.
German media reported Bayern cancelled contract clause.
Reputable Rangers source reports we get 1m plus 10% of future fee, as compensation for cancelled clause.
Not sure which part is a stretch to believe. We paid 7m for Kent when we were in a worse financial position. Given the reported interest in Tilman and potential quick profit would be daft of us to not take the option. Similar would be daft of Bayern to not make a quick profit.
Not sure what risk you are referring to, Bayern have risked 1m. A very low risk for calling the shots, when you’d assume they wouldn’t cancel clause without interest from others or intent to keep him.
If they do sell, then loan has been a success for both Bayern and us.
still doesn't sound like a fact...
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 10 minutes ago
still doesn't sound like a fact...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but 4lads fanzine said so
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s a clear timeline for all of this.
Bayern having a buyback clause, to cancel our buy clause was reported at outset of deal by German media.
The reported deal was 6m euros, so 5.2m GBP.
There is reported interest in him from likes of Brighton, Brentford etc.
German media reported Bayern cancelled contract clause.
Reputable Rangers source reports we get 1m plus 10% of future fee, as compensation for cancelled clause.
Not sure which part is a stretch to believe. We paid 7m for Kent when we were in a worse financial position. Given the reported interest in Tilman and potential quick profit would be daft of us to not take the option. Similar would be daft of Bayern to not make a quick profit.
Not sure what risk you are referring to, Bayern have risked 1m. A very low risk for calling the shots, when you’d assume they wouldn’t cancel clause without interest from others or intent to keep him.
If they do sell, then loan has been a success for both Bayern and us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If course it’s a risk keeping a player in the hope his value is increased. Should know better than anyone you guys
Seems Bayern took note of Celtics bad business selling Jack Hendey for 1m, for him to be sold for 4m a month later
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 4 minutes ago
Seems Bayern took note of Celtics bad business selling Jack Hendey for 1m, for him to be sold for 4m a month later
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d think Bayern would know that you can’t do that anymore, and that the same player can’t be sold within 16 weeks of being bought…
Btw-when did the rangers review become a reputable source?! Everyone else I’ve read that’s reporting it seems to be saying ‘according to the rangers review’.
For me it simply boils down to “did Rangers offer the £5.8m?”
Naw
So there’s that and the reality that Tillman didn’t want to go back and Bayern disinterested want him to go back, yet they’re being forced or obliged to pay £1m + 10% sell on fee when the release conditions weren’t even met?
Sakes 😂
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When I said it sounds like there was a different clause?
Christ I'm basically agreeing with you. Almost as bad as Lex here.
comment by Call Sign (U3627)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 10 minutes ago
still doesn't sound like a fact...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but 4lads fanzine said so
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're hardly Follow Follow or LexBaillieFACT
Tend to only post this stuff when they have it confirmed
The only clause it breaks is the sanity clause!
It would need Tillman to want to go and Rangers wanting to pay the £5m+. Which is plausible, of course.
Much more likely he is more interested to hear the other offers - even if none yet have been tabled then he just needed to say naw to Rangers and BM get a presumably bigger fee. If he wasn't sure it just needed BM to say listen son, we'll pass on 10-20% of any differential to you on top of any signing on fee you negotiate yourself - Rangers need not get any slice of the pie - win/win.
comment by lauders (U9757)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When I said it sounds like there was a different clause?
Christ I'm basically agreeing with you. Almost as bad as Lex here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to a convo that was on here a while ago when I said that Bayern didn't need to sell. Fash and whitabootit went apoplectic when I suggested it.
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 8 minutes ago
Btw-when did the rangers review become a reputable source?! Everyone else I’ve read that’s reporting it seems to be saying ‘according to the rangers review’.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are they the guys that had a gymkana lassie at the (the) Bristol?
Sign in if you want to comment
Rodgers Confirmed
Page 13 of 19
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18
posted on 20/6/23
They didn’t comment on it though-they just repeated what was said really…
posted on 20/6/23
Trusted source but
On a par with Fabrizio
posted on 20/6/23
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
posted on 20/6/23
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 3 minutes ago
doesn't sound like a fact...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds nothing remotely like fact
posted on 20/6/23
‘Rodgers Confirmed’
Does that mean he made his First Holy Communion last time
posted on 20/6/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
posted on 20/6/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The reaction being to point out that has just been made up on the spot, and goes against both Scottish and German reports?
It’s usually us getting in trouble for cancelling contracts without compensating, but apparently sound the other way round
posted on 20/6/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They get excited about a made up fee. Remember Morelos was going to China for £40M but they turned it down?
posted on 20/6/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
posted on 20/6/23
£5.80 seems likely.
posted on 20/6/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The reaction being to point out that has just been made up on the spot, and goes against both Scottish and German reports?
It’s usually us getting in trouble for cancelling contracts without compensating, but apparently sound the other way round
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think by your own admission, it hasn’t came from a German outlet. Folk are taking what the rangers review are saying as being factual.
I don’t know-all I said was that I was sure I’d read a while ago that the selling club would also have a clause that they didn’t need to sell. Cue abuse and meltdown.
Now, it’s a clause that’s meaning money for rangers so it’s all good now?!
posted on 20/6/23
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It could well be true, but if we’re going to believe fan media, then there were reports that Tillman didn’t want to come back anyway, so irrespective of any bid, Bayern didn’t need to offer anything. If the player says no, then they just keep him and sell him on when they want.
Good business if it’s true though.
posted on 20/6/23
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s a clear timeline for all of this.
Bayern having a buyback clause, to cancel our buy clause was reported at outset of deal by German media.
The reported deal was 6m euros, so 5.2m GBP.
There is reported interest in him from likes of Brighton, Brentford etc.
German media reported Bayern cancelled contract clause.
Reputable Rangers source reports we get 1m plus 10% of future fee, as compensation for cancelled clause.
Not sure which part is a stretch to believe. We paid 7m for Kent when we were in a worse financial position. Given the reported interest in Tilman and potential quick profit would be daft of us to not take the option. Similar would be daft of Bayern to not make a quick profit.
Not sure what risk you are referring to, Bayern have risked 1m. A very low risk for calling the shots, when you’d assume they wouldn’t cancel clause without interest from others or intent to keep him.
If they do sell, then loan has been a success for both Bayern and us.
posted on 20/6/23
still doesn't sound like a fact...
posted on 20/6/23
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 10 minutes ago
still doesn't sound like a fact...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but 4lads fanzine said so
posted on 20/6/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 5 minutes ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad how we don’t latch onto mere baubles because some fanzine reported it and it’s then accepted as fact.
And do you honestly believe Rangers bid £5.8m to trigger the clause which Bayern then broke and had to provide some serious compensation as recompense?
It doesn’t make any financial sense at all
If he were sold for £10m (I know. Let’s kid on for now) they have to hand Rangers £2m based on this fact. They get a nett £8m.
All that risk for the sake of an additional £2.2m? To Bayern? Sakes
And that’s after you believe Rangers bid £5.8m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s a clear timeline for all of this.
Bayern having a buyback clause, to cancel our buy clause was reported at outset of deal by German media.
The reported deal was 6m euros, so 5.2m GBP.
There is reported interest in him from likes of Brighton, Brentford etc.
German media reported Bayern cancelled contract clause.
Reputable Rangers source reports we get 1m plus 10% of future fee, as compensation for cancelled clause.
Not sure which part is a stretch to believe. We paid 7m for Kent when we were in a worse financial position. Given the reported interest in Tilman and potential quick profit would be daft of us to not take the option. Similar would be daft of Bayern to not make a quick profit.
Not sure what risk you are referring to, Bayern have risked 1m. A very low risk for calling the shots, when you’d assume they wouldn’t cancel clause without interest from others or intent to keep him.
If they do sell, then loan has been a success for both Bayern and us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If course it’s a risk keeping a player in the hope his value is increased. Should know better than anyone you guys
posted on 20/6/23
Seems Bayern took note of Celtics bad business selling Jack Hendey for 1m, for him to be sold for 4m a month later
posted on 20/6/23
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 4 minutes ago
Seems Bayern took note of Celtics bad business selling Jack Hendey for 1m, for him to be sold for 4m a month later
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d think Bayern would know that you can’t do that anymore, and that the same player can’t be sold within 16 weeks of being bought…
posted on 20/6/23
Btw-when did the rangers review become a reputable source?! Everyone else I’ve read that’s reporting it seems to be saying ‘according to the rangers review’.
posted on 20/6/23
For me it simply boils down to “did Rangers offer the £5.8m?”
Naw
So there’s that and the reality that Tillman didn’t want to go back and Bayern disinterested want him to go back, yet they’re being forced or obliged to pay £1m + 10% sell on fee when the release conditions weren’t even met?
Sakes 😂
posted on 20/6/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When I said it sounds like there was a different clause?
Christ I'm basically agreeing with you. Almost as bad as Lex here.
posted on 20/6/23
comment by Call Sign (U3627)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 10 minutes ago
still doesn't sound like a fact...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but 4lads fanzine said so
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're hardly Follow Follow or LexBaillieFACT
Tend to only post this stuff when they have it confirmed
posted on 20/6/23
The only clause it breaks is the sanity clause!
It would need Tillman to want to go and Rangers wanting to pay the £5m+. Which is plausible, of course.
Much more likely he is more interested to hear the other offers - even if none yet have been tabled then he just needed to say naw to Rangers and BM get a presumably bigger fee. If he wasn't sure it just needed BM to say listen son, we'll pass on 10-20% of any differential to you on top of any signing on fee you negotiate yourself - Rangers need not get any slice of the pie - win/win.
posted on 20/6/23
comment by lauders (U9757)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 1 minute ago
Mad how a potential £2m windfall can cause Celtic fans so much bother
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should see rangers fans reaction when you suggest that Bayern probably have a clause that says they don’t need to sell…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When I said it sounds like there was a different clause?
Christ I'm basically agreeing with you. Almost as bad as Lex here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to a convo that was on here a while ago when I said that Bayern didn't need to sell. Fash and whitabootit went apoplectic when I suggested it.
posted on 20/6/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 8 minutes ago
Btw-when did the rangers review become a reputable source?! Everyone else I’ve read that’s reporting it seems to be saying ‘according to the rangers review’.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are they the guys that had a gymkana lassie at the (the) Bristol?
Page 13 of 19
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18