3 Jul 2013

Solved - Truth re €30m Mkhitaryan mystery finally revealed. Next stop Anfield...?

Liverpool continue to be linked with a move for Armenian maestro Henrik Mkhitaryan, and after weeks of confusion over an alleged buyout clause (BC) in his contract, Shakhtar Donetsk have finally clarified the player's transfer situation.

Over the last couple of weeks, multiple reports claimed the following:

* Mkhitaryan has a £20m buyout clause in his contract.

* Liverpool activated the clause and agreed a fee with Shakhtar.

* The Russian club ignored the activation and raised his price to €30m.

Unsurprisingly, it transpires that none of this is accurate. I suspected as much, which is why I haven't posted anything recently about the Mkhitaryan deal, preferring instead to wait for factual clarification of some kind.

Well, courtesy of Shakhtar Chief Executive Sergi Palkin - a British-trained accountant - we now have that clarification. Speaking to football.ua this evening, Palkin confirmed that:

- Mkhitaryan does NOT have a release clause in his contract.
- LFC have NOT 'agreed a fee' for the player, or even made an offer.
- Borussia Dortmund is the only club to put in an offer so far (€30m)
- Mkhitaryan's contract stipulates that he can buy himself out for $30m (£19.8m.)

Palkin urged Mkhitaryan to take the 'civilized' way out refrain from buying himself out of his contract:

"If Mkhitaryan wants to terminate the contract, he must pay Shakhtar $30m and go to a club that he likes. If we go in a civilized manner and sell the player, and in doing so he does not break the contract, the value we place on him is 30million euros (£25.5m)"

Palkin specifically mentioned dollars here. It's possible he made a mistake and meant Euros. He also reiterated that the Ukrainian club IS willing to sell:

"Our position is clear - we want to do a gentlemanly deal for 30million euros"

So there you have it: The Mkhitaryan mystery solved. No buyout clause; no LFC offer, and no hint yet of any semblance of an agreement between Liverpool and Shakhtar, though that may not matter as the Reds may not have to deal directly with the club to facilitate signing the Armenian.



NOTE: Please stick to the Comment Policy (Click to read)


119 comments:

  1. I wouldn't believe everything he says although he deffo does not have a clause but saying Liverpool haven even made contact but then there manager comes out saying he shouldn't go to Liverpool I believe there has been contact also it seems the fact he has 3 different parties that own part of him Liverpool could of been speaking to him well never no tbh its just a matter of time the fact the transfer window has barely been open the way Liverpool are doing there business I think if this deal was dead theyd be looking at other options

    ReplyDelete
  2. liverpool4life56512:11 am, July 04, 2013

    According to Arthur Petrosyan and Alexey Yaroshevsky, we don't need to talk to them about Mkhitaryan, because he only part owned by them, we are trying to break his contract so we only pay 19.8m

    ReplyDelete
  3. MKHITARYAN pays 19.8m to buy himself out of his contract.Then we give him the biggest signing on fee in football history to pay him back.We get a small fine for our devious ways.Sorted ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  4. well from what I've heard liverpool don't have to agree anything with Shaktar. Mkitarayans contract is with 3rd parties so don't need to agree anything with Shaktar

    ReplyDelete
  5. That's that cleared up. Any progress on a Downing sale :)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shakhtar just wanna make more money on his move, thats understandable. But Dortmund are lurking, and have made a bid, which confirms their absolute interest in him. And they have more to offer than we do, playing wise, CL etc.

    I obviously hope we get him, but it is reminding me of the stories last year, I think Jamie covered some of them. When we were CERTAIN to obtain the services of Gaston Ramires, the story ran for months, then Southampton snapped him up. Please no replication of that one again this year. So far No LFC official has confirmed any interest in HK.

    ReplyDelete
  7. liverpool4life56512:23 am, July 04, 2013

    The player wants liverpool and its only day 4 of the transfers window, so should be okay, also BVB have dropped out according to sources....

    ReplyDelete
  8. Actually, the new information makes perfect sense. It would be Mkhitarayan himself whoi would buy himself out of his own contract for $30m, or £19.9m. Shaktar would have no answer to this as it is apparently written into his contract as a fixed figure. There is no need to negotiate with Shaktar in this case: HM is no doubt upset that despite him having that in his contract, Shaktar are trying to put £5m extra on his transfer fee, effectively putting him on the spot and forcing him to break the contract himself by paying the $30m.
    As he would see it, they should let him go for the £20m amount that they would receive if he activated his clause, which would make sense. Shaktar are refusing to deal anywhere below £25m , which imo is ridiculous.
    Don't see why you are making out that the other info is erroneous when clearly it makes sense and is consistent with the facts. LFC have only to deal with his 3 owners and pay the $30m. I suspect HM would prefer them to accept an offer but the premium is too high- would YOU want LFC to go to Shaktar and make an offer of £5m more? or even £3m?
    No way. Maybe 1 or even 2, but it seems they won't budge.
    The delays make sense now. Not sure your take on this is truly representative of the total situation. No facts are in dispute that I can see....

    ReplyDelete
  9. Again, the player has not publicly declared his interest in LFC, and BVB also have not said they are no longer interested, especially now the real price of getting him has emerged. But we live in hope, a real class player at last, A certain poster here, will be tearing his hair out, if we get him.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So why would his manager put out a statement saying going to LFC (or Spurs) is a step down if HM had shown no desire to go to LFC? Dortmund have CL to offer , so why bother with that statement?

    ReplyDelete
  11. liverpool4life56512:33 am, July 04, 2013

    We are supposedly having talks with Seville over "Alberto Moreno" who is a Left Back

    ReplyDelete
  12. Because he wants to keep his best player. And is trying to convince him to stay.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Always better to provide a source, stops the rumour mongering, where did you read that L4L.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Err, I get that. I was referring to HM wanting to join us... he has obviously said something to his manager to make his manager address us instead of Dortmund, and point out that he would not be in the CL or going for the PL title if he joined us.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I am trying to be cautious, but I am also quietly optimistic.

    ReplyDelete
  16. liverpool4life56512:42 am, July 04, 2013

    http://bleacherreport. com/articles/1692644-liverpool-4-players-brendan-rodgers-should-consider-to-complete-spending/page/4 reading though that and it said it :) don't know if it's true or not, but we defo need a Another LB

    ReplyDelete
  17. The other info is not consistent with the facts at all:


    * Mkhitaryan has no buyout clause. It was widely reported that he did have such a clause.


    * LFC have not agreed a fee with *Shakhtar* for his transfer, and no offer has been made to the club. Again, multiple sources reported yesterday that LFC had 'agreed a fee with Shakhtar'


    * There's no evidence to suggest that LFC have made contact with the third parties that have an interest in Mkhitaryan.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Don't blame you matey. But him badmouthing us is a positive sign :-)

    ReplyDelete
  19. That's not a link - that's pure speculation, i.e. the site is suggesting 4 players LFC should consider. They're not saying the player is actually linked with LFC.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Agreed, and I like Aspas also, saw a good youtube video, Aspas Vs Real Madrid, he really held his own against Madrid, did'nt look outclassed. think he could turn out to be a very good addition also. I have that Xmas Eve feeling again, :)

    ReplyDelete
  21. liverpool4life56512:46 am, July 04, 2013

    No look at the twitter part... :) that's all I was stating, also that we need another LB for cover :)

    ReplyDelete
  22. So we can disregard the assumption made from the Bild article that Liverpool had in fact made an offer? I guess we'd rather not be "that team" that enables a player to leave the club in somewhat dishonourable terms, but then that's what self-buyout is all about: the freedom of the player to choose if he wants to leave. The one thing I'd suggest is that if we do buy the player we should do whatever is required to get rid of those third party agreements. If that means Mkhitaryan buying out his contract and then us paying off those other third parties then that's the way to go. I can't imagine the nightmare that could be paying a fee to Shakhtar only to then find out that some third parties still have a contracted interest in his situation.


    This all seems speculative. Maybe Liverpool made an early enquiry, heard the quoted fee and the convoluted ownership situation and then just bailed on the whole idea of signing him.

    ReplyDelete
  23. You're being pedantic about the clause. There is a clause ie the contract termination compensation you mention, it just isn't in the form that most people assumed or expected. It IS there though.
    I'm talking about the info from Arthur Petrosyan and Alexey Yaroshevsky. Surely you don't expect the various reports in the likes of the Star and the Mail to be something to be relied upon? They contradict themselves and each other daily. I've seen as many reports saying we're not signing him as I have saying a fee has been agreed.
    The only thing that seems to be wrong with that info is the timeframe, which if Shaktar are trying to get £5m extra and are unwilling to negotiate on, would account for the uncertaincy.
    As for evidence of contact with the 3rd parties, what evidence would you expect? You have no evidence that talks are not taking place, and the Shaktar manager himself contradicted his Chief Exec and said that LFC had tried to buy him..

    ReplyDelete
  24. Mkhitaryan is apparently only part owned by Shaktar, 50%, but what does anyone really know here.

    Palkin has stated that Mkhitaryan can buy himself out for $30 million, but that the club want €30 million for him. Seems straight forward enough, IFF it is true.

    LFC can't "give" $30 million to Mkhi as that is surely illegal, also LFC would want a structured payment arrangement, not an up front splurge.

    I know everyone clamours for sources in these situations but to believe the words of parties who will profit from the deal is a bit of a stretch.

    I choose to believe arturpetrosyan on twitter - he seems well informed and some of his followers on twitter have had personal interaction with Mkhit

    Hopefully we get him

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yes, stating a fact is being pedantic. You're trying to twist this into something it's not. It's not a matter of terminology - there is no buyout clause. End of story. The clause that exists is something different, and can only be activated by Mkhitaryan.

    Also, every news provider under the sun reported that either LFC had agreed a fee with SD, or that there was a buyout clause, including the Broadsheets and the BBC.

    The only person being pedantic here is clearly you. In the absence of explicit evidence we can see with our own eyes, it's reasonable to rely on the most credible evidence available, and in this case, the club's Chief Exec is clearly in a position to know the ins and outs.

    ReplyDelete
  26. JK LFC do not have to deal with one party when multiple parties are involved. Shaktar is trying to make enough money otherwise why don't they accept BVB offer. All parties have to agree to an offer. Right now it seems the other parties have agreed for him to go to LFC and the fee is not were Shaktar wants it. Remember the director first said BVB offer was 19.5 million euro.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Get real.
    Unless you have a unimpeachable definition of a " buyout clause, and knowledge that the score of such clauses all follow the exact same form, then I'll continue to use it in a generic sense i.e. any clause in the player's contract which allows him or another club to meet certain conditions and force a sale whether the player's present club wants to sell or not.
    And I'm pretty sure most people would see it like that, perhaps they will comment?
    And the Chief Exec has form for messing about with regard to his transfers by the way.
    I'm sure Ian Ayre will be glad to hear that you accept his word without question though..

    ReplyDelete
  28. is there any news on Erikssen? I'm tired of this story. like I said something seems weird with this deal, I would like him but this saga sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hang on Jamie what you are saying if I'm right is this guy is saying Mkhitaryan can buy himself out of his contract for roughly £19.8 million pounds yet Shakhtar (a Ukraineian club not a Russian club) want roughly £25.5 million pounds. I can't see that I mean seriously do the maths and figure it out. I'm involved with a club that wants Mkhitaryan and I know the situation, the first thing I'd do is get on the phone to Mkhitaryan's agent and tell him to buy himself out of his contract and I'll give him a £22.4 million pound signing on bonus therefore giving the lad £2.6 million on top of what he bought his contract out for and saving the club the same amount. Now if I'm the Shakhtar CEO would I alert clubs to this? The mystery of this drawn out transfer saga is far from solved.

    ReplyDelete
  30. It's mentioned at the end of the article. Funny, I didn't notice it before. Strange.
    Any body who wants to get a steer on this could do worse than google the Fernadinho transfer to Man City. Fernandinho ended up forgoing £4m to break the deadlock after Shaktar refused to lower their price from £34m. City would only pay £30m, so he had to make the rest up himself.
    And even that was after weeks of Shaktar saying they would only sell for his buyout clause of £42.5m.
    No end of quotes from the trustworthy Mr Palkin.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Echo's Neil Jones has said we're not in for Erikssen, don't know if that's because he's not interested or we don't rate him. However when Jones say we're not in for a player take it as read we're not in for the player as the Echo are the club's mouthpiece.

    ReplyDelete
  32. This is all such a headache, can't we just go get our man by offering the money and signing the player. or does it not work like that anymore?

    BTW i don't think Dortmund offered 30m euros as stated in this article, it was less hence it was not accepted


    Also if this falls to pieces, i hope we have a plan B

    ReplyDelete
  33. of the 2 I do rate hm higher, but Eriksson would still be a great signing. I'm tired of the games played by shanktar though. if anything they should have played this money game with money bags city and fernandinho.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Amazes me the stance you take on this transfer saga...

    You claim you didn't report much on it because you had no factual clarification... and by extension, any one engaging in such talk was foolish to do so...

    Why don't you apply the same and proper standard when dealing with Reina ... You reported every half baked story on him. I kept reiterating factual confirmation from BOTH our player AND manager that contradicted every half baked story at the time and you held me in contempt for it...

    Why did you choose to ignore OUR own club's statements at the time but now OTHER club statements are gospel...??

    ReplyDelete
  35. The main reason that this potential signing interested me more than the potential Erikssen signing when it was first mooted, was that by all accounts Mkhitaryan would 'apparently' be equally effective as a wide-forward, thereby replacing Downing! That plus for the fact that this would be an actual grown up signing bringing in new qualities to the team, whereas Erikssen looks more like a duplicate of Coutinho imo. A quality player, but a redundant signing for our (relatively) limited resources.

    I don't claim to be an expert on his game (each time that I watched Shakhtar the only player that stood out head & shoulders above the rest for me was Willian) but this signing is a true barometer for the intentions of FSG now. It's all well and good picking up Barca B & other unwanted players, but this would be the first major signing ahead of major competition.

    All that being said, I do think it's a pity that we won't be bringing in any more power into our midfield. Hopefully Lucas/Allen/Gerrard can prove me wrong, and be more than enough to form an effective base for a more expansive team game next year...

    ReplyDelete
  36. Exactly - and what's going on with Skrtel and Coates too??

    ReplyDelete
  37. 'sources' make up a load of conflicting stories on a daily basis.


    It's only a couple of weeks ago that Dortmund 'definitely' put in a big money bid for Erikssen, which directly preceded Mkhitaryan 'definitely' being on his way to LFC for his medical, which then directly preceded Dortmund 'definitely' putting in an even bigger bid for him.


    I'm not even bothering to follow all of these nonsensical rumors too closely anymore

    ReplyDelete
  38. Re-sign Any Carroll, good idea anyone, :)

    ReplyDelete
  39. Or get N'gog back ;)

    ReplyDelete
  40. Now your talking. :)

    ReplyDelete
  41. Next stop Anfield? Doesn't seem so. Maybe we were never interested at all.

    BTW, by now everyone should know that Shaktar Donetsk is NOT a Russian club, Jaimie. Donetsk is in the Ukraine.

    ReplyDelete
  42. As long as Liverpool don't come out and say that Mkhitaryan was a transfer target at any stage, we will not know whether he was a plan A at some time.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I always wondered what had happened to that Webster (was it Webster) rule, where a player could buy himself out of his contract by paying the wages he would have earned during the rest of his contract. There are a lot of Bosman's but no Webster's. Think I remember that clubs agreed, that they won't do it (tell players to buy themselves out in order to move).

    ReplyDelete
  44. lol last week you swore blind we had made an offer ,and belittled anyone who tried to say different imo

    ReplyDelete
  45. Now, Jaimie, you know all this, but still create a headline asking "Next stop Anfield"? Did you work as an intern at the Daily Mail to make such a conclusion?

    ReplyDelete
  46. m8 you need to get a grip you read something you want it to happen it must be true,shame thats not how life works

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yeah true, i guess with the level of media coverage you have to assume it is. Not often a club will come out and say he is a target until an offer of some sort is agreed.



    And potentially worse if we say we want him and not get the deal done

    ReplyDelete
  48. A few weeks ago we were led to believe that he must be interested in joining Liverpool, because he signed some kid's Liverpool shirt.

    ReplyDelete
  49. and he was leaving on a jet plane for john lennon airport,lol

    ReplyDelete
  50. Isn't Yaroshevky the guy who told the world that Mkhitaryan would definitely join LFC within three days, which was yesterday?

    ReplyDelete
  51. The level of media coverage should not be basis of any assumptions concerning our transfer targets. We were linked to roughly 200 players and signed 4. A 2 percent success rate suggest, that the media is not very good at second guessing.

    ReplyDelete
  52. l4l565,started all the rumours lol,

    ReplyDelete
  53. i ,am going to adopt i different attitude in future to lfc transfer speculation,if they are young cheap and have shown a bit of potential ,in a youth league,or somebody,s second team,i will take it seriously ,if they are performing at a good level look class and cost big money ,i will take it with a pinch of salt ,i said before and will say it again anyone who thinks we are going to sign players like hk without selling suarez or other top players is dreaming,

    ReplyDelete
  54. Stone him to death then. Nah, L4L565 only broke them on here.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Like Mignolet? Only played for a "second team" (Sunderland) in a youth league (The Premier League). No Jason, your new attitude isn't water-tight.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Yeah fair enough- but at this time of year and its what you go by, along with manager and player's quotes- right? it's what makes this period exciting, painful, annoying and nerve wrecking (IMO)

    Also out of those 200 players who have had a significant level of coverage about joining Liverpool- including quotes from various sources and related articles in the last month or so? i would say 5-10 of them and 4 have been signed making the ratio around 40%

    i don't mean the gossip columns which have all sorts of rumors and where all the big clubs get linked to a large number of players

    ReplyDelete
  57. but he was not neary 20 million

    ReplyDelete
  58. Remember that guy who said he was gonna kick a cat? XD

    ReplyDelete
  59. Yeah, sure. Poor little cat won't know what she did wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  60. So? He wasn't cheap either.

    ReplyDelete
  61. dont listen to all this british media junk,all they do is paste copies off other websites,go to arturpetrosyan twitter.hes works for the media and is an ex armenian international,seems to know what hes talking about.imo.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Mr. Point Of View9:48 am, July 04, 2013

    i got a better 1....titi camara or igor biscan?? how tat sound?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Mate in theory you might be right...but trusting our club to the right thing in the transfer market is a bit of a gamble ;) love live LFC's transfer policies

    ReplyDelete
  64. The idea being, if you link enough players you are bound to get 1 right?

    ReplyDelete
  65. he was pretty pricey for a keeper though.

    ReplyDelete
  66. The words of Palkin are no facts Jaimie. They are just words. And presidents of football clubs are always genuine about transfer deals, aren't they? Especially in Eastern Europe, which is well-known for transparency and truthfullnes.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Nunez and Sean Dundee...

    ReplyDelete
  68. but he did not cost 20million

    ReplyDelete
  69. and he was not a player that other clubs showed a great deal of interest in unlike hk

    ReplyDelete
  70. 30 million euro's isn't £19.8 million it's £25.57 million.


    I still think that we should buy him. It's difficult to get a top goal scorer (midfield or striker) when you don't have CL so if he's willing to come then it's a must, especially if we lose Suarez.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Dortmund haven't bid €30m, because they would have him allready. They have bid $30m, very different.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Part of your article is inaccurate too- Shakthar is a Ukrainian club, not a Russian club ;)

    ReplyDelete
  73. liverpool4life56512:19 pm, July 04, 2013

    Yes but he also broke the willian and fernanidho deals before anyone.... So he has previous :) and this guy isn't a no body either..

    ReplyDelete
  74. liverpool4life56512:20 pm, July 04, 2013

    Me get a grip? , funny :) you need to take your own advice. You moan 24/7 give it a rest. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  75. liverpool4life56512:24 pm, July 04, 2013

    Yes, now bbc have also said we want him? Also the echo. We want him to be our big signing. It's only day 4 of the window.

    ReplyDelete
  76. liverpool4life56512:25 pm, July 04, 2013

    There is a base to the Mkhitaryan deal... Just need to have abit of patience

    ReplyDelete
  77. liverpool4life56512:32 pm, July 04, 2013

    http://www.talksport. co.uk/radio/richard-keys-and-andy-gray/130704/thompson-suarez-leaving-liverpool-arsenal-makes-no-sense-200940? Listen to the end of that about Mkhitaryan

    ReplyDelete
  78. liverpool4life56512:34 pm, July 04, 2013

    To listen to the Thompson interview he from liverpool echo. He even said we are I'm talks. The players wants to come and we want him. We are going to splash the cash on Mkhitaryan... But it's a slow process

    ReplyDelete
  79. Mr. Point Of View12:44 pm, July 04, 2013

    toure, alberto, mignolet n aspas ????? hahahahahaaaa

    ReplyDelete
  80. This saga has gone on and on and generally these type of transfers end up big nothings .
    I am not convinced this guy has what it takes anyway and the hiring of the so called super players rep has failed to deliver him anywhere as yet, i think he is angling for more dough at Donetsk.
    Definitely no big loss in my mind if he stays 20 mill could be better spent elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  81. that`s my take on it

    ReplyDelete
  82. I haven't listened to the clip, but assume it is just further 'confirmation' about the Mkhitaryan transfer situation? Just because a somebody conveys information on live radio rather than in print doesn't make the information any more valid.

    People will say anything to get a little attention; they know they'll never get called up on all of the falsehoods, so might as well keep plugging rumours in the hope of claiming an "Exclusive" from one of them right...

    ReplyDelete
  83. Like who exactly, with no CL?

    ReplyDelete
  84. Shut up, you annoying tit! Your not even a Liverpool supporter! Tosser.

    ReplyDelete
  85. C.L is not the only criteria for joining a club go look at a few lists you will get an idea i suggest, also u are carrying on like no one would come but him.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Is the base wishful thinking?

    ReplyDelete
  87. Can you send me a link for that interview, please.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Then he must be garbage. Just like that Torres no-one but us was keen on signing, back in the day.

    ReplyDelete
  89. liverpool4life5654:40 pm, July 04, 2013

    It's the chief editor of Liverpool echo.... He knows what's going on at Liverpool

    ReplyDelete
  90. liverpool4life5654:40 pm, July 04, 2013

    If you go up to jay wright comment I've posted the link to him :)

    ReplyDelete
  91. Don't they all come across, portray themselves as if they were in the know and knew what they are talking about?

    ReplyDelete
  92. I think this is a bad idea to follow. And I expect more and much better from newspapers.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Painful, that's what it makes it. If they had a better quota, say 50%, we could still consider all this stuff as rumours, but as it stands it is guessing, and not very good one.


    I question my own, and a lot of other people's sanity, looking at the reactions to mere gossip. Quotes of alleged reliable sources often get mixed into those rumours.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Liverpool should just give Mkhitaryan the 19.8m so he can buy himself out of his contract, that way LFC would get him for 19.8M instead of 25M.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I don't believe HM has a buy out clause which happened to get matched by the champs league finalists . No champs league for us but he would rather sign for us rather than Dortmund . I very much doubt that's the truth. Something's not right somewhere down the line here . I have a feeling he is going to end up at Dortmund

    ReplyDelete
  96. I honestly don`t believe a word there manager/club says. They are worse than Whelan. So far they have confirmed we have put in a bid, which wasn`t high enough, confirmed we put in a bid which was contract cancelling level, confirmed we haven`t even bidded and I think confirmed we were and weren`t interested. They are playing loads of games, price hiking. Thats there right, but I aint listening to a word they say anymore, as every few days they completely change from what they said last time.

    ReplyDelete
  97. The Dortmund offer wasn`t 30mil euros, was 30mil dollars according to them. It worked out as the same price as he would pay to cancel his contract. Why Dortmund would be working in dollars is beyond me, and again just highlights the rubbish that comes out of there clubs mouths.

    ReplyDelete
  98. NonEventHorizon7:09 pm, July 04, 2013

    I thought the FA made some ruling banning third party ownership for players in the EPL after Masch and Tevez moved to West Ham. The delay could be down to the third parties not wanting to completely give up their interest in a player who would arguably become more of an asset to them with worldwide EPL and LFC exposure. Just guessing really... much like everyone else :)

    ReplyDelete
  99. Yep. Completely shuts up the age old view of "no one else wanted him". Which is always a odd view anyway as how do any fans know which other clubs are in for players? Most like to keep it to themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  100. He seems to know hardly anything. The Russian and also Artur Petrosyan tweets are as bad as the British Media. Look at the amount of different stories on this they have covered already. We have had done deal, not done deal, no bid, bid accepted etc, all coming from Artur and other Russian media outlets.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Last one went into the abyss that is random mod world, so a shorter version is, I don`t believe a word there club/manager says. They are clearly price hiking as have confirmed a bid, denied a bid, stated interest and denied interest from us all in about 2 weeks. The man is worse than Whelan and will say anything almost daily, changing it as per what suits he mood by the looks of it.

    ReplyDelete
  102. its meant to be 30mil dollars, for contract canceling clause, and they want 30 mil euros.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Said it a few times on this post already, but sounds completely made up to me, used as another tatic to price hike the deal. Why would Dortmund or them work in dollars?

    ReplyDelete
  104. There must be tax rules on that. I know you can only give about 3k per year untaxed to people. Maybe Liverpool could offer to pay the amount to them themselves? I don`t know the in`s and outs.

    ReplyDelete
  105. It is indeed the Webster rule. However you have to have done a min of 3 years of your existing contract before you are allowed to buy yourself out of the remaining part. I think this is one reason a lot of clubs offer new contracts to players even though they may have a while left, as it means they don`t go over the 3 year mark (this is for under 28`s) over 28`s is 2 years.


    HM is at the end of his 3rd year, so maybe the price valued to cancel his contract is the remaining amount of wages of the rest of his contract, although that does seem somewhat high as I can`t imagine he was on 5mil a year (90k a week) in the Ukraine league, and even if he was it would still take 4 more years for that to add up to the 20mil quoted. That would be a 7 year contract he originally signed? Possible but unlikely

    ReplyDelete
  106. 34mil, I think they already did haha

    ReplyDelete
  107. Yes, indeed. That's why I can't see Reina staying. Why would we pay 9m for a keeper who will sit on the bench.

    ReplyDelete
  108. I think he will go too, just maybe not till xmas. Xmas makes the most sense for all parties. Barca don`t need a new keeper till next summer, and buying him in Jan means he can settle in, in games or even be first choice without having to drop Valdes while he has a whole year left, being a bit of a club legend I don`t think the fans would be to happy with that, but dropping him on jan they might understand. For us it means we got the keeper to replace Reina but a bit early, so he to can settle in till Reina leaves.

    ReplyDelete
  109. So where's the player at HM's level who would take a non CL club? Muriel would be my favourite, but it's hardly an extensive list.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Would not be calling HM any superstar yet lets see on that call there is plenty of clubs who have built top teams without C.L football.
    Jventus did a good job as did Dortmund and there are others across the board who really knows who would come and who wouldnt.

    ReplyDelete
  111. what is exactly is his level playing in the Ukraine does not qualify him as the next Messi over rated in my eyes until he really steps up to a bigger league.

    ReplyDelete
  112. - Borussia Dortmund is the only club to put in an offer so far (€30m)

    "If we go in a civilized manner and sell the player, and in doing so he does not break the contract, the value we place on him is 30million euros (£25.5m)"

    So why isnt he sold to Borussia Dortmund then?

    ReplyDelete
  113. All the quotes from seasoned observers have described him as a very good player. Certainly not at the elite level, but extremely capable.
    We won't get elite level players here yet, and Dortmund built a team of players from people at HM's level which was my point.
    You still fail to name the players upon which you say the money could be better spent. Who are you referring to?

    ReplyDelete
  114. Ok if this is true I'd say tough Shaktar why accept a players contract and allow a clause in your not happy with. Hope he signs / should just allow him to buy out and reimburse

    ReplyDelete
  115. Shakhtar are ukrainian not russian there is a difference

    ReplyDelete
  116. Well it all looks like being academic now, by all accounts he's off to Dortmund, very disappointed myself, I think he was the perfect fit for LFC.
    What I want to know now is:
    1. Did we seriously go for him, if so, did Ayre's lack of gravitas let us down?
    2. Was it Just the lack of CL football that made him choose them?
    3. Will we look for and sign an alternative, or put the money towards a high quality DM and CB?
    I was one of those who believed the Russian tweets. Will be much more sceptical from now on....

    ReplyDelete
  117. I am the type of guy to say, I told you so...

    ReplyDelete
  118. liverpool4life5653:19 pm, July 08, 2013

    Told me so about what? a player turned us down for BVB.... Quiet simple as that

    ReplyDelete
  119. No, that was never my point. My point was these 'in the knows', including this guy, know little more than any fan with some common sense and access to the internet.

    Btw, that he has signed for Dortmund is a fact. That he turned us down is just conjecture.

    ReplyDelete