https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/exclu ... e-striker/
Hopefully just paper talk.....
and the Boss is back....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf38RpVyqmo
https://www.lancasterguardian.co.uk/spo ... ge-3527346
ianmcm wrote:Surely the club would be asking for more than half a million?!
RedRedWine wrote:Assuming there’s no buy out clause in the contract, then the fee has to be £1m+. We have Cole under contract for another season (at least - who knows if an optional extension exists), so the club is well protected. Unless we get a silly offer I think we’d be foolish to sell at this stage - as the divisions top scorer I don’t see his value diminishing in the space of 5 months. He’s our only reliable goal scorer, so any chances of staying up would evaporate if he was sold…. And if he was to keep us up that value might even increase… win win win!
Football League World is operated by an unverified ‘journalist’ Ned Holmes. He probably just makes stuff up for click bait to draw in gullible fools and bombarded them with adverts based on their internet search history (I dread to think Neil!). The article doesn’t appear to be reliable at all, and comes across as particularly baseless. It is worse than paper talk, and should not be presented as a anything resembling a remotely reliable source.
facebook like buttonRedRedWine wrote:Assuming there’s no buy out clause in the contract, then the fee has to be £1m+. We have Cole under contract for another season (at least - who knows if an optional extension exists), so the club is well protected. Unless we get a silly offer I think we’d be foolish to sell at this stage - as the divisions top scorer I don’t see his value diminishing in the space of 5 months. He’s our only reliable goal scorer, so any chances of staying up would evaporate if he was sold…. And if he was to keep us up that value might even increase… win win win!
Football League World is operated by an unverified ‘journalist’ Ned Holmes. He probably just makes stuff up for click bait to draw in gullible fools and bombarded them with adverts based on their internet search history (I dread to think Neil!). The article doesn’t appear to be reliable at all, and comes across as particularly baseless. It is worse than paper talk, and should not be presented as a anything resembling a remotely reliable source.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 108 guests