Indeed he was! A man with many sides.Well he was head doorman of an 'interesting' club back in the day.
Perhaps he knows Blake from then? The plot thickens...
Want to meet for a
I’ll say hello if I see you in the concourse. I expect I’ll already have a beer.Want to meet for a beer?
Shandy top with a dash of lime.I’ll say hello if I see you in the concourse. I expect I’ll already have a beer.
Mine or Neil’s?Shandy top with a dash of lime.
Do… it’s always good to put names to faces on here.I’ll say hello if I see you in the concourse. I expect I’ll already have a beer.
Solanke, Ibe and Smith and Wilson’s loan fee were the best part of 50m.
Want to meet for a beer?
I think taken in context as well:Even if you took the highest reported figures for them all - £19m for Solanke, £15m for Ibe, £6m for Smith and £2.5m for Wilson it still only comes to £42.5million. Why do you always inflate everything so highly? It diminishes any sort of argument you’re trying to make.
When you then consider Solanke as the only one who would have triggered all the add on fees, Ibe probably cost the lower end of the £13m, most reports on Smith were £3m (and that also supposedly covered the Clyne loan deal as well) and then the Wilson loan fee it drops down to £37.5million and includes an extra player.
Solanke has more than recouped that entire total himself with his performances and could well end up being sold for well over that amount in the future.
So if the whole premise of Richard Hughes being a failure is based on an overall profit regarding his transfer dealings with Liverpool, I’d politely suggest that its foundations are weaker than a cocktail bar built on a beach.
A very in depth analysis of what I said some scousers were saying on Twitter … not me. I even said we know what we paid so you can differentiate. You want to go on some red men websites and do this analysis there.Even if you took the highest reported figures for them all - £19m for Solanke, £15m for Ibe, £6m for Smith and £2.5m for Wilson it still only comes to £42.5million. Why do you always inflate everything so highly? It diminishes any sort of argument you’re trying to make.
When you then consider Solanke as the only one who would have triggered all the add on fees, Ibe probably cost the lower end of the £13m, most reports on Smith were £3m (and that also supposedly covered the Clyne loan deal as well) and then the Wilson loan fee it drops down to £37.5million and includes an extra player.
Solanke has more than recouped that entire total himself with his performances and could well end up being sold for well over that amount in the future.
So if the whole premise of Richard Hughes being a failure is based on an overall profit regarding his transfer dealings with Liverpool, I’d politely suggest that its foundations are weaker than a cocktail bar built on a beach.
A very in depth analysis of what I said some scousers were saying on Twitter … not me. I even said we know what we paid so you can differentiate. You want to go on some red men websites and do this analysis there.
To repeat… we know what we paid
...unless something personal we don't know about?
A very in depth analysis of what I said some scousers were saying on Twitter … not me. I even said we know what we paid so you can differentiate. You want to go on some red men websites and do this analysis there.
To repeat… we know what we paid
I could say on twitter we signed all 3 on frees, doesn't make it true. But could support an argument that they were excellent signingsA very in depth analysis of what I said some scousers were saying on Twitter … not me. I even said we know what we paid so you can differentiate. You want to go on some red men websites and do this analysis there.
To repeat… we know what we paid
I think taken in context as well:
-Smith was a low cost/low risk signing who was always coming in to be a squad player/a player who could develop over time. There are countless signings of this nature made across the league every season that don’t pay off.
When you consider he also had loan deals with both Seattle and Cardiff, which with both extended, the likelihood is there would also have been loan fees and wage costs included. So even the loss on him would have been cushioned a bit.
I don't think there is any way of inputting those numbers on Neil's evidence abacus.
Is he on gardening leave yet, as I'm guessing he would know our transfer plans for the next window