Nottingham Forest - Wigan

[Strawberry Avenger]

I think it's fair to say we won't recoup the full 13.2m for Carvalho.

Either way, back to my original point, the financial weight he carries is the reason why we can't afford to keep him on the books just to develop him, or have as 3rd/4th choice backup.

Whereas on the flipside we're not paying any transfer fee out for Yates', and he signed a new contract Jul 18 when he barely had any game time to his name so will be on relative pittance wage wise. That you can afford to develop, and keep as 3rd/4th choice backup.

Alf why do you think that any club is going to spend that sort of money on Carvalho? ... we shafted Red Bull when they signed Burke, and they shafted WBA in return ... now he is worthless and probably will go on a free to a L2 team when his contract runs out ... Benfica shafted us with Carvalho,  and now we r hoping that some team sign him on just watching YouTube highlights...definitely not by sending scouts to the City Ground...

Totally agree, hence why I said "Won't recoup"

It depends on what you mean by recoup.

His original transfer fee has been inflated for some unknown reason; the 13.2m included the loan fees for Dias and Goncalves which made Carvalho worth around 10m, which is still a lot of money

Assuming he did cost 13.2m, for the sake of argument, his actual worth to the club at this moment in time is around 8m - his value is amortised over the length of his contract.

To say the financial weight that he carries is the reason we cannot keep him is nonsense; that is the reason why we can keep him, and should keep him.

We signed an unfinished product and should be doing everything we can to turn him into the finished article; if that means sending him out on loan so be it.

According to the last three sets of accounts we have made a surplus of 29m in the transfer market over the last three seasons, and I would guess there will be another surplus recorded when the next set come out in two months time.

We are clearly not short of money; that does not mean we can just throw it away if a player we sign goes through a difficult period

Rational.

Well explained.  The new overlords at Forest aren't stupid.  They clearly know what they are doing.  They managed to loan or sell a great deal of players over the Summer.

Forest have been good at developing their younger players from the Academy by sending them out on loan and moving them up the leagues until they can be included in the Forest squad or sold.

Even the players brought in from outside have been sold or loaned according to the 'business plan' for each particular player.

It's going to be very interesting to see what happens this January.  There's been a lot of debate about the battle readiness of young players like Yates and Car'.  Cash and Worrall have been up and down and been in an out of the 1st team for longer and playing under many successive managers. This season they have begun to settle to consistency and quality at this level at least with the promise of more to come.

I'd like recruitment to sign battle ready players to even out the development of eg. Yates, Car' and others (Brennan?) over the longer term.

The new Forest don't just let players go for nothing, even if they have a bad patch.  It wasn't so long ago Forest would sign mediocre players on 'good money' and then just let them leave for nothing.

There is more a sense of wheeling and dealing.  Or even better, shrewd business dealing within the rules of monetise playing assets.

SA.