Aston Villa Rumours Archive May 18 2013

 

Use our rumours form to send us aston villa transfer rumours.

18 May 2013 19:45:11
Just heard Aston Villa are looking to Loan Lukaku from Chelsea.

Darren Bent also rumoured to be going to West Brom for £4m to replace Lukaku.

Believable9 Unbelievable11

Villa wouldn't sell Bent to West Brom & certainly not for a mediocre £4m! that's a loss of £20m!

Agree9 Disagree3

No one is going to pay a fortune for Bent. We want to sell, he wants to leave - that drives the price way down.
We need him off the wage bill. £4 million sounds about right

Agree3 Disagree9

Bents fee was 18 mill plus add ons.
No add ons activated due to lack of playing. so loss smaller but still, thanks to O'Neill, massive. But have to get him out and off wage bill. would prob accept 6-8 mill.

Agree5 Disagree6

Villa will sell bent & he wants to leave. But it will be for about 10mil

Agree6 Disagree2

What has o Neil got to do with Bent? Houllier signed him

Agree11 Disagree0

Bent will go for 6-10m tops depending on how many clubs want him so now that's Everton, Fulham and Baggies

Agree6 Disagree1

Who will pay10 m for bent when there's better strikers for less he's worth 5m

Agree4 Disagree4

Could always just play bent and see he's just what we need, a proven goal scorer. scary how good him and benteke could be together given the hance I think. shame the wage is so high

Agree3 Disagree1

How it's martin oneills fault when he was signed by houiller I would like you to explain that one to me bet you was not complaining when his goals kept us in the premiership

Agree4 Disagree0

Villa wanted £12 million last season. That price has halved at least.

£6 million, maybe less

Agree4 Disagree3

Looking back on things, I am not the biggest fan of O'Neill's transfer policy but blaming him for a Houllier signing (Bent) is a bit harsh

Agree8 Disagree1

How can you pin this one on O'Neil when it was Houllier that bought him?
£4mill sounds cheap but realistically we won't get much more. Best to sell for whatever and get him off wage bill

Agree5 Disagree2

Bent no matter who he plays for will bag 15 goals a season, we need to get rid of him but he's still worth atleast 8m

Agree3 Disagree2

6 million would be a good deal considering all factors

Agree5 Disagree3

Norwich signed RVW for 8m, why would anyone buy Bent for that much. I would take 3m. Played next to no games, crippling our wage bill and no relegation clause to reduce costs if we were to go down. let's get rid of him please.

Agree1 Disagree6

Lerner will never take a loss of £20m on a perfectly good player!

Agree0 Disagree5

Van Wolfswinkle might have cost £8m but he's unproven in the prem, Bent for £8m would be a bargain for any club because he's a proven prem goal scorer, we all know what you'll get with bent, he guarentees goals, chances are RVW will be a flop, it's only common sense.

But I do think because PL has made it blatently obvious he doesn't want DB, he has devalued him, which I think shows his lack of experience

>scg87

Agree8 Disagree0

8 mil from Newcastle

Agree0 Disagree0

I don't think anyone should be beblaming houllier because when we actually signed bent he probably kept us up

Agree0 Disagree0

18 May 2013 11:55:10
Dortmund likely to sign Benteke as replacement for Lewandowski. German club set to offer £20 million for the forward, the whole sum payable over 4 years, according to German media reporting.

Believable5 Unbelievable19

Did benteke not say, he is happy at villa!

Agree16 Disagree4

£20m over 4 years? £5m a year? We could loan him out for £5m a year Lol so why would we except that? Nonsense!

Agree18 Disagree4

Because that is how most transfers are constructed, especially continental club deals. When we signed Bent, most of the money went to Spurs because Sunderland hasn't finished paying for the player.

Agree5 Disagree12

The deal is done based on 2 teams agreeing, an if we decide to agree to a deal where we only get £5m a season over 4 seasons, then someone seriously needs to be sacked.
I guarentee you the €40m that Munchen are paying for Gotze will not be paid over 4 years.

Agree9 Disagree2

Benteke isn't leaving aston villa as things stand - papers are always are just looking to get people to buy their papers, doesn't mean what you see is true.

Agree8 Disagree1

Absolutely guaranteed that Gotzes fee is payable over instalments.
It's how nearly all transfer fees are paid.

Agree4 Disagree6

Dortumund more likely to sign Dzeko for 12-15m instead of Benteke for 22-25m.

Benteke will not be leaving this summer for less that 25m, and this will have to be paid 70% up front.

Agree9 Disagree1

The bigger clubs don't need money up front, but its the teams like villa that need to sell, and use that money to buy replacements. Without transfers out we won't be able to get ins, where as teams that turnover 100's of millions a year can splash that on players and use sales as a constant income for the next few seasons. There is no way we could afford to only gain £5m a year and lose our biggest member of the team, because we wouldn't get a replacement half as good for that. IF benteke does go, we will not accept the payment in instalments, we cannot afford to.

Agree6 Disagree6

Benteke's keeps saying how happy at Villa

His agent, Him and Lambert have said he'll 99% stay

Agree7 Disagree1

Almost certain that Benteke will stay.

But most transfers are conducted in installments. Until last season the only club that paid and received transfers up front was Newcastle.

How difficult is this: pretty much every transfer has an "up front" fee which is paid in installments, normally over the length of the players contract. "Up front" doesn't mean a lump sum. It means that part of the fee that isn't dependent on clauses.

Agree4 Disagree2

What else would they say?
There not going to come out an say he's off

Agree5 Disagree1

Lambert can not be trusted. He said he would not leave norwich nd he did. Benteke will leave. Don't trust lambert. Come on the villa

Agree3 Disagree5

Should it even be Lamberts decision? Is he really any better than Mcleish?

Agree2 Disagree7

18 May 2013 08:18:20
Villa transfer plans
INS
aiden mceady (moscow) or jefferson farfan (schalke)
Douglas (twente) or Cresswell (ipswich)
Figeuroia (Wigan)
Pina (mallorca)

Outs
Bent
Ireland
hutton
given
Bannan (loan)
fonz (loan)
curruthers (loan)

Believable6 Unbelievable7

Is agree with most but I doubt farfan will trade champions league football for villa- of and I think we will sign Sinclair rather than mgeady

Agree4 Disagree4

Remember no big names coming in it'll bargains from abroad and talent from lower leagues

Agree9 Disagree1

Don't think we will get douglas but I would like us to sign Callum Mcmanaman

Agree8 Disagree3

Would absolutely love douglas! Absolute unit, him and vlaar would have a great understanding too!

Agree4 Disagree2

Fonz will not go out on loan again, he will be kept as part of the first team under Lambert who is keen to work with him.

Agree4 Disagree3

McGeady's disciplinary record would make him a huge gamble plus he's been linked with Villa every year for about a decade now and it's never come off. Can't see it.

Agree0 Disagree0

18 May 2013 02:27:35
Fabian Lustenberger is set to be cherry-picked by Lambert for a minimal price due to Hertha BSC being relegated from the Bundesliga.

Believable7 Unbelievable2

Hertha BSC have just been promoted back to the bundesliga

Agree7 Disagree0

Think this was a link from around January, I vaguely remember seeing something on here about it, maybe we'll back in for him, tidy little player.

Agree4 Disagree0