Forest to get King windfall afterall?

Reports are infuriatingly absent of the fee, but Marlon King has signed a three-and-half year deal with Wigan – who presumably don’t have particularly rigourous medicals – which should hopefully see a slice of cash coming our way from the sell-on agreement we had with Watford upon allowing the striker to join them for a knock-down price.  The Watford site describes Wigan’s offer as ‘significantly better’ than the revised bid Fulham made, so there should still be a slice of that for us.

I’m not particularly close to the story, but my understanding was that Fulham had originally bid £5m for the striker, before his medical with the Cottagers put paid to the move owing to a dodgy knee.  Fulham did go back with another offer, which I heard was some kind of staggered payment based presumably on King’s ability to play.  So the actual amount I’m unsure of, Watford rejected it whilst stating King was no longer part of their plans.

So I’m thinking that Wigan must have made a decent offer.  Certainly significantly over the £500k Watford paid for him.  Again, I’m unsure of the sell on percentage we would have agreed, but given the loss we made on him in the short time he was with us, I imagine it was quite high (I realise I’m crediting Forest with some common sense here), so hopefully we are in for a bit of cash coming in that looked to have been unlikely after the results of Marlon’s Fulham medical.

Given my general frustration and impatience levels I’d be quite pleased to see us just chuck whatever cash comes in on top of the original offer for Leon Best, and make Coventry an offer they literally can’t refuse.  I can see what Forest are going for, Coventry clearly would prefer to sell the player now, and by leaving the deal late it puts us in the driving seat – but why do I fear them refusing to do business just to spite us?

Advertisements

2 Responses

  1. Finally King does soemthing decent for Forest other than that goal against west ham. with the half million we sold him for, and say 10% of 5 million, we’ve just about recovered what we spent on him. Fair play to someone on the board who has worked out about this sell on clauses, jenas, harewood and now king, all bringing in £500,000 cash bonuses several years after leaving the CG and when the club really needs it, in fact only prutton failed to sell on for more really and look what he did for us instead, get sent off!

  2. That last line, NFFC, might be closer to the truth that we all realise. Is it just me or are Forest (or should that be Mark Arthur?) starting to get a reputation for being a tad underhand in their transfer dealings???

    Not very nice things keep being intimated about the way we approach transfers at the Club.

    Its a worrying time!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: