West Ham co-owner David Gold hints Charlie Austin's Southampton deal is not a bargain

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3403830/West-Ham-owner-David-Gold-claims-Charlie-Austin-s-Southampton-deal-not-bargain-wages-100-000-week.html

I really don't believe he can be on that much. The cheek of him to come out and say that when he probably doesn't have any way of knowing for sure how much we have offered to pay him. I believe I saw glass ankle Carroll is on near that when they got him, he cost 15m and has been injured for over half their games!

Sour grapes

Him and Austin have history, think David Gold made some comments about him in the Summer as well.

Austin goal against West Ham next month anyone?

*edit just seen it mentions it in the article and it was the other one who made those comments, my mistake.

That was Sullivan.

Maybe he really just didn't want to go there in the summer but said, well pay me this and I can't really say no

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/west-ham-and-andy-carroll-agree-to-46m-deal-8663284.html

Since joining WetSpam in January 2012, Carroll has scored 17 goals in all competitions. That's an average, given that it is just over 4 years to the day, of 4 and a bit goals per year, 1 fewer than Austin got last season for QPR. I wonder if Gold, someone who I am sincerely glad is not involved with my club, wonders whether that is a good return, let alone a bargain? As it is, why should he care? It's our £100k a week, not his, and if that is the way we want to make signings, then so be it.

And then I do love Gold saying that a lot of the 18 goals were penalties. I think that he might find that it was 3.

As for being injured, sure Austin has had some injuries, but many players do. But still, he plays a lot, and a lot more than Donkey Carroll.

14/15 season - played in 35 league (1 match suspension) and 1 cup game

13/14 season - 31 league, 3 play offs and 3 cup games

12/13 season - 37 league and 3 cup games

11/12 season - 41 league and 5 cup games

Carroll is reported to be on around 80k a week and they would of signed him on that before they knew they were getting even more premier league money that we get this or next season so basically 100k a week equivalent to now...Jokers. How they've got that Olympic Stadium is also a sham.

He's since said he doesn't know how much Austin is on at Saints.

Saw a journalist (from Sky, I think) saying that Austin had said his preference was to move back south from London, making Bournemouth and Saints his main choices. We came in and he wanted to get the move sorted. Perhaps another possible factor on why other clubs weren't seen to be going all out for him?

Talk at the end of the last window was Bournemouth were suggesting 60k. And I'd be very surprised if he's on much more than that. But it was topped up with a lot of match and position bonuses.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

I thought West Ham were one of the clubs who were clearly INVESTING IN THE TEAM, not like the tight fisted, scrimping and saving bargain basement skinflints that run Southampton Football Club. Saints only sign dirt cheap players from the bargain bin like Virgil and Clasie for £12m and £8m while West Ham actually show real intent by actually splashing the cash and signing players like Payet and Agbonna for proper money like £10m and £8m. I wish we were West Ham.

****inghell. How does he have the audacity to comment on players wages? West Ham pay stupid money for stupid players.

Gold and Sullivan make it very hard to like West Ham, both slimy little weasels, need to mind their own business! It's a shame as West Ham are decent club with some good fans!

****inghell. How does he have the audacity to comment on players wages? West Ham pay stupid money for stupid players.

Gold is only replying to West Ham Fans about the Austin deal as they were in for him at one time be nice if we could get Tweets from Ralph.

I think Gold is right if we are paying 100000K a week it is not a bargain but we dont know what wages he is on like me Gold is only making a comment.

He seems to be doing a good job at West Ham are probably did not go for Austin after the problems with injuries with Carroll

Not sure anyone claims that it was a bargain, save for the likes of people who post here.

one could think that having rejected Wham, Charlie Austin is getting cynical comments from Gold, who is trying to divert criticism by Wham fans for not signing him first.

. I wish we were West Ham.

He is a ****! If they hadn't been promoted with us out of The Championship they would have gone bust. They were paying Nolan & others over £50k pw & would have been wiped out.

I would be astonished if he is on £100k pw. I would be surprised if it were £80k pw, but I would imagine his signing bonus would have been quite high so it maybe spread over his contract??

I thought West Ham were one of the clubs who were clearly INVESTING IN THE TEAM, not like the tight fisted, scrimping and saving bargain basement skinflints that run Southampton Football Club. Saints only sign dirt cheap players from the bargain bin like Virgil and Clasie for £12m and £8m while West Ham actually show real intent by actually splashing the cash and signing players like Payet and Agbonna for proper money like £10m and £8m. I wish we were West Ham.

To be honest, I couldn't give a fig for what the owner of West Ham thinks. All that matters to me is what our club does. All the others can go and sulk in a corner.

He is a ****! If they hadn't been promoted with us out of The Championship they would have gone bust. They were paying Nolan & others over £50k pw & would have been wiped out.

Seems a strange thing to say I thought they were showing ambition by investing to get into the PL which they did l agree I would be astonished if Austin is on £100k pw. I would be surprised if it was earning more than £50k

Every time the West Ham owners (or the son) seems to say anything its just made out like they're so in the know about everything in the world of football and run the best club in the whole wide world (yes miss, look at me, we're so amazing), or they're really bitter...

West ham and a few other clubs were all waiting for the latter stages of this transfer window to swoop in and get charlie for next to nothing. What we are seeing is sour grapes because saints beat them all to it. Well done to all at st marys because charlie austin is exactly what is needed.

If the funds allow it I would like us to also sign Tony Vilhena from feyonord, then we will have a realy strong squad capable of finishing very high this season

I thought West Ham were one of the clubs who were clearly INVESTING IN THE TEAM, not like the tight fisted, scrimping and saving bargain basement skinflints that run Southampton Football Club. Saints only sign dirt cheap players from the bargain bin like Virgil and Clasie for £12m and £8m while West Ham actually show real intent by actually splashing the cash and signing players like Payet and Agbonna for proper money like £10m and £8m. I wish we were West Ham.

You mean West Ham BOTH keeping key players (eg Reid) AND strengthening the team?

As ever, clear as mud, pal.

You mean West Ham BOTH keeping key players (eg Reid) AND strengthening the team?

 

As ever, clear as mud, pal.

Did any of West Ham's players get courted by the big clubs? I'm not sure any of them are good enough to play for a top-six club, so there is not much pressure on their board to sell. If Liverpool had come in for Reid with a £20m bid, he'd have gone quick sharphish. Payet is their best player atm, but is not being linked with any of the big clubs...

Looking at Gold's tweet, it's not even clear that he is intentionally implying he knows something about how much Saints are paying Austin. It could just be that he's asking West Ham fans to consider wages as well as transfer fee before saying whether a particular deal is a bargain.

Did any of West Ham's players get courted by the big clubs? I'm not sure any of them are good enough to play for a top-six club, so there is not much pressure on their board to sell. If Liverpool had come in for Reid with a £20m bid, he'd have gone quick sharphish. Payet is their best player atm, but is not being linked with any of the big clubs...

Give it time, I'm sure Payet will be linked with a move away in the summer

Give it time, I'm sure Payet will be linked with a move away in the summer

Not sure - he's already pretty old. Might keep him at West Ham with the new stadium n all.

Carroll or Austin? Carroll or Austin? Hmmmmmm LOL

I agree with Gold, if Austin is on £100k a week, then no longer considered a bargain. However, it was speculation... 'if he were...’.

Whether the board would be able to pay £100k a week on a 4.5 year contract is another matter!

Did any of West Ham's players get courted by the big clubs? I'm not sure any of them are good enough to play for a top-six club, so there is not much pressure on their board to sell. If Liverpool had come in for Reid with a £20m bid, he'd have gone quick sharphish. Payet is their best player atm, but is not being linked with any of the big clubs...

Living in the capital, the speculation around Winston Reid and a move to Arsenal or Spurs has been red-hot for the last couple of seasons, more than most players. But hey, keeping plugging away with the utterly and wonderfully nonfalsifiable logic that because the player didn't leave there was never any real interest in him to begin with.

Living in the capital, the speculation around Winston Reid and a move to Arsenal or Spurs has been red-hot for the last couple of seasons, more than most players. But hey, keeping plugging away with the utterly and wonderfully nonfalsifiable logic that because the player didn't leave there was never any real interest in him to begin with.

Or, the speculation is at an almost identical level to Wanyama, who we haven't sold either.

But yeah, no player says "top four here we come" than the likes of Winston Reid.

He is right in a way, Austin will be on big wages because we got a good deal because he was near the end of his contract.

Wether you pay £4mill for a player on high wages or £14mill for one on lower wages makes no difference - except you are paying the money to the player and not another club.

DG is speculating on the wages, i'm led to believe that his wages are nearer £80k p/w, which is only slightly more than Osvaldo was on, plus that does seem the going rate for good premier league players now. Additionally, this is mental from an owner who pays Carroll £80k per week who only can play 2 games every 3 months!

We are just about to shave 50K off the wage bill, with Gaston going.....

Gold is only replying to West Ham Fans about the Austin deal as they were in for him at one time be nice if we could get Tweets from Ralph.

 

I think Gold is right if we are paying 100000K a week it is not a bargain but we dont know what wages he is on like me Gold is only making a comment.

 

He seems to be doing a good job at West Ham are probably did not go for Austin after the problems with injuries with Carroll

I agree, £100,000,000 a week is too much to be paying him...

Or, the speculation is at an almost identical level to Wanyama, who we haven't sold either.

 

But yeah, no player says "top four here we come" than the likes of Winston Reid.

Not where I am it is. But let's see if Vic is still here in the summer, shall we, before you start trumpeting that one.

Did I say no player says top four than Winston Reid? You're making things up again; however, I did say he has the quality to move to a bigger club. But perhaps I'm underselling him:

“Winston Reid, though, has been just as influential [as Payet]. It was a surprise West Ham were able to keep him, as I have no doubt he has the qualities to play for a top-four team. I’ve liked him for a long time, so to re-sign him on a six-year contract was a massive statement,”

Did any of West Ham's players get courted by the big clubs? I'm not sure any of them are good enough to play for a top-six club, so there is not much pressure on their board to sell. If Liverpool had come in for Reid with a £20m bid, he'd have gone quick sharphish. Payet is their best player atm, but is not being linked with any of the big clubs...

Turns out only 3 of the 7 we sold are good enough for a top 6 club, and Morgan isn't even getting high praise yet but think he'll be ok. I'd argue that we sold Puncheon to Palace for what 1m? I reckon he would of probably been more of a success at Liverpool than Lallana for 24m less, we really did pull United Arsenal and Liverpools pants down for most of the players we sold apart from Clyne (1 year od contract left) and Morgan (reasonable price for both partys).

Living in the capital, the speculation around Winston Reid and a move to Arsenal or Spurs has been red-hot for the last couple of seasons, more than most players. But hey, keeping plugging away with the utterly and wonderfully nonfalsifiable logic that because the player didn't leave there was never any real interest in him to begin with.

I think we all know he would of gone to Spurs or Arsenal if he knew they wanted him as their first choice target. They clearly didn't as Arsenal got Paulista and Spurs got Toby and Wimmer.

I agree with Gold, if Austin is on £100k a week, then no longer considered a bargain. However, it was speculation... 'if he were...’.

Whether the board would be able to pay £100k a week on a 4.5 year contract is another matter!

I doubt if it would be that much but even it it were, it would mean the £4 million fee + c. £5 million /year salary would bring his cost upto £26 million by 2021.

Sound a lot? Gaston's much-quoted salary I've seen £65K / week quoted by several people means his fee+salary would be £26...(that is if he's still here in June).

Comparing that sum with Gaston's goal-scoring record .....I'd say whatever he's on Charlie Austin will be a better deal ...in the long run...by a mile.

I think we all know he would of gone to Spurs or Arsenal if he knew they wanted him as their first choice target. They clearly didn't as Arsenal got Paulista and Spurs got Toby and Wimmer.

We know nothing of the sort.

FWIW Reid took himself out of contention and signed a new contract well before Spurs/Arsenal made the aforementioned signings.

We know nothing of the sort.

 

FWIW Reid took himself out of contention and signed a new contract well before Spurs/Arsenal made the aforementioned signings.

Really? Arsenal signed Paulista last January.

Quick google shows Reid signed new deal last March

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11685/9744721/winston-reid-signs-new-long-term-contract-with-west-ham

You have a case for Spurs but had Arsenal really wanted him, they would of got him.

Spurs probably sorted the Wimmer deal before then and tapped up Toby before then as well knowing them

Living in the capital, the speculation around Winston Reid and a move to Arsenal or Spurs has been red-hot for the last couple of seasons, more than most players. But hey, keeping plugging away with the utterly and wonderfully nonfalsifiable logic that because the player didn't leave there was never any real interest in him to begin with.

keep plugging away? it was only one post, with a genuine question! A quick search didn't pull anything up first time, but you are right about Reid:

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/561991/Winston-Reid-Arsenal-Tottenham-Spurs-Man-Utd-Liverpool-West-Ham-deal

Fact is, the goddess that Winston Reid is aside, West Ham players don't get linked to the big boys much, because they buy for their position. If we bought players with 6-10th place potential, like jenkinson, or valencia, or song, moses etc., then we could probably hold onto them and finish mid table every season.

Who cares what we are paying him,I would fully expect him to be one of if not the highest paid at the club,to me that shows ambition that the club has been accused of not showing in recent times and will hopefully show other players that we are looking to strengthen and have competition for places.

And if he can score 15-20+ goals a season he will be a worthy addition.

Even if he gets £100,000pw its still a bargain if we sell him in two years time for £15-20mn.

Even if he gets £100,000pw its still a bargain if we sell him in two years time for £15-20mn.

£10.4m in wages, £4m in transfer fee plus agents fee plus signing on fee doesn't come to much less than £15m. He'll be getting an appearance bonus, a goal bonus and so on as well.

£10.4m in wages, £4m in transfer fee plus agents fee plus signing on fee doesn't come to much less than £15m. He'll be getting an appearance bonus, a goal bonus and so on as well.

Yes, but you are rather disregarding the service he would give us for those 2 years, and also hopefully the goals as well.

Even if he gets £100,000pw its still a bargain if we sell him in two years time for £15-20mn.

Charlie Austin will never command that sort of fee.

There is quite obvioulsy something wrong medically, that doesnt stop him playing, but (Best guess) prevents him being insured. There have been players before (Ricardo Fuller springs to mind) that were in the same boat, but whatever it is prevents the big money moves.

We have (Which I am delighted about) appeared to take a punt at 4 million - Great bit of business, but there is a reason why 18 premier goals a seaon, England Internationals go for 4million pounds and it's not just because he could leave in the summer on a free. QPR would have off loaded him for the big bucks back in the day, if they could have...... They couldn't.

You might be right that there is an under lying problem, but the fact is that he has played a lot more games than he has missed. In fact over the past 5 seasons, nothing is out of the ordinary, as I guess one expects a player to be injured from time to time. Taking the 11/12 > 14/15 season and comparing to Lallana, they both played in 159 games.

You might be right that there is an under lying problem, but the fact is that he has played a lot more games than he has missed. In fact over the past 5 seasons, nothing is out of the ordinary, as I guess one expects a player to be injured from time to time. Taking the 11/12 > 14/15 season and comparing to Lallana, they both played in 159 games.

Completely agree, what ever it is doesnt stop hm playing.

I agree with Gold, if Austin is on £100k a week, then no longer considered a bargain. However, it was speculation... 'if he were...’.

 

Whether the board would be able to pay £100k a week on a 4.5 year contract is another matter!

Sullivan: "They say he has no ligaments in his knee, who knows?"

Well, Sullivan, if you don't know STFU.

And to think the state gives an honour to his secretary Karen Brady, who masquerades as a "business woman". Tory Party mouthpiece, more like.