web analytics
2 Comments

£4 million Jelavic? In our dreams

ChinaClaretandHugh has again been assured this afternoon that reports of Nikicia Jelavic’s transfer to China nrtting the club a transfer fee of £4 million are false.

Various media outlets have claimed the Hammers sold the Croatian for £4 million but that was rubbished by a highly placed source at Upton Park.

Such a fee would have given a 100 per cent profit on the former Hull City striker but the club has made it clear to us that is definitely not the case.

We were told: “The club managed to salvage £1.5m of the £2.5m we paid, but it allows us to go again and releases one from the wage bill.

“There seems to have been some confusion on the figures – maybe the media has mixed up transfer fees with wages but whatever the reason we certainly won’t see £4 million.”

Claret & Hugh’s team of creators work with passion and pride to bring you the quality of content that keeps you coming back for more. Support for our creators, however big or small, will help us keep your sports content fresh, frequent and loyal to the club. £5 £10 £20 £50

ClaretandHugh reported earlier today the figure was believed to be between £1.5m – £2m and our source said: “You have had it correct from the start of the deal.”

 

Click Here for Comments >
 

About Hugh5outhon1895

Hugh Southon is a lifelong Iron and the founding editor of ClaretandHugh. He is a national newspaper journalist of many years experience and was Bobby Moore's 'ghost' writer during the great man's lifetime. He describes ClaretandHugh as "the Hammers daily newspaper!" Follow on Twitter @hughsouthon

2 comments on “£4 million Jelavic? In our dreams

  1. You know how to beat your own drum Hugh…… got to hand it to you.

  2. With all the new contracts being handed out, Payet, Kouyate who is rumoured to have already agreed the new contract and soon Lanzini plus his transfer fee any money on the credit is going to help plus Sean Whetstone featured a piece suggesting we were actually under the FFP if his estimates on Salary were correct but I would imagine the new contracts would bring that back in line.

Comments are closed.