We would be daft to accept 100k, but 250k is a different story...
I'd hate to see Shanks leave but 250k is a lot of money.
Consider this scenario:
We sell Shanks for 250k, use 50k towards player budget plus whatever Shankland's wage is to sign another striker and possibly another player, we then bank 200k. The rest of the squad are good enough to stay up (he may be good, but Ayr are not solely the Lawrence Shankland show these days) so say we finish 8th, and we get 190k of league prize money. So we start next season with 390k in the bank.
2nd scenario:
Shanks stays. Has a glorious season, Ayr finish 5th, narrowly miss out on a play off slot, fans are elated. Shanks leaves on a free, leaving great memories behind. Ayr scoop 230k (ish) for league prize money. Our budget for next year is potentially 160k less than what it could be.
Now we know that next season, Lachlan is no longer topping up our playing budget, so long term financial stability and securing funds and income for the future is a massive thing for us just now. This is why we've secured a two year deal with McDonalds Ayr as we need to secure income for next year as well as this year. Now I'd love us to finish 5th and beat big teams along the way, but as we'll be facing 2019/20 without Shankland regardless (and likely that Mark Kerr and Stevie Bell will be the same) then I'd rather have more funds available to keep ourselves up again and really cement our place in the division.
The questions on top of this are: a) do you think the Ayr squad w/o Shanks but with another lesser striker are good enough to finish 8th? Or, b) do you think that with Shanks, we'll have a good cup run to bring in extra revenue, and on field success will increase crowds to a level that will cover what we would get from his sale. It's a tough question and one the club are no doubt trying to work out.
I reiterate, I'd hate to see him go, but for 250k, we most definitely need to consider the pros and cons along with our long term plans.