That would depend on how many trophies he would help us win, and how much revenue his inclusion to the squad would bring to the club as a whole. At £60m, his transfer could either be a bargain or it could be extortionate.£55 +£5m in add ons was a bargain for Sanchez.
Not if that Chilean coach is right....
"I saw him gone, I saw him out of physical shape, totally. He’s fatter than normal.
Without his spark, he never left that Paraguayan defence behind. He never made a diagonal run, it was something else. It was not Alexis"
I think that's worthy of comment given that we've spent the last 12 months arguing over how good the player is.
He obviously is as Liverpool turned it down. That's how price works.
Liverpool getting ahead of themselves? Surely not! They aren't the kind of club that would do that!Liverpool didn't turn down jack shit mate. They postured like that, but they were sat waiting for a fax that never arrived as Barca chose Dembele instead at a cheaper price.
If you walk into a shop and say "how much is that item?" you aren't obliged to buy it. This is essentially what happened, and Liverpool got ahead of themselves.
-If Alexis wants to join City in January he can't turn up as Arsenal's savior until then
as they simply wouldn't let him go then. They've just denied 60m, 20m in January wouldn't matter to them as long as he performs.
So any sign of great performance for Arsenal would question Alexis' desire to join City in January, IMO.
Regarding WC, Chile are in big trouble to qualify. Last 2 matches are Ecuador (h) and Brazil (a).
Some good chance Alexis doesn't even have to care about his WC form come November.
Sure based on how are purchases escalated as the season went on, perhaps.I still think £60m wasn't a bad deal given his true worth in today's market was much higher than that.
£20m will be great value in Jan.
Free would be amazing next summer.
Sure based on how are purchases escalated as the season went on, perhaps.
But if one were to step back and view it safely, I'd say Sanchez was worth about 60 to 70 Million tops.
He is 2nd level superstar ( A rung below the Messi, Neymar Suarez, Ronaldp tier), then add the fact that he is 29, so at best 2 peak years and then may 3 declining but still good years left. So again you'd rank him fee wise below rising stars like Coutihno, Dembele" Isco and Lemar ( even if he is still currently better, he won't be in 2 years). So definitely worth less than 90 million. At best 80 million
Now add the fact he has one year left... You can split his fee by half conservatively, or perhaps even 1/3.. So we are talking somewhere between a good deal at 25 million to a slighly expensive deal at 40 million.
Anything above that, knowing all the facts seem insane.
I mean put differently, David Silva is on about the same level as Sanchez, perhaps a little older, but assuming City wanted to sell him with 2 years left on his contract. How much can we get?
My guess would be 30 million tops... So why would we pay doubme that for someone with even less time on his Contract and more dependent on his Athletism?
Don't get me wrong, teams pay these exorbitant fees every now and then, but more often than not they are mistakes..
This is a function of risk and not uncertainty ( to bring my freakonomics knowledge to bare :p)... These things should be easily calculateable.