General transfer rumours

warpig said:
Agreed. There was no way Aguero would have got into a position to make those two goals.

I read an article in the MEN just after I originally posted where Pep intimates he wants more from Sergio when he's not got the ball. I think that is what Pelligrini was getting at as well, albeit indirectly, when he said he could become the best player in the world (missing out the - if he applied himself more). In his defence Pep did said he may have been fatigued from the game in Romania, the same as ginger Kev. I thought he looked a bit over weight on Saturday as well.
Click to expand...
After the Nasri episode do you honestly believe Pep would have started him.Not a chance in hell.
 
Back to financials ;-)

SWP's back said:
No. It's a 66% devaluation. (45m less 66% is 15.3m). If we'd bought him for 15m and sold him for 45m it'd be a 300% increase though so your maths was sound, just the wrong way around. (It's impossible for something to devalue more than 100% unless we pay a club to take him).
Click to expand...

The base of 15m has trebled to 45m.
But wouldn't the increase (being 30m on top of 15m) rather be 200%?
 
St.Pauli support said:
Back to financials ;-)



The base of 15m has trebled to 45m.
But wouldn't the increase (being 30m on top of 15m) rather be 200%?
Click to expand...


After all these years of silent browsing I have logged back in just for this (lol) yes you are correct.It's an "increase"of 200% (which is 300% of the original value - 100%/15m + 200%/30m = 300%/45m)

Over and out until next time :) Sounds worse then what it is but I am always here watching lol

Edit: to show I was agreeing with st Pauli ( it read like I dis agreed)
 
St.Pauli support said:
Back to financials ;-)



The base of 15m has trebled to 45m.
But wouldn't the increase (being 30m on top of 15m) rather be 200%?
Click to expand...
Yes I see what you mean now on the wording of increase of 300%.

If I'd say we would get back 300% of what we paid, I'd have been correct but I'm not and you are.

I'm better at maths than English.
 
SWP's back said:
Yes I see what you mean now on the wording of increase of 300%.

If I'd say we would get back 300% of what we paid, I'd have been correct but I'm not and you are.

I'm better at maths than English.
Click to expand...

I think we all understand each other now.

I didn't log in to try and put anyone down or disprove anyone . The above was more me making a joke of my time between log ins. All in good faith.

It's more that I have only just remembered my password after only browsing for a long time and I thought I'd chuck my 50 pence in. Again no harm intended.
 
superman7 said:
I think we all understand each other now.

I didn't log in to try and put anyone down or disprove anyone . The above was more me making a joke of my time between log ins. All in good faith.

It's more that I have only just remembered my password after only browsing for a long time and I thought I'd chuck my 50 pence in. Again no harm intended.
Click to expand...
None taken. I thought everyone had gone mental for a moment.

This is why I like maths, there's no semantics (increase of 300% as opposed to up 300% etc) with numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.