It's Quiet Thread 15 - Txiki Blinders

[dhruvblue]

Hopefully just bollocks like those others too.

Sancho would be amazing for us, really don’t want him going to those cunts.

We cannot stop players from joining other teams. Amazing for us? We haven't been linked don't think he wants to join us not we look interested

 

[Legal Alien]

I would expect with Pep being so desperate for Kane that we won't drag our heels.

Do you think Pep really wants him, or is this City just biding their time to see what happens with Messi and Mbappe?

 

[BeerIsTheBest]

The rags must need empty seats filling for next season.
Looks like we're getting sancho to the red mardarses headline every year now.
Was sneijder for a few years, then Ronaldo for a few more, now it's sancho for about the 3rd year running.
Piss funny.

And other one which readers might find entertaining. There are only two players on the scums roster who were playing when GPC was manager. The doughnut thief and the face that is Phil. If doughnut boy exits who could have imagined that the last player standing from Slurgies reign would be the superhuman force, the reincarnation of Duncan Edwards.

 

[City_Sean]

Wonder if Villa signing Buendia means we could see some movement on Grealish?

 

[Saddleworth2]

Nobody gets him cheaper next season.
If his current cost exceeds market value then he is, in effect, not for sale currently.

If and when his total costs meets market value he will be sold.

Saying “we get him cheaper next summer” is nonsense because if you were willing to pay his current total cost (if he met your valuation) then the money would be in the table and contracts would be being drawn up.
But his total cost is greater than market value so he’s not for sale is he.
Thus, if his total cost reduces to meet market value (either by way if reduced up front fee, reduced salary demands, reduced bonuses arc.) then he will be sold - and you don’t save anything on what he would theoretically cost now because that’s theoretical and the actuality is that his current costs exceed market value so he is not for sale.

Conversely, returning to Haaland, he could blow everyone away at the Euro’s and his market value could rise to exceed his current costs, or football’s commercial incomes could treble (as example, but no it won’t happen) and Haaland's market value and costs go up so that he becomes affordable (effectively for sale) at a higher cost than is currently unaffordable (effectively not for sale).

Mate, I think you missed the ;-)

 

[Lkzerinho]

Wonder if Villa signing Buendia means we could see some movement on Grealish?

More of a Barkley replacement it sounds like

 

[big phil]

Think we should have a market value thread...

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Think we should have a market value thread...

There is no value in the market - Pisscan circa 2012

 

[supercity88]

The market value of any player is the maximum cost that any club values that player at for the intended period of engagement.

So if Messi is on a free but his market value is say £300M for a 3 year contract then he’ll be employed on that basis.
If there was an upfront fee, payable to Barca, of say £100M attached then, provided Messi was willing to take only £200M for those 3 years, his total cost would be £300M (his market value) and that’s what he’d go for.

I think maybe you’ve confused asking price with market value.
Asking price is what the selling club would be willing to take for a player whereas market value is what a buying club is willing to pay.
Thus, some asking prices mean that some players are actually not for sale.

A players total cost is the combination of all costs - up front fees, players salary over the period of the contract, agents fees, tea & coffee, etc.
Provided the total of all costs meets a players market value then the player will be sold.
If the combined costs exceed market value then the player is, in effect, not for sale.

Oh, and years left in a players contract do not effect a players market value. What it does effect is the contract holding clubs ability to set a price that makes the player not for sale.
That control diminishes as the contract runs down until there is no control at all at the terminal date of the contract.

Think about it this way.
In simple terms.

I’m selling a skateboard. It is definitely for sale because I’m selling it for £250 and people are will to pay £250 for it - that is what the market values it at.

I make a profit (my take)
It costs me £100 to buy the board + a £50 import fee so I make £100 on the deal.
Imagine that skateboard is a player and I’m his agent.
My import fee suddenly reduces to £25. Do I reduce the £250 price to £225 when the price the market is willing to pay (the market value) is £250?
Not on your effin’ nelly I don’t - I’m not mad, I’m in the business of making money, just like all the footballers and all the agents and all the clubs are.
My skateboard will still cost £250 because that’s what the market is willing to pay. The import fees are reduced by £25 and my take from the £250 goes up by £25 so I now make £125 rather than £100.
Only a total nob would sell a skateboard at less that the market would pay for it - reducing one part of the cost does not change the market value it just alters the split between me and those collecting the import duty.
The buyer pays the same market value because me making more money does not effect market value.

I haven't been on here much today but blimey the sun has got to some people. This is almost as much drivel as I read earlier from someone talking about how they didn't want Kane or Haaland...

Mate, take some time out and habe a think about things. If the above is how you conduct business then fine, but it isn't how it works.

Is your skateboard free next year? I'll wait until then to have it if so... or give you £150 now... does that help?

 

[Stoned Rose]

Think we should have a market value thread...

The Net Spend Trophy wants it's limelight back.