John Terry [Merged]

[felixbg]

Spot on post Dyed Petya,,,, I was gonna write the exact same thing...

lol made me chuckle

 

[Anonymous]

Dyed Petya you do bring up a few intersting points but:

What your argument is basically boils down to is that City can offer Terry much more money and Chelsea can't/won't be able to match that offer or even come near it. I don't think anyone debates the fact that City can offer more money in wages than any club in the world right now.

Nothing against Cook but you make him look like he invented business and everybody else was living in dark ages until MCFC chief executive arrived on the scene and enlightened the savages about the use of wages and image rights in modern football.

City are in a position to offer Terry or any other player the kind of terms that blow away any competition for one reason only: your new owners are able and willing to pay way more than any other club would. Your pulling power has little to do with Cook,Umbro or especially City finances and standing as a club since even with your "real' budget you were losing money.

I speak from the personal experience as a Chelsea fan since we've been doing similar thing only several years ago but it never occured to me to suggest that it was Peter Kenyon's expertise rather than Roman's big pocket that allowed us to assemble one of the best squads in Europe.

The point which Dyed Petya was making, and one which Garry Cook has made several times over the last 12 months, is that football isn't in the same league as the NBA or the NFL when it comes to wages...and this is directly linked to the amount of income those sports generate from image rights...

Therefore, you can go to a whole new level with wages in football, if you can tap into similar image rights and marketing income as the American sports do...

Garry Cook knows this from his overseeing of the Jordan brand. And this expertise will be used to ensure that both now, and once the club is successful on the field, that we are not simply pissing money at the wall, but finding ways to generate it back.

 

[bornblueegg]

Re:

Enjoyed reading that as an article and the numbers are a bit scary when you start talking of the amount of earnings possible. The argument about Chelsea not being able to offer the same are a little weak in my opinion however I am not an expert on image rights and its complexities.

Doesnt the bottom line in all this rely on the fact that we get to talk turkey with the actual player to state our case and then let him decide on the best option for him and his future.

There were two reasons behind my assessment of our having an advantage with regard to image rights payments. Firstly, I think that Cook has an expertise in this area that not many other people have in the world, and I doubt if any of them is working in football. The other thing we have going for us is that our owners at present will be willing effectively to take a punt on his abilities and pledge big money to players for their image rights knowing that they can meet the payments even if we fall short. Maybe I'm over-stating our advantage and even if we have one now, it certainly won't last for ever.

With regard to us talking to Terry - I think if he insists on talking to us officially, then he's finished at Chelsea. But even before then, I have no doubt he knows exactly what we'll offer him and exactly why we think he'd be advised to join us. There will be lines of communication open. He may end up not joining us, but it won't be because we couldn't make a sales pitch.

Dyed Petya, excellent informative post. Thanks! One thing I'll add relates to the comparison of US sports salaries and football salaries. It should not be forgotten that US professional sports teams do not pay any "transfer fees". The deals are done via player "trades" i.e. swapping players between teams (sometimes there may be a chain of teams and you could have 3 or 4 way trades), and through "free agency" which is basically like the Bosman rule. A player out of contract can move away for free. The money that isn't spent "buying" players, is available for salaries.

The player trades and free agency point (i.e lack of transfer fees) pushing up wages is a fair one, actually. I forgot about that! In football, some Bosman players do end up picking up very big salaries for this reason - Ballack at Chelsea, I guess, and Eto'o probably if he stays the next year at Barca.

I think with Terry, if he joined, our owners would be prepared to regard the fee - vast as it will be - as a kind of investment to show everyone we mean business.

____________________________

PS - Thanks to various people for your kind words. Don't have time to write individual replies!

Fair play mate it now makes sense, thank you

 

[Dyed Petya]

I am not sure who raised the issue of this Public statement from John Terry but the papers all seem to be expecting it.

If Terry's silence continues for much longer it will get very difficult for Chelsea to manage the situation. Appears that they are making strenuous efforts to get him to commit to the club - possibly through an improved contract offer - if that doesn't happen soon, surely he will be on his way?

As far as I can see, it came from a story in the Telegraph earlier on. Maybe there's something before that, but that was the first thing I saw. It made three claims:

1. Terry has agreed "in principle" to stay with Chelsea.

2. Negotiations will take place when they get back from the USA over a new contract for Terry with Chelsea.

3. "Chelsea are expecting" that Terry will make a public announcement soon (presumably one which is positive from their point of view).

4. Didier Drogba says that: "[Chelsea] know he's going to stay with us and win more trophies".

On which I'd comment as follows:

1. I'm a lawyer and I know what a binding agreement is. If he's agreed "in principle", then presumably he's said he'll stay if things are resolved to his satisfaction. They may not be. So no "agreement" at all then, more a vague and conditional statement of intent which is worth nothing.

2. I wish I could have a hundred quid for all the negotiations I've been involved with that haven't come off. And what happens if they don't? Presumably Terry leaves.

3. Are Chelsea expecting it? Or are they saying that they do so that if it doesn't happen, they can paint Terry as the bad guy - i.e. "He told us he would and he hasn't? Mr Chelsea? Pah!". And even if they're "expecting" it, we don't know why. Presumably he hasn't told him that he definitely will, or this would be phrased more conclusively.

4. Drogba is telling us this, as is everyone else at Chelsea. Except Terry. Oh, and Lampard, the one player at Chelsea one might expect above all to know what Terry may be thinking.

I don't think it's definite that Terry will come to City at all. I think his preference would be to stay at Chelsea if he were offered the right financial package and if other frustrations he has there can be resolved. But, for reasons I've already stated at length, I question whether they will be able to offer a financial package that's acceptable in the light of what I expect we will be offering.

All up in the air, then. The only thing I'd say is that it would be a mistake to underestimate our chances at this point. Seems to me we're very definitely still in the game.

 

[hgblue]

I am not sure who raised the issue of this Public statement from John Terry but the papers all seem to be expecting it.

If Terry's silence continues for much longer it will get very difficult for Chelsea to manage the situation. Appears that they are making strenuous efforts to get him to commit to the club - possibly through an improved contract offer - if that doesn't happen soon, surely he will be on his way?

As far as I can see, it came from a story in the Telegraph earlier on. Maybe there's something before that, but that was the first thing I saw. It made three claims:

1. Terry has agreed "in principle" to stay with Chelsea.

2. Negotiations will take place when they get back from the USA over a new contract for Terry with Chelsea.

3. "Chelsea are expecting" that Terry will make a public announcement soon (presumably one which is positive from their point of view).

4. Didier Drogba says that: "[Chelsea] know he's going to stay with us and win more trophies".

On which I'd comment as follows:

1. I'm a lawyer and I know what a binding agreement is. If he's agreed "in principle", then presumably he's said he'll stay if things are resolved to his satisfaction. They may not be. So no "agreement" at all then, more a vague and conditional statement of intent which is worth nothing.

2. I wish I could have a hundred quid for all the negotiations I've been involved with that haven't come off. And what happens if they don't? Presumably Terry leaves.

3. Are Chelsea expecting it? Or are they saying that they do so that if it doesn't happen, they can paint Terry as the bad guy - i.e. "He told us he would and he hasn't? Mr Chelsea? Pah!". And even if they're "expecting" it, we don't know why. Presumably he hasn't told him that he definitely will, or this would be phrased more conclusively.

4. Drogba is telling us this, as is everyone else at Chelsea. Except Terry. Oh, and Lampard, the one player at Chelsea one might expect above all to know what Terry may be thinking.

I don't think it's definite that Terry will come to City at all. I think his preference would be to stay at Chelsea if he were offered the right financial package and if other frustrations he has there can be resolved. But, for reasons I've already stated at length, I question whether they will be able to offer a financial package that's acceptable in the light of what I expect we will be offering.

All up in the air, then. The only thing I'd say is that it would be a mistake to underestimate our chances at this point. Seems to me we're very definitely still in the game.

How important would you reckon the Umbro link is in all this? How much influence can they bring to bear?

 

[TedLoonBlue]

Let me get this right Dyed Petya , let's just say ( all figures hypothetical )

We sign JT for £40m

Pay him £10m a year for five years plus £6m image rights

That's a total of £120m

Over the five year contract MCFC take in £150m for JT's image rights

MCFC make a £30m profit by sighing him. Plus the cash from winning the CL three years on the bounce

 

[rushts]

Dyed Petya you do bring up a few intersting points but:

What your argument is basically boils down to is that City can offer Terry much more money and Chelsea can't/won't be able to match that offer or even come near it. I don't think anyone debates the fact that City can offer more money in wages than any club in the world right now.

Nothing against Cook but you make him look like he invented business and everybody else was living in dark ages until MCFC chief executive arrived on the scene and enlightened the savages about the use of wages and image rights in modern football.

City are in a position to offer Terry or any other player the kind of terms that blow away any competition for one reason only: your new owners are able and willing to pay way more than any other club would. Your pulling power has little to do with Cook,Umbro or especially City finances and standing as a club since even with your "real' budget you were losing money.

I speak from the personal experience as a Chelsea fan since we've been doing similar thing only several years ago but it never occured to me to suggest that it was Peter Kenyon's expertise rather than Roman's big pocket that allowed us to assemble one of the best squads in Europe.

stop droning on the highlighted text is where you could (and should)have stopped.

 

[baldybouncer]

Let me get this right Dyed Petya , let's just say ( all figures hypothetical )

We sign JT for £40m

Pay him £10m a year for five years plus £6m image rights

That's a total of £120m

Over the five year contract MCFC take in £150m for JT's image rights

MCFC make a £30m profit by sighing him. Plus the cash from winning the CL three years on the bounce

Ha ha loon by name, loon by nature :)

 

[Dyed Petya]

Dyed Petya you do bring up a few intersting points but:

What your argument is basically boils down to is that City can offer Terry much more money and Chelsea can't/won't be able to match that offer or even come near it. I don't think anyone debates the fact that City can offer more money in wages than any club in the world right now.

Nothing against Cook but you make him look like he invented business and everybody else was living in dark ages until MCFC chief executive arrived on the scene and enlightened the savages about the use of wages and image rights in modern football.

City are in a position to offer Terry or any other player the kind of terms that blow away any competition for one reason only: your new owners are able and willing to pay way more than any other club would. Your pulling power has little to do with Cook,Umbro or especially City finances and standing as a club since even with your "real' budget you were losing money.

I speak from the personal experience as a Chelsea fan since we've been doing similar thing only several years ago but it never occured to me to suggest that it was Peter Kenyon's expertise rather than Roman's big pocket that allowed us to assemble one of the best squads in Europe.

I'd respond with two points:

1. I'm not saying that football was in the dark ages before Cook. What I'm saying is that the commercial exploitation of image rights (and other commercial issues) in football is and has always been a long, long way behind American sports in terms of sophistication. Garry Cook has basically made his career in this area in America, and he's the only person (at least as far as I know, and I follow these things because it's my job to follow them) who has. That makes City much bolder in terms of what they'll offer through image rights.

2. In offering the wages that blow everyone else out of the water, City (in contrast with Chelsea when Abramovich arrived) do have a strategy to make at least a decent chunk on it back. And it's not a muddle-headed, aspirational and pie-in-the-sky idea either: it revolves round using demonstrable and fairly rare expertise we have in house. Now, it may work out that we recoup smoe or all of the money or it may not: all kinds of strategies that seem fairly sensible fail for all kinds of reasons, in football and in life. But it remains that City are trying to implement a more aggressive approach in this area that, so far at least, has been tried in football maybe only by advisers to Brand Beckham.

 

[Dyed Petya]

How important would you reckon the Umbro link is in all this? How much influence can they bring to bear?

I'm a lawyer so don't expect a straight answer. ;)

It's helpful, but not conclusive.