BringBackSwales
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 33,650
Blue Coop said:
they both played well last night but then again so did our new boy Jerome Boateng - looked very comfortable on the ball for a big bloke playing out of position
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Mesut Özil
- Thread starter Cheadle Blue
- Start date
they both played well last night but then again so did our new boy Jerome Boateng - looked very comfortable on the ball for a big bloke playing out of position
bluemoon32
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 24,722
- Team supported
- City
BringBackSwales said:Blue Coop said:Lahm was my MotM tonight, he is quality.
Nice goal from Ozil.
they both played well last night but then again so did our new boy Jerome Boateng - looked very comfortable on the ball for a big bloke playing out of position
He did, i thought he did well but left back certainly isn't the position i'd hope we played him
BringBackSwales
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 33,650
bluemoon32 said:BringBackSwales said:they both played well last night but then again so did our new boy Jerome Boateng - looked very comfortable on the ball for a big bloke playing out of position
He did, i thought he did well but left back certainly isn't the position i'd hope we played him
agreed; after what I saw last night I think he could be our right back of choice - most people seemed to think he was mainly CB but to me he looked so comfortable coming forward that I could see him as RB. Nice to know we have the flexibility that tactically or due to injury he could go LB too<br /><br />-- Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:39 am --<br /><br />The other thing is that so many people on here are bollocking City for not signing him - it just occurs to me that if people on here are saying how good he is then the chances are so are fans of all other big/rich clubs and therefore maybe signing such super-talented youngsters is not quite as easy as all the KA's on here think it is?
Oasis_City
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2009
- Messages
- 2,205
BringBackSwales said:bluemoon32 said:He did, i thought he did well but left back certainly isn't the position i'd hope we played him
agreed; after what I saw last night I think he could be our right back of choice - most people seemed to think he was mainly CB but to me he looked so comfortable coming forward that I could see him as RB. Nice to know we have the flexibility that tactically or due to injury he could go LB too
-- Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:39 am --
The other thing is that so many people on here are bollocking City for not signing him - it just occurs to me that if people on here are saying how good he is then the chances are so are fans of all other big/rich clubs and therefore maybe signing such super-talented youngsters is not quite as easy as all the KA's on here think it is?
Including Boateng himself.
BringBackSwales
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 33,650
Oasis_City said:BringBackSwales said:agreed; after what I saw last night I think he could be our right back of choice - most people seemed to think he was mainly CB but to me he looked so comfortable coming forward that I could see him as RB. Nice to know we have the flexibility that tactically or due to injury he could go LB too
-- Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:39 am --
The other thing is that so many people on here are bollocking City for not signing him - it just occurs to me that if people on here are saying how good he is then the chances are so are fans of all other big/rich clubs and therefore maybe signing such super-talented youngsters is not quite as easy as all the KA's on here think it is?
Including Boateng himself.
I was not saying otherwise, my point was that notwihstanding this he may have to play at RB AND he may actually be good at it
Tevez City
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 May 2010
- Messages
- 13,793
NewbBlue said:Is there some reason we have not offered 40 million for this guy?
If Milner is worth 30, certainly this man is cheap at 40.
Make Ozil, if he doesn't want to come, turn down one of the highest salaries in the world. He's 21, he'd be speechless by a salary of 7 million.
7 million salary is too much for Ozil , but hey ! we are paying over the odds anyway
avoidconfusion
Well-Known Member
LoveCity said:If we're signing Milner and Silva, surely we won't be signing Ozil too? Unless we plan to clear out Bellers, SWP, and Ireland?
If we could get Oezil I wouldn't mind if Bellers, SWP and Ireland go.
What is it with people and Milner?
It seems that, once again, my opinion on a player is completely at odds with most of the forum.
Personally, I think that 'worth' is such a stupid platitude that journalists, and now fans, use to justify their own opinion on a player.
A player is 'worth' whatever somebody pays for them. In fact, in a market where prices are decided by two parties, and the goods exchanged are in themselves variable, the only possible way to determine worth is by looking at the price.
There are several reasons why Milner is worth £100m and several reasons why he is worth £10k. Firstly, Villa have an asset on their books that brings three major benefits to them; merchandising, sponsorship, and finally, playing ability. The only people in the world who know how much Milner is worth, is Randy Lerner and his accountants. Not Bluemoon posters, not O'Neill, not Martin fucking Samuel, just Lerner himself. He knows what he brings into the club in both terms of attracting sponsors and prestige, and also knows what he brings to the team after advice from the man who he appointed to run that side of his business, O'Neill.
He has obviously been given the advice that he is a very important member of the squad and is therefore almost irreplaceable. After consulting with his accounts, and taking this into consideration, he has decided that he will ask for a £30m fee.
Now, that is his value by Villa. His worth is decided whether City believe that he is equal in value to £30m sitting in their account. As we have (as a complete guess), £300m sitting in our coffers, is James Milner equal to the value of 10% of our liquid assets? I would personally say so. He is a relatively young player, who can play in numerous positions (to varying successes), he is English which will possibly be important for future rules, he knows the league, he is currently in the England team which is big attractions to both current and potential sponsors , he seems quite a likeable guy in interviews (again, helps with sponsors, but also with the image of the club), he has been playing in the Prem since he was 15 (marketing hook), etc, etc.
If we had £50m sitting in our coffers, would he be worth 60% of our liquid assets? I don't think so. Messi would be, due to his large worldwide profile, his huge marketing and sponsorship machine, his respectful demeanour, his internationally recognised quality and his great prestige. He'd be worth anywhere up to about 75% of our liquid assets to me, so in Milner terms, I'd pay up to about £225m for him. Cook might see him as worth 50%, or 26.667254832% or whatever, which is how we determine what price to bid.
This is how worth works. It's a scale. This is why clubs like Wigan have a good business model. They buy in players that take up 25% of their budget, them sell them to Spurs for 25% of THEIR budget. Both parties have now felt that they have a good deal.
You can't look at worth as a monetary figure like that. Johnson cost us £8m, Ronaldo cost £80m. Does that make Ronaldo TEN TIMES the player of Johnson? No, of course not. Think about that, as it is an overused saying - ten times the player. Is he TEN TIMES better than him? I wouldn't think so. I wouldn't think Ronaldo is TEN times better than me, and I'm shit.
We need to stop with this stupid shit about comparing transfer values of players, it doesn't work and makes people look like an idiot.
It seems that, once again, my opinion on a player is completely at odds with most of the forum.
Personally, I think that 'worth' is such a stupid platitude that journalists, and now fans, use to justify their own opinion on a player.
A player is 'worth' whatever somebody pays for them. In fact, in a market where prices are decided by two parties, and the goods exchanged are in themselves variable, the only possible way to determine worth is by looking at the price.
There are several reasons why Milner is worth £100m and several reasons why he is worth £10k. Firstly, Villa have an asset on their books that brings three major benefits to them; merchandising, sponsorship, and finally, playing ability. The only people in the world who know how much Milner is worth, is Randy Lerner and his accountants. Not Bluemoon posters, not O'Neill, not Martin fucking Samuel, just Lerner himself. He knows what he brings into the club in both terms of attracting sponsors and prestige, and also knows what he brings to the team after advice from the man who he appointed to run that side of his business, O'Neill.
He has obviously been given the advice that he is a very important member of the squad and is therefore almost irreplaceable. After consulting with his accounts, and taking this into consideration, he has decided that he will ask for a £30m fee.
Now, that is his value by Villa. His worth is decided whether City believe that he is equal in value to £30m sitting in their account. As we have (as a complete guess), £300m sitting in our coffers, is James Milner equal to the value of 10% of our liquid assets? I would personally say so. He is a relatively young player, who can play in numerous positions (to varying successes), he is English which will possibly be important for future rules, he knows the league, he is currently in the England team which is big attractions to both current and potential sponsors , he seems quite a likeable guy in interviews (again, helps with sponsors, but also with the image of the club), he has been playing in the Prem since he was 15 (marketing hook), etc, etc.
If we had £50m sitting in our coffers, would he be worth 60% of our liquid assets? I don't think so. Messi would be, due to his large worldwide profile, his huge marketing and sponsorship machine, his respectful demeanour, his internationally recognised quality and his great prestige. He'd be worth anywhere up to about 75% of our liquid assets to me, so in Milner terms, I'd pay up to about £225m for him. Cook might see him as worth 50%, or 26.667254832% or whatever, which is how we determine what price to bid.
This is how worth works. It's a scale. This is why clubs like Wigan have a good business model. They buy in players that take up 25% of their budget, them sell them to Spurs for 25% of THEIR budget. Both parties have now felt that they have a good deal.
You can't look at worth as a monetary figure like that. Johnson cost us £8m, Ronaldo cost £80m. Does that make Ronaldo TEN TIMES the player of Johnson? No, of course not. Think about that, as it is an overused saying - ten times the player. Is he TEN TIMES better than him? I wouldn't think so. I wouldn't think Ronaldo is TEN times better than me, and I'm shit.
We need to stop with this stupid shit about comparing transfer values of players, it doesn't work and makes people look like an idiot.
Damocles said:What is it with people and Milner?
It seems that, once again, my opinion on a player is completely at odds with most of the forum.
Personally, I think that 'worth' is such a stupid platitude that journalists, and now fans, use to justify their own opinion on a player.
A player is 'worth' whatever somebody pays for them. In fact, in a market where prices are decided by two parties, and the goods exchanged are in themselves variable, the only possible way to determine worth is by looking at the price.
There are several reasons why Milner is worth £100m and several reasons why he is worth £10k. Firstly, Villa have an asset on their books that brings three major benefits to them; merchandising, sponsorship, and finally, playing ability. The only people in the world who know how much Milner is worth, is Randy Lerner and his accountants. Not Bluemoon posters, not O'Neill, not Martin fucking Samuel, just Lerner himself. He knows what he brings into the club in both terms of attracting sponsors and prestige, and also knows what he brings to the team after advice from the man who he appointed to run that side of his business, O'Neill.
He has obviously been given the advice that he is a very important member of the squad and is therefore almost irreplaceable. After consulting with his accounts, and taking this into consideration, he has decided that he will ask for a £30m fee.
Now, that is his value by Villa. His worth is decided whether City believe that he is equal in value to £30m sitting in their account. As we have (as a complete guess), £300m sitting in our coffers, is James Milner equal to the value of 10% of our liquid assets? I would personally say so. He is a relatively young player, who can play in numerous positions (to varying successes), he is English which will possibly be important for future rules, he knows the league, he is currently in the England team which is big attractions to both current and potential sponsors , he seems quite a likeable guy in interviews (again, helps with sponsors, but also with the image of the club), he has been playing in the Prem since he was 15 (marketing hook), etc, etc.
If we had £50m sitting in our coffers, would he be worth 60% of our liquid assets? I don't think so. Messi would be, due to his large worldwide profile, his huge marketing and sponsorship machine, his respectful demeanour, his internationally recognised quality and his great prestige. He'd be worth anywhere up to about 75% of our liquid assets to me, so in Milner terms, I'd pay up to about £225m for him. Cook might see him as worth 50%, or 26.667254832% or whatever, which is how we determine what price to bid.
This is how worth works. It's a scale. This is why clubs like Wigan have a good business model. They buy in players that take up 25% of their budget, them sell them to Spurs for 25% of THEIR budget. Both parties have now felt that they have a good deal.
You can't look at worth as a monetary figure like that. Johnson cost us £8m, Ronaldo cost £80m. Does that make Ronaldo TEN TIMES the player of Johnson? No, of course not. Think about that, as it is an overused saying - ten times the player. Is he TEN TIMES better than him? I wouldn't think so. I wouldn't think Ronaldo is TEN times better than me, and I'm shit.
We need to stop with this stupid shit about comparing transfer values of players, it doesn't work and makes people look like an idiot.
Worth the read that !!;)