Players wages affecting transfers

[daztrueblue91]

I have said this about 10 times tonight in regards to the AJ transfer, his wages should not come into consideration when considering the fee we sell him for. City did not want rid as we were happy to keep him but his playing time was limited therefore he was the one who wanted to leave. Why should we then sell a useful asset for a reduced price because of his wage when he wants out. Its crazy and no other club would do this although I dont think we got totally ripped off with the transfer I still think we should been recieving a minimum 15 mil leading to a possibly 20 with add ons when you consider he is a current England international, is only 25 and seems to be highly rated by every person who aint a City fan. Adebayor was different as we wanted rid of him so in some capacity due to his very high wage we had to take a hit. I am just trying to point out that we need to start selling our players for their true worth and playing hardball if a player wants out of City then they must take a pay cut or stay simple as that.

 

[johnmc]

City didn't want rid?? Of course we did.

 

[daztrueblue91]

City didn't want rid?? Of course we did.

We would of used him if he stayed though, As Mancini said if AJ wanted to stay and fight he could of. Put it this way do you think City tried to force AJ out?

 

[johnmc]

City didn't want rid?? Of course we did.

We would of used him if he stayed though, As Mancini said if AJ wanted to stay and fight he could of. Put it this way do you think City tried to force AJ out?

I don't think we were bothered seeing the back of him no. What do you think his value is? Just say we only get half of the add ons that's £12.5m. How much more is he worth.

 

[Marvin]

Big loss. May not be an automatic starter but always has an impact on a game.

I don't think we wanted to lose him either and only sold him because he was unhappy. I'd have thought we'd have been able to get £15m plus. Sunderland got him on the cheap. This time last season they paid £9m for Connor Whickham

 

[daztrueblue91]

City didn't want rid?? Of course we did.

We would of used him if he stayed though, As Mancini said if AJ wanted to stay and fight he could of. Put it this way do you think City tried to force AJ out?

I don't think we were bothered seeing the back of him no. What do you think his value is? Just say we only get half of the add ons that's £12.5m. How much more is he worth.

I agree with that and said a minimum 15 million would of been a good deal, we signed Rodwell for a similar price to want we sold AJ for and AJ is a much more developed player than Rodwell. Also AJ was back up for the Champions and Rodwell was back up for a mid table team so surely you can see my point. Bedsides I am only pointing out that in no circumstances should AJ's wage affecte the transfer fee like other posters have been saying.<br /><br />-- Sun Aug 26, 2012 12:30 am --<br /><br />

Big loss. May not be an automatic starter but always has an impact on a game.

I don't think we wanted to lose him either and only sold him because he was unhappy. I'd have thought we'd have been able to get £15m plus. Sunderland got him on the cheap. This time last season they paid £9m for Connor Whickham

Finally someone who understands, If AJ wanted to leave because he was unhappy then he should of been the one to take a pay cut so we get maximum value for him not the other way round.

 

[dctid]

We would of used him if he stayed though, As Mancini said if AJ wanted to stay and fight he could of. Put it this way do you think City tried to force AJ out?

I don't think we were bothered seeing the back of him no. What do you think his value is? Just say we only get half of the add ons that's £12.5m. How much more is he worth.

I agree with that and said a minimum 15 million would of been a good deal, we signed Rodwell for a similar price to want we sold AJ for and AJ is a much more developed player than Rodwell. Also AJ was back up for the Champions and Rodwell was back up for a mid table team so surely you can see my point. Bedsides I am only pointing out that in no circumstances should AJ's wage affecte the transfer fee like other posters have been saying.

Any transfer fee is determined by how any one club are prepared to buy any given player for

We dont know what the offers were and then there were no doubt other consideration like to we want one of our players going to a team like Liverpool

A players wage DOES impact the transfer fee - the higher the wage the smaller the number of clubs whom can afford that player and if none of those clubs are interested then you have to price accordingly

 

[johnmc]

Yes but surely you understand there is a city tax. You could argue Rodwell has more potential to improve or you could argue Johnson is more rounded and experienced. Either way we have in effect swapped one for the other so we will see who gets the better deal. You could look at the Moses deal and think he has shown more promise than Johnson did so to get more than what he went or isn't bad business.

Wages wise we obviously have to take it into consideration otherwise players we dont want would just sit here on big contracts not really caring when they come in for the odd game or a few sub appearances. We can't have an infinite number of players so we have to get rid of a few players for a bit less than market value especially when Sunderland were probably the highest bidders. We either sell at their max bid or keep them for keeping thems sake and not being able to bring others in.

 

[daztrueblue91]

Do other clubs take that approach with us DCTID? do they balls they will try and fleece us for every penny they can. Sunderland will have a pay structure and will know whether or not they can afford AJ in the first place and if AJ was willing to put his career before money as it has been constantly reported then he would have taken a pay cut. The fact Fletcher went for more than AJ is bad business which ever way people try to dress it up.<br /><br />-- Sun Aug 26, 2012 12:49 am --<br /><br />

Yes but surely you understand there is a city tax. You could argue Rodwell has more potential to improve or you could argue Johnson is more rounded and experienced. Either way we have in effect swapped one for the other so we will see who gets the better deal. You could look at the Moses deal and think he has shown more promise than Johnson did so to get more than what he went or isn't bad business.

Wages wise we obviously have to take it into consideration otherwise players we dont want would just sit here on big contracts not really caring when they come in for the odd game or a few sub appearances. We can't have an infinite number of players so we have to get rid of a few players for a bit less than market value especially when Sunderland were probably the highest bidders. We either sell at their max bid or keep them for keeping thems sake and not being able to bring others in.

Its time there wasn't a city tax though, and i do understand your views and can see where you are coming from and tend to agree with a lot of it however looking at the AJ situation if we would have signed Hazard I would agree we would of wanted rid but signing Sinclair is not really an upgrade IMO and the fact he remained an active player for us suggests we should of got full market value for him.

 

[johnmc]

The addition £5m will be achievable though, it will be appearance based and I presume and maybe Sunderland staying in the prem. It's not like it will only be triggered if Sunderland win something as we wouldn't agree to that.

Therefore this is pretty much a £15m fee as long as he stays fit I would say which is what people are saying his true value is. So not much to moan about.

Doubt many would say he is worth more than £15m

 

[dctid]

Do other clubs take that approach with us DCTID? do they balls they will try and fleece us for every penny they can. Sunderland will have a pay structure and will know whether or not they can afford AJ in the first place and if AJ was willing to put his career before money as it has been constantly reported then he would have taken a pay cut. The fact Fletcher went for more than AJ is bad business which ever way people try to dress it up.

I doubt Fletcher was earning anything near the 80K a week and doubt he will be earining anything near 80K at his new club

If we as a club are preared to pay superstar wages for a good solid yet squad player then the problems are of our own making - Scott Sinclair wont be on more than 10K a week at SWansea and AJ is NOT 8 yimes better than SS

I have posted several times i would have kept AJ BUT once the club decided they wanted to sell him then they have to get the best deal they can - the alternative is too keep an unhappy player and let him run his contract down and go for next too fuck all

We played hard ball over Tevez because we did not get a deal we though acceptable - we got a deal for AJ we deemed to be acceotable and in view of his replacement probably being on less than 50% of what AJ was and we sold AJ for more than we bought him for then it probably explains the transfer fee

 

[yerwot?]

the lad seems unable to add to his game, is no better than when he came.
it's pointless comparing transfer fees as the actual details are rarely in the public domain, for various reasons.

 

[waspish]

Why did Ade go for 5m? When for me he's a 20m player?

 

[moomba]

Why did Ade go for 5m? When for me he's a 20m player?

Because no club was prepared to pay £20m for him and if no-one buys him he stays at our club picking up his wages.

 

[bluethai]

And then City just paid most if not all of Ade's wages in advance + discount price for just to get rid of him. ;)

 

[bgblue]

Why did Ade go for 5m? When for me he's a 20m player?

I think it's due to him taking a pay cut fro 170k to 100k a week, he insisted on a 5mill signing on fee from spurs. City wanted rid, so they must've thought it was in the clubs interest to sell for 5mill and save 170k a week for the next 3years.

 

[Akira]

City didn't want rid?? Of course we did.

We would of used him if he stayed though, As Mancini said if AJ wanted to stay and fight he could of. Put it this way do you think City tried to force AJ out?

AJ was the one who wanted out. Someone came calling with 15m, so we went like, "Why the hell not?" It's simple as that.

 

[S04]

Why did Ade go for 5m? When for me he's a 20m player?

I think it's due to him taking a pay cut fro 170k to 100k a week, he insisted on a 5mill signing on fee from spurs. City wanted rid, so they must've thought it was in the clubs interest to sell for 5mill and save 170k a week for the next 3years.

They say it was a £4m sign on fee paid by Spurs to be exact..But as we had a £4m loan fee from spurs the previous season you could argue that in toto we got £9m for him I guess.

 

[bgblue]

Why did Ade go for 5m? When for me he's a 20m player?

I think it's due to him taking a pay cut fro 170k to 100k a week, he insisted on a 5mill signing on fee from spurs. City wanted rid, so they must've thought it was in the clubs interest to sell for 5mill and save 170k a week for the next 3years.

They say it was a £4m sign on fee paid by Spurs to be exact..But as we had a £4m loan fee from spurs the previous season you could argue that in toto we got £9m for him I guess.

How does the loan fee work then? If spurs paid us 4mill fee, do we still pay his wages or do they?

 

[S04]

I think it's due to him taking a pay cut fro 170k to 100k a week, he insisted on a 5mill signing on fee from spurs. City wanted rid, so they must've thought it was in the clubs interest to sell for 5mill and save 170k a week for the next 3years.

They say it was a £4m sign on fee paid by Spurs to be exact..But as we had a £4m loan fee from spurs the previous season you could argue that in toto we got £9m for him I guess.

How does the loan fee work then? If spurs paid us 4mill fee, do we still pay his wages or do they?

Spurs paid Adebayor a £4m signing on fee, in return for getting Adebayor dirt cheap, we get his wages of the books..