EPTBtw
Aaaaay lmao
2015 - 2016 Football Thread - Page 420
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
Faruko
Chile34171 Posts
Btw Aaaaay lmao | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On August 10 2016 13:27 nayumi wrote: But the shirt sale will make up for the absurd excess if you think about it..... In all seriousness, I think Utd did pay a lot for making a statement to the world that they can still get any top player that they want, and they have the pocket for it. Is Pogba's ability and recent performance really worth that much money? Perhaps not. But again a transfer deal comprises of other factors rather than the player's ability itself. It's like paying for a luxury sport car while anything on four wheels would probably take from from A to B anyway. Only time will tell though. But one thing for certain, in the end they're all businessmen and they wouldn't spend an absurd amount of money if it weren't likely to yield. The job of all of these fancy businessman isnt to make money in these instances, its simply to maintain the club as a going concern while spending money they dont have because of their purported worth, leveraging debt and shit. The yield is purely competitive, not financial. That has been the case for atleast 10 years now. | ||
|
Faruko
Chile34171 Posts
I dont even know what to tell you, but it is what it is, this is just like buying a smartphone, you see lesser know brands with top tier specs selling phones for about $300 dollars, then you see samsung selling their phones for over $700 dollar with the same specs Difference ? One is proven and it works, and the other is a gamble, it could end up being as good as the samsung phone, but maybe not... Are you willing to risk it ? thats your decision to take considering what could be on the line Pogba is a proven player (that is also young), sure, you could go for other lesser know player, that could actually end up being the next pogba, but what if he ends up being the next fellaini or marcos rojo ? Top tier teams almost never gamble on those kind of players, just like people with money will not gamble on a chinesse phone if they can get their hands on an iPhone or Samsung | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On August 11 2016 00:28 Faruko wrote: I mean, what united paid is pretty much on par with the figures people have been talking about top tier players for quite some time. I dont even know what to tell you, but it is what it is, this is just like buying a smartphone, you see lesser know brands with top tier specs selling phones for about $300 dollars, then you see samsung selling their phones for over $700 dollar with the same specs Difference ? One is proven and it works, and the other is a gamble, it could end up being as good as the samsung phone, but maybe not... Are you willing to risk it ? thats your decision to take considering what could be on the line Pogba is a proven player (that is also young), sure, you could go for other lesser know player, that could actually end up being the next pogba, but what if he ends up being the next fellaini or marcos rojo ? Top tier teams almost never gamble on those kind of players, just like people with money will not gamble on a chinesse phone if they can get their hands on an iPhone or Samsung Which is fine, but the issue is that the number keeps rising every year for no obvious reason. | ||
|
sneirac
Germany3464 Posts
Isn't it actually a surprisingly low increase when you compare it to how much bigger the newest TV contracts are? I thought the 120 million + Kroos deal was actually gonna happen. | ||
|
Faruko
Chile34171 Posts
But its incredible how fast its happening | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On August 11 2016 00:35 sneirac wrote: What do you mean for no apparent reason? Isn't it actually a surprisingly low increase when you compare it to how much bigger the newest TV contracts are? I thought the 120 million + Kroos deal was actually gonna happen. Yeah but more money to spend isnt really a good argument for lets spend more money. I get it, its just not a good one imo, its their money they can do what they want with it and get why, but its a very dangerous direction. Especially because really, lets be honest Pogba is a boss but has literally nothing on his resume in terms of actually being a winner. | ||
|
sneirac
Germany3464 Posts
On August 11 2016 00:39 Rebs wrote: Yeah but more money to spend isnt really a good argument for lets spend more money. I get it, its just not a good one imo, its their money they can do what they want with it and get why, but its a very dangerous direction. Especially because really, lets be honest Pogba is a boss but has literally nothing on his resume in terms of actually being a winner. Eh it is basic inflation. There is more money around therefore in order to get the equivalent relative value the amount is going up. I will agree on Pogba not being worth it, then again I already thought Bale was not worth as much so this doesn't surprise me either. | ||
|
TerransHill
Germany572 Posts
On August 11 2016 00:35 sneirac wrote: What do you mean for no apparent reason? Isn't it actually a surprisingly low increase when you compare it to how much bigger the newest TV contracts are? I thought the 120 million + Kroos deal was actually gonna happen. 120 million + Kroos? Was that actually a rumour? Kroos is only 3 years older and probably the better player. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18476 Posts
On August 11 2016 00:45 sneirac wrote: Eh it is basic inflation. There is more money around therefore in order to get the equivalent relative value the amount is going up. I will agree on Pogba not being worth it, then again I already thought Bale was not worth as much so this doesn't surprise me either. How is there more money around? | ||
|
sneirac
Germany3464 Posts
Isn't the 2016-19 Premier league TV deal 40% larger than the 2012-15 deal? 5.5 vs 3 billion per year or something. On August 11 2016 00:45 TerransHill wrote: 120 million + Kroos? Was that actually a rumour? Kroos is only 3 years older and probably the better player. I thhink it started as a rumour and became a meme very quickly. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On August 11 2016 00:57 zulu_nation8 wrote: If clubs have more money, they obviously will spend more of it since they are competing in a market of limited talent. Unless people are implying that they should be investing in other things like coaching or infrastructure, etc. Thats another thing that doesnt hold true anymore btw. Talent is not limited anymore. And more importantly everyone has access to talent especially on the continent. Arsenal became shit the day everyone else started drawing talent from the same sources Wenger was and his first mover advantage dissipated. The thing about all teams having access to all this talent and all we've learnt the last couple of year in terms of the valuation methods that are used is that really they often have no fucking clue what they are doing anymore than "Big Joe at the pub screaming at the telly." The variables are to extensive. If anything the greater access to talent is whats driving top teams to spend stupid amounts of cash on been there done that resources that are bankable form a performance perspective (in their minds) because they know smaller teams are gaining on them. Normally I've fallen on the side of let them do what they want as long as it makes sense but I expected there would be some sort of equilibrium eventually but now were in a situation where tripe digit millions and 300k a week is becoming regulation and thats not a sustainable model imo. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28695 Posts
I'm also very negative towards the development, but I don't see any way of fixing it unless fifa&uefa go together in establishing regulations in terms of transfer and salary caps, probably also more egalitarian tv deals. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
If you're talking about how scouting knowledge has progressed, in that every team with a decent scouting system will have heard of and seen any potentially talented youngster, unlike the old days when you needed connections and to know where to look, then that seems right. It would follow that greater knowledge leads to greater demand and hence rising prices. If the prices are not sustainable, then it will be the ultra rich teams who pay for it, and not the Sevillas and Portos. The fact they can hold out for higher and higher prices also has to do with how these CL 2nd/3rd seeded clubs don't need the money. There are really only three clubs who have spent far more than the rest in the last couple of years in terms of net transfer spend; Man City, Man Utd, and PSG. City and PSG have oil money, Utd is a public company that answers to shareholders. If they fail to qualify for CL then you can bet that there will be firesale and no more triple digit transfers. What the Chinese are doing actually seems unsustainable, and I highly doubt that their league will be much different in several years. But again, it's the selling clubs that benefit, the investors/buyers are taking the risk. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On August 11 2016 01:27 Liquid`Drone wrote: talent isn't limited, but proven world class players certainly are. There can only be 10 top 10 players at any given time, and as clubs become wealthier, these players become more expensive. I'm also very negative towards the development, but I don't see any way of fixing it unless fifa&uefa go together in establishing regulations in terms of transfer and salary caps, probably also more egalitarian tv deals. yeah but the fundamental problem is that with so many independent leagues they will probably not accept that sort of regulation from the governing body and really the governing bodies have fuck all incentives to do it aswell as absolutely no moral authority to regulate jack shit. Alot of the leverage is with the leagues and clubs anyway hence the FFP being pretty useless which I had some hopes for even if it wasnt going to fix anything it might have stymied the activity but that turned out to not work. + Show Spoiler + Points for trying though. | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
| ||
|
agenbola303
1 Post
| ||
|
nayumi
Australia6499 Posts
On August 11 2016 00:30 Rebs wrote: Which is fine, but the issue is that the number keeps rising every year for no obvious reason. The reason is pretty obvious. Clubs manage to make more money every year from television rights and sponsorship. ![[image loading]](http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/80917000/jpg/_80917618_rise_tvincome.jpg) More people are willing to spend (more) money to watch star players in the weekend, hence the clubs can afford to spend even more money on securing signings that are likely to attract more viewers. If Zidane were playing these days I wouldn't be surprised if Real would pay $200m for him. Football is still the most popular and arguably profitable sport in the world and I highly doubt it will change in the foreseeable future. And it has evolved beyond a mere sport event. It's not just football anymore, it's the Ronaldo vs Messi, the el classico, the London/Manchester derby, the overcoming CL curse .etc El Classico sure as hell attract more viewers worldwide ever since Real got Ronaldo. So it's a business now and those big fat businessmen know how much they get in return if they are to spend an absurd amount of initial investment more than we do, that's a fact. | ||
|
haitike
Spain2716 Posts
| ||
| ||
