The Banter Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Azza said:
Porto the transfer market kings.


BK-AnMQCUAAJf-n.jpg:large
Click to expand...

:eek: seems so, some of their buys then to sell them on for outrageous fees is nothing short of remarkable.

Wonder what Arsenals table would look like, we seem to buy players cheap them sell them on for good money
 
Keep in mind Porto often gets little of not any part of the profit because of the way they bring people in. You have a situation where a player ends up entirely owned by a investment group, then they finance a deal for the purchase by Porto, they give Porto £5mil, and then have them pay £5mil for the player they own, then they subsidise the wages of said player, and put them in the european shop window. Then that player, say Falcao, cost to Athletico for £40mil. But that money goes to the investment group, and (supposedly in this case) came from the investment group as well. IE they again give Athletico a crapload of money, to pay for the transfer which just goes back to themselves.

Then Falcao goes where ever he goes for £60mil, but to a club with the £60mil, and they take full ownership of Falcao and the investment group gets the majority of that £60mil.

So all in all, Porto aren't making much profit most likely, and the appearingly increasing value is largely to pump up the price of the player(remember most of the money for these transfers comes from the investment group, they are almost artificially raising the price of the player).

Falcao could have gone to Porto for £5mil, atletico for £5mil then you'd have a hard job convincing someone he's worth £60mil. By bumping his price to Atletico he suddenly becomes a £40mil player, who wins a title and does well so gets to be bought for more the next transfer.

Buying low and selling high from Porto is just part of the tactic to raise the value of a player for his eventual huge move that is all profit.
 
It is only banned in England I think.

That's why West Ham were fined over Tevez and Mascherano, they were owned by a third party company who "sold" them to West Ham to raise their profile and be sold on for a huge profit again.
 
Biz.Kid09 said:
It is only banned in England I think.

That's why West Ham were fined over Tevez and Mascherano, they were owned by a third party company who "sold" them to West Ham to raise their profile and be sold on for a huge profit again.
Click to expand...

Yup, no one else cares, and I have no idea why the EPL gives a crap about it. In generally I think the idea is that 3rd party ownership leaves a player vunerable to being influenced to throw games and the like, but one, that assumes the player is happy to break the law and in generally you shouldn't make rules based on assuming people will break them, and players owned by one team have cheated and been involved in game fixing anyway, there is nothing to suggest 3rd party ownership increases the likelyhood of game fixing.

Infact considering the guys who get involved with guys like Falcao's entire investment is in getting a huge pay off for a huge move, thats where the money is. Making 60mil on one match of betting would be so obvious its a joke, there is more money in selling Falcao than having Falcao throw a game, and if Falcao got tainted with "match fixing" he'd be worth nothing in the transfer market.
 
ALAN PARDEW has claimed that his Newcastle side were the best team outside the Premier League’s top six in their final 15 games of the season.

The Magpies won six matches from the end of January.

But they were also at the wrong end of home defeats by Liverpool and Sunderland – plus a 4-0 humbling at Manchester City – and failed to find the net in their last three outings at St James’ Park, all of which ended in defeat.

They finished fifth from bottom but Pardew said: “In our last 15 games, apart from the top six, we were the next best team.”

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/foot...re-best-team-outside-Premier-League-s-top-six
Click to expand...

7 more years of this ****.

He also said recently the reason why we haven't scored from a corner for so long is our lack of 6'4 players.
 
Last edited:
So according to DM Falcao is only worth a load of cash because of an investment bank.

Can we have a poll, who is more dumb? DM or Pardew?
 
No1newts said:
So according to DM Falcao is only worth a load of cash because of an investment bank.

Can we have a poll, who is more dumb? DM or Pardew?
Click to expand...

Except that isn't want I said at all and you've have to be incredibly dumb to read it as that. There is a reason players prices go down over the course of their contract, and why people are willing to sell cheaper and let people go with 12-18 months left on their contract.

There is literally value in a player, someone transfered for 40mil on a 4 million contract is treated by the buying club as a player that devalues by 10mil each season over 4 years, his worth is said to be 30mil after a year, 20mil a year later, 10mil a year after that, then can leave on a free. Thats how clubs see and account for assets. A players value can improve, or go down.

A player who moves for 40mil, misses a season due to a knee injury... could easily find another club make a "cut price" speculative offer of 25-30mil. Try and get that price if he was bought for 5mil, simply wouldn't happen.

Falcao is an excellent player, it doesn't change the fact he could have had a terrible couple seasons at Atletico, or been injured, and considering the investment bank was essentially paying themselves, basically just moving money around, they can artificially inflate his cost(this is matter of a fact EXACTLY what they did), they could have made the move cost £10mil, or £100mil.

By making the previous move 40mil instead of 10mil(because to a large degree they were just paying themselves the extra), they can help insulate the value of the player in case of anything going wrong, and why wouldn't you when they are treating Falcao as nothing more than an investment.

Seriously, if Falcao moved for 5mil to Atletico and missed 2 seasons with a knee injury, if a club wanted to risk moving for him, would he get the same price as if the move was 40mil? Not a chance, we see teams/managers over spending on players thinking they are getting a great deal constantly and its often based on how the club and the world see as that persons value.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom