Clubs telling untruths about transfer fees

Status
Not open for further replies.


Bob Murray had a habit of including wages in the value - such as Flo costing £10m which was £6m (ish) fee plus £4m wages over 4/5 years.
 
MakemIndo said:
Did this agent tell you anyone was heading our way, dodgy price or not?
Click to expand...

none of his clients - unfortunately

raven_5 said:
This. It was all over the press that we've paid 12m on Turner.
Click to expand...

£4.5m cash up front. i was told about that one a few years back

sksk3021 said:
If this is as widespread as is made out then the clubs would be pretty stupid to rely on figures in the press when doing their own business.
Click to expand...

it helps though when then have to bullshit the bank manager about the value of their assets
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NEVER itk said:
none of his clients - unfortunately



£4.5m cash up front. i was told about that one a few years back



it helps though when then have to bullshit the bank manager about the value of their assets
Click to expand...
Yes I'm sure when clubs go to talk to the bank manager they take a copy of the daily star with them.
 
So basically believe no one and you'll not be hoodwinked ? Suits me, football bosses are basically politicians in better suits.
 
From my experience, any figure quoted in the press for either a transfer fee or a player's wage, is usually a good 25-30% or so higher than the reality. Bigger fees generate more interest.
 
sksk3021 said:
Yes I'm sure when clubs go to talk to the bank manager they take a copy of the daily star with them.
Click to expand...

whilst your comment is clearly silly - you would be surprised what banks will use to get a handle on market values of assets. Private contracts in all industries are seldom available for public inspection. Media reports are often the best available estimates

Dogbark said:
Transfers are undisclosed by default. It's not a "current trend" either.
Click to expand...

No clubs used to include the fees in their press release. There press release now says undisclosed and they instead 'brief' journalists
 
NEVER itk said:
whilst your comment is clearly silly - you would be surprised what banks will use to get a handle on market values of assets. Private contracts in all industries are seldom available for public inspection. Media reports are often the best available estimates



No clubs used to include the fees in their press release. There press release now says undisclosed and they instead 'brief' journalists
Click to expand...
Clubs generally don't mention the transfer fees. They are usually stuck in by the press themselves. It is not a current trend.
 
NEVER itk said:
I was having a couple of drinks last night with a reasonably high profile agent and he was discussing the current trend of transfers to have 'undisclosed fees' and the subsequent spinning to the media of 'made up' fees. He was also talking about how fees are getting more complicated with increasingly flaky add ons and more complex release clauses. Some examples we discussed were McCormick, Suarez, Debuchy, Valencia and Cabaye.

McCormack deal to Fulham was 2 x £3m payments and add ons for promotion (£2m) and some for appearances. The new Leeds owner has briefed the press it was £11m to appease the Leeds fans!

Suarez - because of last summer - had a legally watertight release clause in his new contract. For a non British club the release clause was euros 80m (this was pretty much common knowledge amongst the agent community) - at current exchange rate £63.4m. The club have spun to friendly Liverpool based journalists the price was £75m - with one muppet saying the price would of been £120m to Real Madrid if it was not for the biting incident. The journo claimed there would of been a bidding war? Why would the clubs pay more when there is an actual release clause - any bidding war would be about wages.

The Mags deal with Arsenal for Debuchey is apprently £6.5m plus a million of add ons. The mags were spinning £12m in the press. They have previous for this in the Cabeye deal when they tried to spin the fee was £25m (but PSG who do not want to be seen as 'mugs' came out and flatly contradicted them) - it was less than euros 20m (under £17m at current exchange rates).

The most ridiculous is the Valencia to West Ham deal. Apparently the Mexican club authorised his agents to hawk him around Europe at $12m (appromimately £7.75m). Now its being briefed he is being signed for £15- 16m.

This is all a bit of a grand conspiracy with clubs, agents, the press, sky all 'bigging up' the signings of in some cases some quite ordinary players.

It appears transfer fees are now as believable as DFS furniture sale discounts.

BTW this agent told me McCormack was off to Fulham (and posted on here) long before it was in the papers
Click to expand...

.. were you drinking doubles ..
 
redalert69 said:
stoke said £8m for kenwynne jones, although it was correct it was spread over 4 seasons
Click to expand...
Most fees are spread like that..........

b1gals said:
Bob Murray had a habit of including wages in the value - such as Flo costing £10m which was £6m (ish) fee plus £4m wages over 4/5 years.
Click to expand...
Flo was £6.75 million but also included a lump sum of £2 million in lieu of his drop in wages ..........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top