Moussa Sissoko

[Guest dabe]

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/revealed-how-much-tottenham-are-paying-for-moussa-sissoko-and-why-mauricio-pochettino-wanted-the-a3334451.html

 

That's what they are sourcing...

 

Heard he's got a clause in his contract saying if fit he has to play too.

[The College Dropout]

The only reason Sissoko was worth £30m is because lesser players were going for inflated prices elsewhere. If Ryan Mason is worth £13m but has only got one cap and very little league experience then Sissoko is worth twice as much, it's all relative. Yes it's stupid money but if people are going to pay it then of course you're going to want to get as much as possible for your own player.

 

There's a bit too much checking of boxes going on for my liking, as if footballers were like buying a new phone.

 

"Ok so he's got two dozen international caps, 100 PL appearances and 8Gb of RAM, I'll take him."

 

 

That kinda is how it works though. They're resources. Being an international boosts your market value as does any professional accolade.

 

That's only how it works if you want the team to end up overpriced and s****.

 

Aye but that's how it goes. How good a player is - is ultimately subjective. You take evidence where you can. Being an international for a "big" nation is one.

[LFEE]

You are all misunderstanding the article. They pay £6m instalments over the 5yr. This only changes should they sell him therefore they'd have to pay the balance straight away. Nothing unusual or clever about it at all.

[Ikon]

Otherwise they could release him on a free transfer and sign him again

[Ronaldo]

83 people happy that billionaire Mike Ashley's £6m a year richer.

[Joe_F]

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/revealed-how-much-tottenham-are-paying-for-moussa-sissoko-and-why-mauricio-pochettino-wanted-the-a3334451.html

 

That's what they are sourcing...

 

Embarrassed for the journalist. What a load of bollocks.

[Ikon]

83 people happy that billionaire Mike Ashley's £6m a year richer.

 

Don't be stupid!

[maze]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

[Sima]

[timeEd32]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

 

This is the stupidest report I've ever seen. I wouldn't be surprised if the club issues a statement to clarify as it makes us look bad.

[nemtizz]

stahp

[Interpolic]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

 

What the fuck is that shit Did they not stop to think why the fuck we would agree to that?

 

I hate this "Levy always gets the best deal" shite, he doesn't.  He's overpaid on a number of players that didn't succeed at Spurs.

[sturla]

The journo of the Evening standard article  is asked to clarify what he meant with this his confusing sentence about the 5 installments:

 

 

So Spurs can't sell him in January and get away with only paying the first installment, which would be stupid.

[Leazes1986]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

 

What the fuck is that shit Did they not stop to think why the fuck we would agree to that?

 

I hate this "Levy always gets the best deal" shite, he doesn't.  He's overpaid on a number of players that didn't succeed at Spurs.

 

It has been clarified on Twitter. Spurs would pay us £6m for each year of his contract, but if a club buys him before the 5 years if up, its up to Spurs to pay up the remainder of the money owed when sold.

[SEMTEX]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

 

What the fuck is that shit Did they not stop to think why the fuck we would agree to that?

 

I hate this "Levy always gets the best deal" shite, he doesn't.  He's overpaid on a number of players that didn't succeed at Spurs.

 

It has been clarified on Twitter. Spurs would pay us £6m for each year of his contract, but if a club buys him before the 5 years if up, its up to Spurs to pay up the remainder of the money owed when sold.

 

So the same as any installments based transfer that has ever happened then. Daft twats.

[Elliottman]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

 

Kin hell man. Aye, if they sell him in January for 16 million they've made ten million profit and we've been had. Darn that evil genius Levy.

[Leazes1986]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

 

What the fuck is that shit Did they not stop to think why the fuck we would agree to that?

 

I hate this "Levy always gets the best deal" shite, he doesn't.  He's overpaid on a number of players that didn't succeed at Spurs.

 

It has been clarified on Twitter. Spurs would pay us £6m for each year of his contract, but if a club buys him before the 5 years if up, its up to Spurs to pay up the remainder of the money owed when sold.

 

So the same as any installments based transfer that has ever happened then. Daft twats.

 

Got to keep that Daniel Levy genius thing up haven't they?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

We openly said we would accept instalments.

[timeEd32]

The journo of the Evening standard article  is asked to clarify what he meant with this his confusing sentence about the 5 installments:

 

 

So Spurs can't sell him in January and get away with only paying the first installment, which would be stupid.

 

Even this doesn't make sense. Good to know the standard of British sports journalists is still at rock bottom.

[Bimpy474]

Any truth in this: http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/09/01/tottenhams-sissoko-outlay-may-end-up-less-than-30-million-sugges/

 

What the fuck is that shit Did they not stop to think why the fuck we would agree to that?

 

I hate this "Levy always gets the best deal" shite, he doesn't.  He's overpaid on a number of players that didn't succeed at Spurs.

 

I was saying this yesterday, in the last couple of seasons they've took big hits on players they paid too much for. The Levy thing is a myth because of one or two deals. Bit like our signing players out the blue because it happened once or twice years ago.

[timeEd32]

Without going back and looking I feel like Levy's reputation is pretty well earned when it comes to selling players, but he's no different than your average chairman when it comes to buying.

[afar]

The journo of the Evening standard article  is asked to clarify what he meant with this his confusing sentence about the 5 installments:

 

 

So Spurs can't sell him in January and get away with only paying the first installment, which would be stupid.

 

Even this doesn't make sense. Good to know the standard of British sports journalists is still at rock bottom.

 

I'm completely confused, I read the article and it's worded that basically they pay 6 million a year while he's with them. So if it doesn't work out for them, they could go and sell him next summer for say 15 million, and pocket 9 million on the deal while we've only recived 6 million for a player another club were prepared to pay 30 million for. It makes no sense whatsoever ! And this clarification doesn't make any sense either.

 

I think they need to implement a rule that states football clubs need to explain the full details of all player transactions the minute they happen. It's just causing  confusion when papers can just make up stuff to paint a good deal as a bad deal or vice versa. In the NFL, everything is made public, from the details of the compensation given (in terms of draft picks traded), the salary the player is on to the bonuses he's paid.

[SEMTEX]

The journo of the Evening standard article  is asked to clarify what he meant with this his confusing sentence about the 5 installments:

 

 

So Spurs can't sell him in January and get away with only paying the first installment, which would be stupid.

 

Even this doesn't make sense. Good to know the standard of British sports journalists is still at rock bottom.

 

I'm completely confused, I read the article and it's worded that basically they pay 6 million a year while he's with them. So if it doesn't work out for them, they could go and sell him next summer for say 15 million, and pocket 9 million on the deal while we've only recived 6 million for a player another club were prepared to pay 30 million for. It makes no sense whatsoever ! And this clarification doesn't make any sense either.

 

I think they need to implement a rule that states football clubs need to explain the full details of all player transactions the minute they happen. It's just causing  confusion when papers can just make up stuff to paint a good deal as a bad deal or vice versa. In the NFL, everything is made public, from the details of the compensation given (in terms of draft picks traded), the salary the player is on to the bonuses he's paid.

 

The amendment makes sense, it's just being made to seem more complicated than it is.

 

Spurs owe us £30m. They will pay £6m per year.

 

No matter what happens, we will receive that £30m, but if they sell him before his contract is up, the remaining installments could be paid by his new club, should that be how Tottenham negotiate that transfer. Or Tottenham may continue to pay them. Or Tottenham may just lump sum the remaining fee.

 

All stuff that is irrelevant to us. We will receive £30m in the next 5 years (or less).

[timeEd32]

Yup, i.e. like every other fucking transfer that's paid in installments. There's only two reasons that journo brought it up 1) he misunderstood and is stupid 2) he was trying to make Spurs look better.

 

@afar - I'm fully on board with your point about disclosing transfer and contract data. Ridiculous how secretive it all is, but the sport of football is anti-transparency from top to bottom.

[Jayson]

Spurs wont make a profit out of the deal either unless they sell him above what they've bought him for, its like any normal deal.

 

Say they sell him having paid one installment of 6m, they'd have to resell him for atleast 24m for the next club to cover that amount. If they sold him for less, they'd be liable for whatever the new club underpaid by.