TRon Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 4 minutes ago, Abacus said: Likewise though, with Chelsea and Liverpool's players. Who else was prepared to offer them those salaries? Which is also part of the package and value to the selling club in removing their contracts from their books and helped fund their squad refreshes. Not arguing, by the way. The Saudi League was and is a market distortion, and the only point of debate I can see is why we couldn't seem to take the same level of advantage of it that others did due to the FMV rules, but I'm a bit ambivalent to it personally. Maybe they wouldn't have bought him at all without our ownership, so I can definitely see the argument the other way. Exactly. While I agreed in principle that you could argue no one offered us more for Maximin, those parameters don't seem to apply to the cartel clubs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terraloon Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 2 hours ago, r0cafella said: Because they’ve doubled dipped, they’ve sold the hotel for that sweet sweet FFP boost but kept the revenue stream by giving the club the management contract. It’s just another demonstration of the rules being utterly broken. That’s not quite right despite what was said on Talksport. The management contract is with the new owners BlueCo and not Chelsea Holdings Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 6 hours ago, TRon said: Why didn't anyone else offer £40m for a 29 year old Fabinho to Liverpool? That makes no sense. Just because Fabinho was overpriced doesn't mean ASM was underpriced. Fact remains, I doubt we sold him to Saudi for less than we could get elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Just now, Chris_R said: That makes no sense. Just because Fabinho was overpriced doesn't mean ASM was underpriced. Fact remains, I doubt we sold him to Saudi for less than we could get elsewhere. Thats clearly not the case as he would have moved elsewhere if more money was available for him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groundhog63 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 46 minutes ago, Chris_R said: That makes no sense. Just because Fabinho was overpriced doesn't mean ASM was underpriced. Fact remains, I doubt we sold him to Saudi for less than we could get elsewhere. 44 minutes ago, nufcnick said: Thats clearly not the case as he would have moved elsewhere if more money was available for him That clearly IS the case tho. People bleating on that ASM was undersold are utterly deluded. Literally no other club wanted him. NOT. ONE We got what the only offer was and accepted. This was his worth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 10 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said: That clearly IS the case tho. People bleating on that ASM was undersold are utterly deluded. Literally no other club wanted him. NOT. ONE We got what the only offer was and accepted. This was his worth. I think you misunderstood my post, that’s what I was also saying, the fact that he moved to Saudi and there we no other offers means he wasn’t under valued Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groundhog63 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 3 minutes ago, nufcnick said: I think you misunderstood my post, that’s what I was also saying, the fact that he moved to Saudi and there we no other offers means he wasn’t under valued ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 ASM was undervalued compared to some other deals that were done around the same time for players moving to Saudi clubs though (e.g. Otavio and Malcom both over 50m fees), so the club certainly didn't exactly use a loophole here, and you could in fact argue the opposite, i.e. that they were overly cautious to avoid scrutiny. The fact no other club offered more for ASM is only partly relevant, because no other clubs offered some of the insane fees and wages players went up going for over there, so clearly SA is not your average European league in terms of fees, and also we know that ASM was for years one of the most spectacular wingers in the Premier League, albeit also injury prone. His skill level, age and reputation could have easily commanded a higher fee to a SA club and nobody would have bat an eyelid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 37 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said: That clearly IS the case tho. People bleating on that ASM was undersold are utterly deluded. Literally no other club wanted him. NOT. ONE We got what the only offer was and accepted. This was his worth. Yep. Literally how a market works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 ASM could easily have gone for 45m.. worse players have gone for more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Just now, Dr Jinx said: ASM could easily have gone for 45m.. worse players have gone for more. Why wasn’t anyone queuing up to give us £45m then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 50 minutes ago, nufcnick said: Why wasn’t anyone queuing up to give us £45m then? I don’t think it’s that clubs didn’t want him, more so that clubs are loathe to give us any sort of meaningful cash injection. Which still remains true. The previous season there were numerous press reports of PL clubs having an interest in Maxi for more than the 28m he left here for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfcastle Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Wonder how many will be loathe to buy Bruno and Isak if the opportunity arose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobsonsWonderland Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Maybe other clubs were interested but could not match the package he was getting offered in saudi? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 24 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said: I don’t think it’s that clubs didn’t want him, more so that clubs are loathe to give us any sort of meaningful cash injection. Which still remains true. The previous season there were numerous press reports of PL clubs having an interest in Maxi for more than the 28m he left here for. No-one bid for him at any point. It might have been his agent planting stories. ASM is an injury prone player with low output. He’s perfect for shit sides in that he offers a bit of entertainment, but he’s an ineffective player at the highest level. No-one in the bottom six at any point decided he was worth the gamble - and no top club would touch him with a bargepole. There are swathes of our support who cannot accept that he simply isn’t that good a footballer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaqen Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 ASM went for a fair price. I think the frustration lies that Saudi clubs were overpaying for deadwood at other sides. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezzle Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 1 minute ago, Jaqen said: ASM went for a fair price. I think the frustration lies that Saudi clubs were overpaying for deadwood at other sides. This, overrated here but while average old cunts go for big money.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teslact Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Average has beens who've got the glamour of having won the Champions League and Premier League though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 11 minutes ago, Jaqen said: ASM went for a fair price. I think the frustration lies that Saudi clubs were overpaying for deadwood at other sides. They definitely were, but then they can’t be pulled on FMV for related party transactions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crayola Kid Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 So, ASM aside, what made Saudi bid so much for Fabinho, as an example? They put a lot of money into Livpoo and Chelsea for players who quite probably weren’t in demand at the price they paid. Was it just a naive splurge, or is it somehow in their interest to gain favour with some ‘big’ clubs who were quite desperate for funds? I’m not suggesting a specific answer by the way, but they are possibly seeking influence with clubs who may be involved in shaping the next big change in European football. Or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 6 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said: They definitely were, but then they can’t be pulled on FMV for related party transactions. And that was the whole point about the “undervalued” claim… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relámpago blanco Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 17 hours ago, Abacus said: Chelsea have said they had two independent quotes to show that the value of the hotel was fair. From what I read, that still needs to be approved (or at least did, when the accounts were submitted). It does slightly beg the question as to why they didn't just do that and sold it to their own owner instead, but hey, I'm no cynic. What I do find interesting is that these are an "ESL 6" club, and instead of it just being waived through, it's more and more clear that either the PL are wary of being challenged on how fair they are, or that there are divisions between them. They sold it to them as they got the 72 million but then a management contract with the hotels so the club still gets the revenue from the hotels. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 48 minutes ago, Unbelievable said: And that was the whole point about the “undervalued” claim… It still doesn’t make him undervalued. It means he went for what he was worth. A Saudi club didn’t need to overpay needlessly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Prontonise Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said: It still doesn’t make him undervalued. It means he went for what he was worth. A Saudi club didn’t need to overpay needlessly. Exactly he wasn't undervalued in the whole market, it's just there were others who were clearly overvalued. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 I think we need to make a distinction here; FMV is only a thing for related party transactions, anything which isn’t related party would be deemed FMV by default. So, although Fabinho was an overpay in my opinion, in actuality he went for his actual value which was what some mug was willing to pay. For ASM, his transfer with obviously influence by FMV, but with that being said, we didn’t get any better offers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now