How many transfers have we actually made a profit out of in the last ten years?

[Northern Monkey]

We bought Faye for £2 million and sold him for £2 million.

 

Pathetic purchase, fantastic sale. How anyone could have paid that for him after they'd seen him "play" for us is incredible. God bless them.

[Mowen]

Could have sworn we'd made a slight loss on him. The truly amazing thing is my mate who's a Pompey fan was a little disappointed to see him go - he said we'd pay over the odds but he was a decent player who could do a job for us. What the fuck happened to him?!

[Cajun]

Could have sworn we'd made a slight loss on him. The truly amazing thing is my mate who's a Pompey fan was a little disappointed to see him go - he said we'd pay over the odds but he was a decent player who could do a job for us. What the fuck happened to him?!

 

We was a good player at Portsmouth, didn't ever seem to turn up here!

[Ayerso]

We made a profit on Hamann, I think we bought him for £5.5m and sold him for £8m ish

[OzzieMandias]

We made a profit on Hamann, I think we bought him for £5.5m and sold him for £8m ish

 

As mentioned in the very first post.

[robbo_11]

Dietmar Hamann - £5.25m (1998) -- £8m (1999) -- £2.75m profit

Steve Howey - trainee (1989) -- £3m (2000) -- £3m profit

Aaron Hughes - trainee (1996) -- £1m (2005) -- £1m profit

Jermaine Jenas - £5m (2002) -- £7m (2005) -- £2m profit

Franck Dumas - £500,000 (1999) -- £1.5m (2000) -- £1m profit

Steve Watson - trainee (1991) -- £4m (1998) -- £4m profit

David Batty - £3.75m (1996) -- £4.4m (1998) -- £650,000 profit

Keith Gillespie - £1m (1995) -- £2.35m (1998) -- £1.35m profit

[Guest Albert Ayler]

Paul Robinson.

[Guest b0f]

Outside the 10 year mark but Andy Cole, £4.25 mill profit + Gillespie. Nowt against Gillespie but thats a disgrace...

[NE5]

I can think of only three -- Hamann, Jenas and Woodgate -- but I've got a feeling there may be one more...

 

we made a hell of a profit out of players like Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle.

 

Shame we don't make managers sell players like that anymore eh eh  mackems.gif

 

Les Ferdinand.

 

did they now ?

 

Don't you think the manager at the time considered him surplus to requirements and preferred your idol ?

 

Consider the facts. Keegan told Hall he didn't want to sell Ferdinand to Everton, so Hall Jnr said Ok we won't sell him. One of the first players out the door after keegan left was ............. ????

 

Anymore ?

 

Why not tell us the top players we signed and didn't want to go, unless the whole tone of your initial post suggests you think the club should buy players then offload them for more money ie become a selling club, like we were when we had shit directors ?

 

 

bump.

 

For Ossie Mandiarse to reply, as he has, as usual avoided something when I tie him up in knots and show him to be a troll, or even worse a mackem WUM, or worst of all, clueless.

 

As he appears to think we should buy players, improve them and sell them, which is the actions of a small time, selling club. The type of club we were when we had a shit board.

 

He doesn't appear to be the only one either.

 

 

[Guest]

Think we got our money back for Guivarc'h, Goma, Domi & Pistone.

[Guest]

Tomasson came and went for £2.5m, Charvet came in for £750k from Cannes, and went to Man City for £1.5m.

[Howaythelads]

I don't give a s*** whether we make a profit when selling a player on. No, in fact that's wrong, I do give a s***. I don't want the club to buy players, see them improve and then sell them for a profit. That's f****** stupid. What would be the point in the club working to those kind of standards? The club buys players to hopefully improve the team in an attempt to bring success, the aim isn't to sell players on for profit. What you do is get the best years from players and then cash in to some extent at the right time when they're on the decline.

 

Barmy thread imo.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

reading through this got me wondering.  is it a pointless question?  how many transfers have man united, chelsea or even sunderland and boro made a profit on in the last ten years?  i bet its not as many as you'd think.  could be wrong like

[Howaythelads]

reading through this got me wondering.  is it a pointless question?  how many transfers have man united, chelsea or even sunderland and boro made a profit on in the last ten years?  i bet its not as many as you'd think.  could be wrong like

 

I think manure tend to do what I described above. In the main, anyway.

[johnnypd]

I don't give a s*** whether we make a profit when selling a player on. No, in fact that's wrong, I do give a s***. I don't want the club to buy players, see them improve and then sell them for a profit. That's f****** stupid. What would be the point in the club working to those kind of standards? The club buys players to hopefully improve the team in an attempt to bring success, the aim isn't to sell players on for profit. What you do is get the best years from players and then cash in to some extent at the right time when they're on the decline.

 

Barmy thread imo.

 

How often have we done that, spent a good amount on a player then let them leave for a small fee or nothing after they have peaked?

 

Robert, Shearer are two that spring to mind. however i can think of more examples where we've bought players who have not yet reached their peak and failed to develop them/mishandled them - Bellamy, Viana, Bramble, Dyer, Cort and so on.

[Howaythelads]

I don't give a s*** whether we make a profit when selling a player on. No, in fact that's wrong, I do give a s***. I don't want the club to buy players, see them improve and then sell them for a profit. That's f****** stupid. What would be the point in the club working to those kind of standards? The club buys players to hopefully improve the team in an attempt to bring success, the aim isn't to sell players on for profit. What you do is get the best years from players and then cash in to some extent at the right time when they're on the decline.

 

Barmy thread imo.

 

How often have we done that, spent a good amount on a player then let them leave for a small fee or nothing after they have peaked?

 

Robert, Shearer are two that spring to mind. however i can think of more examples where we've bought players who have not yet reached their peak and failed to develop them/mishandled them - Bellamy, Viana, Bramble, Dyer, Cort and so on.

 

Robert and Bellamy were booted out by Souness and can't be considered in this scenario for that reason. Cort was never fit, Viana never established himself in this league, Dyer is still at the club and so is Bramble.

 

There are a few from Keegan's team that might qualify, such as Beardsley, Lee, Barton, Beresford, Peacock and Albert who all spring to mind. All bar Beresford were sold for relatively small fees having done well for us and were all past their best. It's certain that had the club decided to perhaps part with Rob Lee at his peak they would have made a profit, as NE5 points out this is something the club regularly did in the past but nobody should want to see that kind of thing now.

[johnnypd]

I don't give a s*** whether we make a profit when selling a player on. No, in fact that's wrong, I do give a s***. I don't want the club to buy players, see them improve and then sell them for a profit. That's f****** stupid. What would be the point in the club working to those kind of standards? The club buys players to hopefully improve the team in an attempt to bring success, the aim isn't to sell players on for profit. What you do is get the best years from players and then cash in to some extent at the right time when they're on the decline.

 

Barmy thread imo.

 

How often have we done that, spent a good amount on a player then let them leave for a small fee or nothing after they have peaked?

 

Robert, Shearer are two that spring to mind. however i can think of more examples where we've bought players who have not yet reached their peak and failed to develop them/mishandled them - Bellamy, Viana, Bramble, Dyer, Cort and so on.

 

Robert and Bellamy were booted out by Souness and can't be considered in this scenario for that reason. Cort was never fit, Viana never established himself in this league, Dyer is still at the club and so is Bramble.

 

I would consider Robert a success in so far as we got his best years out of him, improving the team significantly while he was here. Bellamy though is exactly what we should be considering, as a prime example of how the club is mismanaging its players - a player finally realising his potential, only to be horrendously mismanaged. we sold him for less than his worth because of this, and he's went on to flourish even more at other clubs. Cort and Viana also fit the bill, both players we've spent a lot of money on and for whatever reason haven't reached their potential at this club. In this case the mismanagement may well have started before we even bought them, failing to properly scout and assess the suitability of these players. Dyer and Bramble likewise.

 

There are a few from Keegan's team that might qualify, such as Beardsley, Lee, Barton, Beresford, Peacock and Albert who all spring to mind. All bar Beresford were sold for relatively small fees having done well for us and were all past their best.

 

agree but i was more thinking about the past 10 years.

[Howaythelads]

I don't give a s*** whether we make a profit when selling a player on. No, in fact that's wrong, I do give a s***. I don't want the club to buy players, see them improve and then sell them for a profit. That's f****** stupid. What would be the point in the club working to those kind of standards? The club buys players to hopefully improve the team in an attempt to bring success, the aim isn't to sell players on for profit. What you do is get the best years from players and then cash in to some extent at the right time when they're on the decline.

 

Barmy thread imo.

 

How often have we done that, spent a good amount on a player then let them leave for a small fee or nothing after they have peaked?

 

Robert, Shearer are two that spring to mind. however i can think of more examples where we've bought players who have not yet reached their peak and failed to develop them/mishandled them - Bellamy, Viana, Bramble, Dyer, Cort and so on.

 

Robert and Bellamy were booted out by Souness and can't be considered in this scenario for that reason. Cort was never fit, Viana never established himself in this league, Dyer is still at the club and so is Bramble.

 

I would consider Robert a success in so far as we got his best years out of him, improving the team significantly while he was here. Bellamy though is exactly what we should be considering, as a prime example of how the club is mismanaging its players - a player finally realising his potential, only to be horrendously mismanaged. we sold him for less than his worth because of this, and he's went on to flourish even more at other clubs. Cort and Viana also fit the bill, both players we've spent a lot of money on and for whatever reason haven't reached their potential at this club. In this case the mismanagement may well have started before we even bought them, failing to properly scout and assess the suitability of these players. Dyer and Bramble likewise.

 

There are a few from Keegan's team that might qualify, such as Beardsley, Lee, Barton, Beresford, Peacock and Albert who all spring to mind. All bar Beresford were sold for relatively small fees having done well for us and were all past their best.

 

agree but i was more thinking about the past 10 years.

 

I think you're on a different subject altogether.

 

The thread is about making a profit when selling players on and I'm contesting that this isn't what we should be doing by pointing out what an ambitious club should be aiming to do, which is selling players for less having got the best years from them.

[johnnypd]

I don't give a s*** whether we make a profit when selling a player on. No, in fact that's wrong, I do give a s***. I don't want the club to buy players, see them improve and then sell them for a profit. That's f****** stupid. What would be the point in the club working to those kind of standards? The club buys players to hopefully improve the team in an attempt to bring success, the aim isn't to sell players on for profit. What you do is get the best years from players and then cash in to some extent at the right time when they're on the decline.

 

Barmy thread imo.

 

How often have we done that, spent a good amount on a player then let them leave for a small fee or nothing after they have peaked?

 

Robert, Shearer are two that spring to mind. however i can think of more examples where we've bought players who have not yet reached their peak and failed to develop them/mishandled them - Bellamy, Viana, Bramble, Dyer, Cort and so on.

 

Robert and Bellamy were booted out by Souness and can't be considered in this scenario for that reason. Cort was never fit, Viana never established himself in this league, Dyer is still at the club and so is Bramble.

 

I would consider Robert a success in so far as we got his best years out of him, improving the team significantly while he was here. Bellamy though is exactly what we should be considering, as a prime example of how the club is mismanaging its players - a player finally realising his potential, only to be horrendously mismanaged. we sold him for less than his worth because of this, and he's went on to flourish even more at other clubs. Cort and Viana also fit the bill, both players we've spent a lot of money on and for whatever reason haven't reached their potential at this club. In this case the mismanagement may well have started before we even bought them, failing to properly scout and assess the suitability of these players. Dyer and Bramble likewise.

 

There are a few from Keegan's team that might qualify, such as Beardsley, Lee, Barton, Beresford, Peacock and Albert who all spring to mind. All bar Beresford were sold for relatively small fees having done well for us and were all past their best.

 

agree but i was more thinking about the past 10 years.

 

I think you're on a different subject altogether.

 

The thread is about making a profit when selling players on and I'm contesting that this isn't what we should be doing by pointing out what an ambitious club should be aiming to do, which is selling players for less having got the best years from them.

 

I am on a different subject as you thought the original one (selling players for profit) wasn't something we should be aiming for anyway. So I'm looking at our transfers in the way you think we should.

[Howaythelads]

I see.

 

You're over my head then, 'cos what you're saying doesn't seem to me to bear any resemblance to the principle I'm on about.

 

There is no similarity between the points you're making in relation to the way players such as Bellamy, Viana and Cort were bought and sold compared with players like Rob Lee and Warren Barton, to mention just two examples. Laurent Robert is a poor example because he wasn't past his best when he was sold, he was alienated by a shit manager and switched off.

 

What I'd be interested in is whether people see selling a player for profit as some kind of measure of the ability of the Board.

[Leazes1986]

How much would Rob Lee at his peak be worth today?

[Guest Sniffer]

In the odd case it can be. sometimes you have to wheel and deal to get ahead and this may involve selling an asset to strengthen other positions. As long as the objective is to  improve the team overall.

[Cajun]

I see.

 

You're over my head then, 'cos what you're saying doesn't seem to me to bear any resemblance to the principle I'm on about.

 

There is no similarity between the points you're making in relation to the way players such as Bellamy, Viana and Cort were bought and sold compared with players like Rob Lee and Warren Barton, to mention just two examples. Laurent Robert is a poor example because he wasn't past his best when he was sold, he was alienated by a shit manager and switched off.

 

What I'd be interested in is whether people see selling a player for profit as some kind of measure of the ability of the Board.

 

Some people said from day one that Souness and Bellamy was a disaster waiting to happen, end of the day its the board who appointed Souness so they have to take some of the blame.

[Guest]

 

I don't give a s*** whether we make a profit when selling a player on. No, in fact that's wrong, I do give a s***. I don't want the club to buy players, see them improve and then sell them for a profit. That's f****** stupid. What would be the point in the club working to those kind of standards? The club buys players to hopefully improve the team in an attempt to bring success, the aim isn't to sell players on for profit. What you do is get the best years from players and then cash in to some extent at the right time when they're on the decline.

 

Barmy thread imo.

 

Great post.

[Guest]

I see.

 

You're over my head then, 'cos what you're saying doesn't seem to me to bear any resemblance to the principle I'm on about.

 

There is no similarity between the points you're making in relation to the way players such as Bellamy, Viana and Cort were bought and sold compared with players like Rob Lee and Warren Barton, to mention just two examples. Laurent Robert is a poor example because he wasn't past his best when he was sold, he was alienated by a s*** manager and switched off.

 

What I'd be interested in is whether people see selling a player for profit as some kind of measure of the ability of the Board.

 

Some people said from day one that Souness and Bellamy was a disaster waiting to happen, end of the day its the board who appointed Souness so they have to take some of the blame.

 

To be fair though, a lot of people thought the same about Ginola at Spurs when George Graham took over yet he went on to win Player of the Year and helped win them a cup.