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

[johnnypd]

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.

 

There's every resemblance to the principle you're on about. Rather than buying players and hoping to sell them for profit, we should be buying players hoping to get the best out of them to lift us as a club. It seems there's more failures than successes if you're judging transfers by this criteria.

 

We bought Lee, Beardsley, Shearer etc for decent fees, got the best out of them, and let them leave for pretty much nothing. That's a successful transfer. Robert fits the bill too, helped transform us into a Champion's League side, and he's left the club and plummeted off the scene, ending up an overweight charicature barely making Levante's bench.

 

While those are successful transfers, there's been even more failed transfers over the past 8-10 years. The issue is how management utilises the talents of players after we buy them. The above players left for little or nowt after succeeding. The likes of Cort, Bramble, Viana, Luque, Marcelino etc, have been failures because for whatever reason we've not realised their potential. In the case of Bellamy, the reason we haven't got the best out of him but rather let him leave for less than he was worth was down to gross mismanagement. He was looking one of our best purchases of recent times up until Souness came, and instead he's doing the business elsewhere, which is exactly what shouldn't have happened.

[Mowen]

Regardless of the underlying point in the thread, I quite enjoy football-trivia related questions such as this one. Mainly 'cos I'm a sad bastard.

[OzzieMandias]

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

 

Almost enough to cover what we spent on Michael Owen.

[Howaythelads]

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.

 

Yes, agree with that.

[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 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.

 

Chomp! Chomp! (If this thread now turns into one about the Board I know you will accept the blame for it.)

 

Anyway, all I have to say in response to this is that the people who thought this were not you or your chums from toonspastic, in fact many of you toonspastic types would hear none of it because Souness had to be backed and given time to build his own team before being judged, etc etc etc.........

 

[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 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.

 

There's every resemblance to the principle you're on about. Rather than buying players and hoping to sell them for profit, we should be buying players hoping to get the best out of them to lift us as a club. It seems there's more failures than successes if you're judging transfers by this criteria.

 

We bought Lee, Beardsley, Shearer etc for decent fees, got the best out of them, and let them leave for pretty much nothing. That's a successful transfer. Robert fits the bill too, helped transform us into a Champion's League side, and he's left the club and plummeted off the scene, ending up an overweight charicature barely making Levante's bench.

 

While those are successful transfers, there's been even more failed transfers over the past 8-10 years. The issue is how management utilises the talents of players after we buy them. The above players left for little or nowt after succeeding. The likes of Cort, Bramble, Viana, Luque, Marcelino etc, have been failures because for whatever reason we've not realised their potential. In the case of Bellamy, the reason we haven't got the best out of him but rather let him leave for less than he was worth was down to gross mismanagement. He was looking one of our best purchases of recent times up until Souness came, and instead he's doing the business elsewhere, which is exactly what shouldn't have happened.

 

Still think you're on a different tack.

 

I believe the club now tries to do the bit I put in bold, they haven't always. Are you suggesting that when signing players this isn't the motivation of the club? Whether individual players make it or not and why they fail when they don't make it is another subject in my opinion.

[NE5]

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

 

Almost enough to cover what we spent on Michael Owen.

 

You appear to have missed my earlier post mandy, in response to your initial starter post. Do you want us to become a club with the aim of selling players for profit ie a selling club, or not ?

 

 

[NE5]

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.

 

There's every resemblance to the principle you're on about. Rather than buying players and hoping to sell them for profit, we should be buying players hoping to get the best out of them to lift us as a club. It seems there's more failures than successes if you're judging transfers by this criteria.

 

We bought Lee, Beardsley, Shearer etc for decent fees, got the best out of them, and let them leave for pretty much nothing. That's a successful transfer. Robert fits the bill too, helped transform us into a Champion's League side, and he's left the club and plummeted off the scene, ending up an overweight charicature barely making Levante's bench.

 

While those are successful transfers, there's been even more failed transfers over the past 8-10 years. The issue is how management utilises the talents of players after we buy them. The above players left for little or nowt after succeeding. The likes of Cort, Bramble, Viana, Luque, Marcelino etc, have been failures because for whatever reason we've not realised their potential. In the case of Bellamy, the reason we haven't got the best out of him but rather let him leave for less than he was worth was down to gross mismanagement. He was looking one of our best purchases of recent times up until Souness came, and instead he's doing the business elsewhere, which is exactly what shouldn't have happened.

 

Still think you're on a different tack.

 

I believe the club now tries to do the bit I put in bold, they haven't always. Are you suggesting that when signing players this isn't the motivation of the club? Whether individual players make it or not and why they fail when they don't make it is another subject in my opinion.

 

Basically, if you consider the question "how many successful transfers have we made in the last 10 years" then the answer is totally different to what the WUM suggests initially.

 

A player who gives value to the club on the pitch is repaying his fee, whatever he costs when he moves on. The aim of the club should be to have players at their peak rather than moving them on for a profit. When selling them instead DOES apply is where a manager comes in and decides he doesn't want him, or if the player wants to go for personal reasons, or whatever. Both of these scenarios must be considered successful transfers. For instance, even though the majority of us were glad to see Jeanarse go, we made a profit so it should be viewed as a successful transfer.  On the other hand, players like Cort disappointed me, personally, because I think if he had not been injured so often and so early he could have done a lot better. He seems to have never recovered from his injuries. Likewise Tomasson, who would have done a lot better if he had had Shearer playing next to him and helping instead of Arsprilla just ambling around the field doing his own thing most of the time. As for Bellamy, I think it is clearly obvious that his transfer value went up while he was at Newcastle, and if not for being booted out of the club and having clauses in his contracts, would have cost Liverpool more than they paid. Robert too, was booted out, but we got good service from him, and really should have got a fee, again this was due to Souness and his lack of appreciation of the club ie putting his own ego before the correct management of the club. Especially when you consider we have spent 9.5m quid on Luque, then another 5m on Duff, neither have replaced him, and that is before you consider the fact that Craig Bellamy should have still been at Newcastle, and we have not replaced him adequately yet either.

 

Rob Lee was the best English midfield player during his time at Newcastle between 1995-99, bettered only in the premiership by Roy Keane. Who the hell would have moved him on for a profit, like we did with Gazza, Beardsley and Waddle  ? Don't make me laugh.

 

If you look at the clubs results over the past decade, it proves without any question that the amount of successful transfers vastly outweighs the poor ones. And for anyone to think that other clubs dont' make transfers that work out, is ludicrous. They all do.

 

I would be interested to hear macbeths view on the mechanics of this thread ........ or maybe not 

 

 

[junkhead]

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

 

Almost enough to cover what we spent on Michael Owen.

 

You appear to have missed my earlier post mandy, in response to your initial starter post. Do you want us to become a club with the aim of selling players for profit ie a selling club, or not ?

 

 

Sevilla sold Reyes and Baptista for 50 mil combined.. are they a selling club? what is a selling club, NE5? and is it better than a club who can't sell anybody, because of overinflated wages?

[NE5]

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

 

Almost enough to cover what we spent on Michael Owen.

 

You appear to have missed my earlier post mandy, in response to your initial starter post. Do you want us to become a club with the aim of selling players for profit ie a selling club, or not ?

 

 

Sevilla sold Reyes and Baptista for 50 mil combined.. are they a selling club? what is a selling club, NE5? and is it better than a club who can't sell anybody, because of overinflated wages?

 

its a club that sells its best players to make profits, with no ambition other than this. More so if they have a big fanbase and shouldn't have to ie selling its best players to clubs with smaller clubs with more ambition. Like we were for decades.

 

The simple response to your comment about not being able to sell players, why not consider the opposite, being that NO quality players want to sign for you ? Where exactly do you think a club would be in that scenario ?

 

I don't mean to patronise mate, but it's isn't so straightforward as you appear to think. I would vastly prefer the club to attempt to buy these players and take the risk [within reason, I am aware that too many players have been brought in who aren't good enough in the last few years] than not bother, and see them all not be interested in coming here. This is the single biggest reason why the club was in such a mess in 1992, and believe me, THAT is something worth moaning about.

 

If you think otherwise, ask yourself - do you want us to challenge Liverpool etc or not ? Because unless we match their wages we never will, we can appoint as good a manager as we like but if we don't back him, he'll never do it. And, yes I know we haven't matched Liverpool by doing this, but we have got closer than anyone else by doing it. There are reasons, in my opinion, that we have not won a trophy during the past decade, but I've said them elsewhere.

 

 

 

 

[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 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.

 

Chomp! Chomp! (If this thread now turns into one about the Board I know you will accept the blame for it.)

 

Anyway, all I have to say in response to this is that the people who thought this were not you or your chums from toonspastic, in fact many of you toonspastic types would hear none of it because Souness had to be backed and given time to build his own team before being judged, etc etc etc.........

 

 

Wasn't an attempt at a bite at all, just pointing out that the whole blame can't be put on Souness when people (some who don't even support Newcastle) could see that the appointment of Souness was going to cause a lot of trouble at the club and one of our best players.

 

But I do apologise and should have realised that a thread regarding the sale of players really has nothing to do with the board.

[Optimistic Nut]

I agree with HTL & NE5 here by the way. I'd much sooner see us pay £15m & £9.5m on Shearer & Robert, have relative success with them (Champions League qualifications, etc) and let them go for nowt when they're finished, than spend £5m on some kid and sell him for £7m because he doesn't think we're big enough for him.

[Mowen]

I agree. There is also the point that, often fully down to managers, we end up under-valuing our assets, and as a result letting them go for less than they're worth a la Bowyer, Ambrose, Bellamy, Viana, Bernard etc., but to try and blame these losses on one collective failure is clearly ridiculous, as they are all individual cases with different groups of people to blame for different amounts in each instance.

 

P.S. How much did Ketsbia cost? We got 900k for him, any profit there?

[OzzieMandias]

P.S. How much did Ketsbia cost? We got 900k for him, any profit there?

 

Ah, well spotted. We got Temuri for free.

[robbo_11]

I agree. There is also the point that, often fully down to managers, we end up under-valuing our assets, and as a result letting them go for less than they're worth a la Bowyer, Ambrose, Bellamy, Viana, Bernard etc., but to try and blame these losses on one collective failure is clearly ridiculous, as they are all individual cases with different groups of people to blame for different amounts in each instance.

 

P.S. How much did Ketsbia cost? We got 900k for him, any profit there?

 

T.Ketsbaia came on a free transfer iirc, so 900k profit.

 

I think that we will have lost more money on big signings then profits over the last 10 years and nave not got the best out of some players signed.

Purchases like H.Viana (£8.5m -- £1.7m), JA.Boumsong (£8m -- £3m), A.Luque (£9.5m -- ?), L.Robert (£9.5m -- free), C.Cort (£7m - £2m) and E.Marcelino (£5.8m -- ?)

[Dave]

I agree with HTL & NE5 here by the way. I'd much sooner see us pay £15m & £9.5m on Shearer & Robert, have relative success with them (Champions League qualifications, etc) and let them go for nowt when they're finished, than spend £5m on some kid and sell him for £7m because he doesn't think we're big enough for him.

 

Aye.

[Dr Spectrum]

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

 

For Fucks sake. I mean, FFS. He was absolutely fucking shite. Absolute shite. And the worst thing is, I believe you actually only paid £450k for him? More than tripled your fucking money. FFS.

[Ally]

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

 

For Fucks sake. I mean, FFS. He was absolutely fucking shite. Absolute shite. And the worst thing is, I believe you actually only paid £450k for him? More than tripled your fucking money. FFS.

 

Scored a blinding goal for us against Boro once, can't remember much else about him.

[Cajun]

I agree with HTL & NE5 here by the way. I'd much sooner see us pay £15m & £9.5m on Shearer & Robert, have relative success with them (Champions League qualifications, etc) and let them go for nowt when they're finished, than spend £5m on some kid and sell him for £7m because he doesn't think we're big enough for him.

 

I definitely agree on that point otherwise there is no point in buying the players in the first place. Just wish there were more Robert's, Shearer's etc.. There seems to be a hell of a lot more Boumsong's, Viana's and Luque's.