|
I don't really get this either and never have. My only guess is that they are really complex deals without the money paid in endless installments.
But even then why hide how much the initial fee is? I can't imagine its merely attempts at secrecy because who seriously cares how much Sunderland paid for Keiren Richardson or how much Portsmouth paid for Utaka (both undisclosed transfer).
My feeling is that Richardson was bought for a stick of Twix and half a can of Dr Pepper, roughly the amount that he's worth, but because the clubs involved don't wish to be associated with promoting an unhealthy diet (think of the children!) the details of the transfer are thus left undisclosed.
I hope this answers your question Mr Syntax.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by zeds:
I don't really get this either and never have. My only guess is that they are really complex deals without the money paid in endless installments.
But even then why hide how much the initial fee is? I can't imagine its merely attempts at secrecy because who seriously cares how much Sunderland paid for Keiren Richardson or how much Portsmouth paid for Utaka (both undisclosed transfer).
My feeling is that Richardson was bought for a stick of Twix and half a can of Dr Pepper, roughly the amount that he's worth, but because the clubs involved don't wish to be associated with promoting an unhealthy diet (think of the children!) the details of the transfer are thus left undisclosed.
I hope this answers your question Mr Syntax.
LOL!!!  I can see where you are coming from. Thankyou. 
__________________________________________________
I'd rather jack, than FLEETWOOD MAC!
|
| |
|
|
Arsenal have been doing this for years. I think it does add to expectations to future transfers. If a club knows for certain you paid 10m for a player of similar age and ability to a player you are after then they will expect at least 10m for their player. If they dont know what the fee was and its just guessed at by the media then they cant use it as leverage to up their price.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by CaptVimes:
Arsenal have been doing this for years. I think it does add to expectations to future transfers. If a club knows for certain you paid 10m for a player of similar age and ability to a player you are after then they will expect at least 10m for their player. If they dont know what the fee was and its just guessed at by the media then they cant use it as leverage to up their price.
Good shout. I've noticed that about the Gunners too & always wondered why.
__________________________________________________
I'd rather jack, than FLEETWOOD MAC!
|
| |
|
|
Add to this the fact that more and more clubs are being privately owned now, so they're no longer obliged to reveal transfer fees with the absence of shareholders and the like.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by CaptVimes: If a club knows for certain you paid 10m for a player of similar age and ability to a player you are after then they will expect at least 10m for their player.
yeah, good reason!! but also maybe because the transfer fee is low, and the rest is made up of signing on fees, appearance £ or bonus's, in which an individual does not need or want to let the public know what thay are on!! also because PLC's do not need to disclose their financial dealings to the public unlike stock exchanged companies!!
............................................................................................................
Why do we press harder on a remote control when we know the batteries are getting weak?
|
| |
|
|
good points zeds and dyla I hadnt made the connection with private clubs but of course you are right.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Undisclosed fees?
I thought it was just a stealthy way to say "BUNG". |
| |
|
