Having just read that the agent for Paul Pogba received 42 million pounds for his part in this particular transfer makes my blood boil and it also makes me think that they are the main culprits in the ever increasing cost of footballers out there today. Can you imagine what an extra 42 million would do the bank accounts of clubs like ours and many others because it probably adds credence to the desire of the so called top clubs to separate themselves from the minnions in the lower divisions. The difference between the top boys and the likes of Forest Green Rovers, the new kids on the block, is like comparing the GDP of countries like the U.S. and Somalia and expecting some time that the lowest of the low can compete in the same league. We at Bristol City seem to be caught somewhere in the middle of this confusing mixture trying to decide what will allow us to achieve the seemingly impossible without kowtowing to the greed of football agents, or getting caught up in the nether world of overpaid players with more ego than talent. This summer will be difficult for Lee and the rest of the crew and it will be interesting to see where it takes us in the overall scheme of things. Good luck to them.
scum - for starters, shiny suit and a mobile and your away, if club owners have to be "fit for purpose" why not agents?
The footballing equivalent to the pimp. Good job we have Ashton - who is familiar with the pimping ways.
Agents are necessary. Without them the players themselves will get ripped off by clubs. In regards to the money Paul Pogbas agent received, it would make no difference to BCFC because the likes of BCFC cannot get at this income until they are in the EPL. Its the EPL's income only and they deem how money is divided amongst the few. The EPL have created a inflated market, it was in Juventus's interest to sell to a EPL club because that is where the biggest fees for players are. Pogbas agent acted for Paul Pogba, Juventus and Manchester Utd - Two clubs (!!?) and the EPL being awash with money allows, nay encourages this to happen because it has no regulation to stop this obvious conflict of interest to occur. The increasing cost of players is not fuelled by agents it is fuelled by the EPL and its money.
Limit the ceiling on transfer fees being paid worldwide. Limit the amount that Agents can take from a transfer in the form of a flat fee, rather than them taking a percentage of the whole amount. Make agents have to pass the 'fit and proper' test before they are allowed to take any business on. And for Christs sake limit footballer players wages to a more sensible level. No one needs, let alone deserves £400k a week or more, no matter who they are.
? if a player costs £100m and no agent then cost is likely just under £100m (hotels travel etc ) if a player costs £100m and an agent wants 15% then player costs £115m ...... explain why any agent needs £15m to negotiate a players ( or indeed £42m ) move! A club wants £100m for a player and has to pay out £15m so needs to ask for £120m to ensure they get their £100m why has the price gone up 20% = answer to pay the agents fee ! 2 years later the player needs to move on so club spent £120m on their £100m player and need to get back or make a profit so need to sell on for £145m to make £3m profit in 2 to 3 years the agent has made £35m ! as I have amended your comment they are not the only reason but the main one..... and explain why so many players chuck the toys out to "move on" if it is not the agent who is fuelling their own income by suggesting they "go on strike" so either getting a better deal wage wise or fat transfer fee, ....................and quite a few agents also get contract renewal fee's eg (unsubstantiated) 5% of contract value ... £20k per week for 3 years around £150k
These moves are fuelled by money. A players worth is dictated by two drivers A/ The selling clubs valuation B/ The sum the buyer is prepared to play. The League with the highest income is the EPL. So the EPL has the highest fees. The clubs with the highest incomes pay the highest fees. If Pogba had been sold to an Italian club the fee would have been much lower. His value would also have been lower in Germany and Spain. Less money = Much lower. To cash in on their asset Juventus gave their agent and Paul Pogbas a bonus to gain the biggest return, its the same person working for both parties. The biggest return is in the EPL. Manchester Utd also gave their agent who is the very same individual a bonus. This cash comes from the same pot. That pot is bigger in the EPL so the fees are bigger. And of course agents get fees, bonuses, % of that pot, but it is the EPL and their pot of immense wealth that fuels those fees whether its is Paul Pogba, or John Stones because nowhere else in Europe are players worth these sums. it is not in the interests of the EPL, Bundesliga etc to do this. Off at a tangent Mr Lansdown has made his wealth from enterprise and the free market. The players market is part of the same circle of unregulated wealth.
Agents wield too much power and as such are able to pocket amounts that are exorbitant. They can go to clubs with crazy, or perhaps even unscrupulous/illegal demands and if the club doesn't go along with it then that agent can 'black ball' them from their entire roster of players, which in this age of the 'super-agent', such as Mino Raiola who represents many of the World's most talented players, means that the top clubs have close to no choice if they want to be in with a chance. I don't know what the existing rules are and it's always going to be very difficult to regulate over multiple countries, but I would assume that a very simple change enforceable by FIFA would be to make it completely against the rules for a club to make a direct payment to an agent. The consequences would be that a club gets a transfer ban/fine and the agent loses their licence and is barred from any future transfer dealings - their fees would have to be paid directly by the player they represent. Footballers seem to be lazy (with regards to paperwork) and often less than bright, so currently they're probably fine to just let their agent do whatever to make their lives easier, but if the agent sends them a bill for £40m+ it might actually make them think; 'What the hell are you doing that's worth that much money?' You'd like to think that agents would then undercut one-another if there was that level of visibility and that's an environment that reduces agents fees, without the need for rules that are going to be nigh-on impossible to properly enforce.
Money does indeed rule, but the public do pay for it. If the football loving section of the public did not these sums of cash via TV would not exist. If people want principled football they should stop contributing to its grubby economics.
