The missing £35 million

Figure of fun: Dalglish makes Carroll seem like a bargain

YOU have to hand it to Kenny Dalglish. Since Liverpool paid €41 million for Andy Carroll to replace Fernando Torres, who, of course, jumped ship for Chelsea in a €59 million move, he’s gone out of his way to take the pressure off the young Geordie by talking down that price tag.

“The price we paid for Andy seems to be a problem for some people, but not us,” he argued last week.

“We are looking at it from the point of view that he cost us minus £15 million (€17.5m).

“That’s a good argument against people who say he’s replaced a £50 million striker.”

It’s a form of creative accounting, really, but an impressive one.

From here on in Carroll shall be known as the minus-£15 million man – and that should certainly lower expectations.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1128/1224308220473.html


Might go some way explaining why we didn't spend the money

 

Still, at -£15 million, he is a waste of money!

 

People already knew this though, Liverpool effectively traded Babel and Torres for Carroll and Suarez.

 

I find your avatar rather frightening to say the least.

 

Yeah it's kind of true, if he does turn out to be a flop, at the end of the day, they will have only lost 15 million. Nevertheless I find it hilarious that they're looking at it from a 10 year olds view point!

 

Yeah I know but I think what dogleash is at is saying he got Carroll for nought to deflect any grief he's getting cos it ain't working out

 

then wasted another 40m for downing and henderson what's his creative accounting say about those 2

 

Are charitable donations still tax exempt?

 

Find it funny liverpool fans justifying the overpriced carroll by using the price of suarez. They get 1 good player for a decent price so they think it's ok to spend £20m more than Carroll was probably worth

 

he didnt cost -£15 mil, he cost 35mil.

If i won the lottery i wouldnt be happy with a baker charging me a grand for a loaf of bread saying 'but it cost you -£1million quid so its the cheapest bread ever"

 

I completely understand what Dalglish is saying and agree with him. The bottom line is the important line and the only reason they paid way over the odds for Carroll is because they were receiving way over the odds for Torres. Carroll was worth around 15m at the time of asking. If he'd offered 15m for Carroll, he'd have been knocked back. Equally though I think they'd have knocked back the Torres deal but for knowing they could get Carroll. So they used Romans bottomless pit to get the player they wanted. People don't like it but the two deals are not seperate, they are linked.

It was excellent business on their part and Carroll will come good. They basically got 15m and Andy Carroll for Fernando Torres. Given Torres has been no better than Carroll then it has worked out well for Liverpool I'd say. That spare 15m paid for three quarters of Suarez.

As for Downing, his market value was 15m-20m. They may have paid the high end but they were not ripped off in a massive way for me. Henderson is the only one they've made a big error on. I think he is a good young player and at the time his stock was quite high. He was an 8m man with the tax for English players added on but they paid 16m-20m depending on who you believe. Poor business.

 

What he fails to consider is that its not as if they hadn't spent that 35m on the final night of the window that it would be lost to them forever. It's not free money, because they could have spent it elsewhere, and if he thinks anyone with sense doesn't realise that, then he's as deluded as someone who would think Henderson is worth 20m...oh wait.

 

Ridiculous argument and a sign of desperation from Dogleash. I'm getting the feeling that the owners might have been giving him a hard time about his reckless use of their investment. Which is nice!

 

Its simples. They paid £35 million for him. Where the funding came from is completely irrelevant.

If I sell my house for £300,000 and buy a flat for £200,000. My flat cost me £200,000 not -£100,000. The Revenue would still expect me to pay stamp duty.

It is correct the transactions where linked in terms of if Chelsea had not purachsed Torres, AC would most likely still be a toon man.

Quite simply AC will only be judged on what he has been bought to do and thats simply scoring goals.

At the moment he is not and thus is regarded as an expensive failure atm in time.

There is plenty of time for him to come good for Liverpool.

 

Get in!

 

We overpaid for Carroll the amount that we underpaid for Suarez. That's what helps me sleep at night.

 

Poor old mandy

 

To be honest, I sort of see what he was saying - if Torres had gone for £40m, I reckon we would have sold Carroll for £25m.