We don't have a plan b, against Everton we we're crying out for someone like Carroll to come on and give Distan a battle, forcing the ball towards the Kop. Carroll would've given us that option. However it's a lot of money, so we cant moan to much, and with Kolo Toure coming in I think we're getting stronger, not fussed on Suarez, we win more often without him, maybe we can buy a few squad players? Keep Downing because we have little depth, buy a new right sided forward, maybe Remy and no need to waste money on a defender, Agger, Toure, Skrtel, Kelly, Wisdom and Coates, enough completion there already.
We don't have a plan b, against Everton we we're crying out for someone like Carroll to come on and give Distan a battle, forcing the ball towards the Kop. Carroll would've given us that option. However it's a lot of money, so we cant moan to much, and with Kolo Toure coming in I think we're getting stronger, not fussed on Suarez, we win more often without him, maybe we can buy a few squad players? Keep Downing because we have little depth, buy a new right sided forward, maybe Remy and no need to waste money on a defender, Agger, Toure, Skrtel, Kelly, Wisdom and Coates, enough completion there already.
It's still bollocks though because it neglects a very important fact. Players values can go up as well as down. Is Coutinho now worth less than 5 months ago? Should we accept a bid of £7mil because that's what it says on the books?
He is 12/1 to go to Newcastle.... That seems like a very good bet to me. Fee may have been agrees but if Newcastle match £15m then he goes to Newcastle - simple as that.
That's true but player value beyond the worth of the contract is subjective. Real Madrid bought Cristiano Ronaldo for more money than the US bought Alaska (adjusted to inflation). Is he worth more? Yes to Real Madrid as you can't put the population of Alaska up front to bang in 40 goals a season. he has a use for them so he has a worth which is valued higher than what is on the paper. We have no use for Carroll... he doesn't fit our system, he can't play. you can make a lovely fish supper with a piece of cod but it makes an awful breakfast. So when we look at the figures we can sell or wait for his contract to finish so he'll leave for £0. We're selling half way through for just less than half of the contracts worth so the loss is £2.5m
Whilst what you describe in terms of the amortization is correct, the fact that the intangible asset in question now sits on your balance sheet at £17.5M, doesn't negate the fact that you're taking a £20M hit on the original purchase price & you've written off £20M of his value during the last 2.5 years. When pursuing a policy of paying top dollar for young talent, the idea is that they'll have a strong resale value should you wish to 're-circulate' the cash you've invested in that asset. In this case, that has clearly not been the case & the fact that you're not writing off the cash today - doesn't alter the facts of the loss.
Dress it up however you like Bozz (and the breakfast analogy is very Cantona-esque) but we haven't lost only 2.5 mill on Carroll. We paid way over the odds for him. We finally got him playing well. After the Euros last summer his value had at least ceased to plummet any further....then we tell the world we don't want him at which point his value plummets further. That's not natural depreciation/amortisation...that's just appauling management from start to finish.
But if they'd bought Alaska they could afford several Ronaldos and still have a few billion dollars to spend.
very true, you announce to other clubs a player is not needed or valued at a club, there first thought is probably lets see how cheap we can get him for. i thought if we didn't want him fair enough, then at least he has shown in the Semis and final of the cup last season what he can do, so had some resale value, obviously we was NEVER going to get any return or value back on him as we paid way over the odds in the first place, we all know that, but we made it easy for other clubs to take the piss and bid cheap for him, as we want rid and let them know this.
i do think Carroll could fit our system. But players do seem to play different when he leads the line. He cant play wide positions much though. Thats the flaw.
Either way, we're taking a hit on Carroll - £15m is good value for him as I don't believe he is worth more than that. I'm afraid he will always be the white elephant in the room if he stays here.
It's almost a default mentality - big guy up front so just lump it to him. That's not really his fault, but it does make him a great option to have off the bench. However, I mentioned it in another thread that if we get £15m for him, that money will fund Papa, Toure and Ilori, and that's before we offload Skrtel, Coates and Downing AND before we dip into our budget.
carroll is not mobile enough. i keep saying sturridge is as tall as carroll but he is more mobile and holds it up just as well. never forget carroll got bossed by wes brown!! 1-1 sunderland first game under kenny season beofre last. carroll was a big eye opener that day for me. Carroll can't get around, and misses the target too. we bought sturridge = carroll has to go. If we get in pace as a striking option next i'll be happy.
obviously means the agreement we had with West Ham to sign him for £17 mill odd was worthless and not worth the paper it was printed on if we have now accepted £15 mill from the same club a supposed agreement was already in place with. what was the point of the agreement in the first place,was it just to get him off our books and someone else pay his wages?
There was no formal agreement, there was merely a price that you'd be prepared to sell him for should they wish to make it permanent. They've chosen to re-negotiate this price, with the rumoured deal @ £12M guaranteed with £3M in performance related bonuses.
