Forget the "stratosphere deals" for the minute - do you think that in general, a player's "value" viz. the amount another club is prepared to pay for them, is influenced by the club they're coming from just as much as the players themselves? I don't mean the asking price - anyone can ask what they like - I mean the actual amount a club will pay for someone from a top club as opposed to a lesser one. The perceived "added value" that having been at a top club brings to the deal. Shelvey cost Swansea £5M - how much of that was because it was Liverpool that was selling him? Caulker cost us £8.5M - how much of that was because he came from Spurs? Take our Gunnar and Ben Turner for instance. Both came from Coventry, a club on the way down - Gunnar on a free and Turner for something like £700k. What are they worth now when you compare them to current deals bearing in mind we're "only" Cardiff? No inter-club slight intended, to my mind Gunnar is better than Shelvey, but would we get £5M for him? Likewise Big Ben. Not saying he's up there with Caulker yet, but I rate him and he wont' be far off before long in my opinion. How much would he command when being bought from a "small club"? After his recent performances, I can't help thinking back to us flogging Ramsey for less than £5M. Maybe circumstances dictated at the time, but that was a bloody giveaway by a small club to a big one. The other way around he'd never have been sold to a club like us for that even if we'd had the money.
I guess if they are coming from a "bigger" club and young enough they are presumed to have a "pedigree" and the "smaller" buying club pays a premium for that. Even though quite often, as seems to be the case with many younger players leaving Man Utd or Arsenal for instance, they rarely stand the test of time when moving on. However when older players (30+) move on from the bigger clubs their values are lower due to the amount of time they are perceived to have left in the game, e.g. Scott Parker from Spurs and David Villa in Spain. When moving from a "smaller" club upwards then the "bigger" club takes the stance that they are gambling on a younger player so don't pay as much, e.g. Ramsey, Gunter.
It's a bit like supermarkets, you can expect to pay a bit more at Sainsbury or Waitrose than at Tesco or Asda, doesn't mean you are getting better quality necessarily. £650K paid for Campbell, how much at this moment in time.
Agree about Campbell there Sweetblue, but that just reinforces what I'm trying to say. If Campbell had still been with Man U, even if he didn't figure for first team selection, there is no way we'd have got him for £650K. He came from Sunderland and O'Neill didn't rate him - there's the rub. Buying any player from a club like Man U seems to demand a premium purely because of their standing in world football. Due respect to Sunderland, but they just don't figure in the same league like us. They're a much bigger club than us (at the moment), but cannot command the same sort of fees as the real big boys. It's just a matter of perception that if a player is signed to a top 6 club, he must be worth more at the time.
Sparkey, don't think there is much doubt that what club you come from will have an affect on your selling price. Quality can be found at half the price usually, but do managers get caught up in the trip of wanting players from certain clubs, simply because of that clubs standing.
bigger clubs are in a position to hold out for better fees, smaller clubs often have players who are desperate to move on to a bigger club so the bigger clubs can capitalise on that...... we could have got more for players we have sold, but we needed the cash and the players wanted to move to bigger clubs understandably......
Aparrently about 3.5 million now. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/fraizer-campbell/mwverlaufgraph/spieler_42411.html
Swampy - cheers for the comment, but bigger clubs holding out for better fees is not the point - other clubs still seem prepared to pay a premium for a player at one of the elite clubs just because of who they are. There seems to be a sort of a cachee about a player being registered with these clubs, when in actual fact, there are better players plying their trade at an "also ran" club available for less money. In other words, the philosophy seems to be that if you're registered with Man U, Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs etc, then you must be a better player and worth more on the market. Maybe there's some truth in the overall situation due to these clubs signing top youngsters and bringing them on, but there seems to be some sort of bonus about being able to say you've signed a player from one of those - and what's worse, other clubs tend to end up pay more than they need to for similar quality.
Dartford - that chart shows Fraizer's value at Sunderland when we bought him at over £2.5M. How the hell did we get him for £650k? If he was worth £2.5M then, he's worth at least double that now, and probably a lot more.
Sparky - If that web site is accurate then we have been ripped off with Cornelius, as he is only valued at £4 million so I don't know how they calculate the values. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/andreas-cornelius/mwverlaufgraph/spieler_203412.html I think the true value depends on who is buying and who is selling. Buying from a top 6 prem side doesn't seem to be the best value for money and other clubs selling players will increase the price if it is a big club buying. The players agent will pitch for as much money as they think they can get away with.
we got campbell at £650k because he was crocked, the only market for him was championship clubs really and he was on a premiership wage so only a club with our resources could take him on. how you value campbell at £2.5m after he joined them for only an initial £3.5m, bearing in mind he had only 6 months left on his contract, i dont know. if you play for a top club, guess what, you tend to be better than players at smaller clubs... 'Caulker cost us £8.5M - how much of that was because he came from Spurs?' he's played europa league, and proved himself worthy of playing for a top 6 team, its only logical that he will cost a bit more given that he's more accomplished and valuable then if he was playing for a small club with no expectations or pressure like wigan or swansea.
Yes, I think so anyway. Caulker made less than 20 first team appearances for Spurs in the 4 years he was signed there. He was loaned out to Yeovil Town, Bristol City and Swansea in that time and played more games for each of those clubs than he's ever done for Spurs. Being selected for Europa League games is not necessarily the pinnacle of a players club career. He's still only 21 and has still got a lot to learn about the Prem. Now I'm not saying he isn't a great future asset for Cardiff, but I doubt he'd have cost £8.5M if he'd been a regular at say Wigan. Levy is no mug on the money front, and wouldn't have parted with him for anything less than a value based up his potential, not his experience. Personally, I think he'll prove to be a great buy even at the amount we forked out, but not all players nurseried at elite clubs turn out like that. Player prices tend to reflect the stature of the selling club, not necessarily the player.
The value of the player is determined by what the buying club is prepared to shell out. All clubs have a value in their won staff and what they are worth to them. Therefore, some silly valuations are out there. Frazier Campbell was seen as a loss both in potential and real value to Sunderland so when we came calling we got a good buy. How much would MM & VT be prepared to pay for him had Sunderland not accepted our bid? Would it have gone to 2,3,4 or 5 million before they accepted a Cardiff offer? Would Cardiff have increased the offer? For a bargain all variables must favour the purchasing club in order to get a bargain, when that happens, and I think it did with Campbell, then you're quids in. Equally if they favour the selling club (Spurs & Bale) then you're quids in. All the big clubs know the financial status of their rivals and the clubs from which they want to purchase a player. They have some clever people working the variables who then come up with a value and a time to buy. Again, none more obvious than Spurs with Bale. The only fly in the ointment is the player, everything can be agreed between clubs but if the guy doesn't want to play for the new team he doesn't sign.
