http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23987048 BBC report on the fees paid to agents in the 2012-2013 season We are the tenth highest in the football league of clubs paying fees to Agents. In this period it was £550k What the hell. We basically signed no-one, spent next to no cash in transfers yet still outspent nearly everyone else in agents fees. something really does stink about the running of our club at the higher (boardroom) level. In a seperate BBC article there is also an interest article on Peterboroughs signings http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23972646 which basically says they look for potential in the lower/ non leagues but when they sign them it is with little risk. A one or 2 year deal on low wages but the promise of an opportunity to prove themselves. If it fails both player and club looses very little and if it works then everybody wins. when are we going to start having a sensible working ethos. One articles amazes me at how badly we have been doing things and the other one shows how potentially we could hit upon success without breaking the bank.
I read somewhere that we've had dealings with 51 players over that time.. Signings, loans, sales and releasing players all included so if you boil it down to how much we've actually done it sort of makes sense for the figure that is reported..
Is it possible a section of this has come in to play? A case of the past catching up with the club? The amounts disclosed include all guaranteed payments due to an agent arising out of player transactions entered into during the reporting period, even if such payments may include instalments payable outside of the reporting period
King, I suppose when you include all the loanees and terminations then your right it could make sense. Just seems strange to me that we can pay that kind of figure for agents but are unable/ unwilling/ not wanting to pay the same amount for a player. I would also assume that agents get paid more for the higher end transfers. Considering the majority of ours have been freebies/ year long contracts or loans then I would hope that the agents get very little from these. Thai- again possibly a valid point but with our lack of high profile signings in the last 3 or 4 years I cant see why we would want to defere payments. Again I would of thought due to the lowbrow signings we have made then it would all be concluded in one year. If an agent is due 20k, for example, I would hope we pay it at once rather than over 3 seasons!
On the contrary Thai, what it means is that in only includes those deals that happened during the period but includes any instalments to be made in the future relating to those transactions.
Also, how on earth did Blackpool spent absolutely nothing on agents fees ?? That can't be right, that will surely catch up with them when next years accounts are published as I can't see how anyone can get away with that.
Obviously I have no idea about ITFC finances or how the club operates for purchases, so perhaps just mere speculation on my part. Even allowing for a percentage of deferred payments (indeed, if there were any at all), it a reasonably high figure considering, as suggested, there have been no really big incoming transfers (Chopra & Bullard excluded perhaps).
interesting post made on TWTD, Why do the clubs have to pay the agents? surely the player employs the services of the agent so they should pay him/her out of his signing on fee.
I totally agree - the agent is surely representing the player, so he should pay them. If only i knew what i know now when i was sitting in my careers advisors office at school...oh well.
Yeah I'd imagine the fees are high due to the number of loans last season and also paying off peoples contracts, particularly as I'd imagine those who we paid off were unlikely to get paid as much anywhere else. I'd be surprised if it'd be as high next year. But if we paid those fees for our current squad, something really has gone amiss!! Yes how the hell did Blackpool get away with not paying agents anything, I don't understand that at all??? I also just read that Peterborough article was about to post it on here, they've really spotted some great talent from the lower league the past few seasons, some really good players, I've been saying we should follow their scouting system closely, they just keep finding gems and replacing goalscorers with other goalscorers. Last season I was hoping we would try to trump the Gayle deal after we lost DJ and they've since lost him for millions but seem to have got another very able replacement in Assombalonga, albeit it for a bit of money. I really do admire how they keep replacing and finding quality players from the lower leagues, albeit they probably do spend a bit of money for a league 1 team but it's worth it with the quality they bring in, they also play great football. It did make me think about Ferguson as a replacement for Jewell at the time, although he did do poorly at Preston, it would be interesting to see if he could recreate something similar at a bigger club, as I'm not sure a club of Peterboroughs size can really ever sustain themselves in the higher leagues.
