So it is "worth" that until the deal is done. Once the deal is done what is it worth? You don't know unless somebody else is willing to make an offer. Until then, the most logical valuation is the NPV of future cash flows.
A crude statement if that has been made but, true none the less. If something "cost" you a certain amount to buy and you want it then that is it's value (to you at least).
For Christ's sake. You're trying to answer a broad, loosely defined theoretical question from differing perspetives. You're tecnnially correct generally, but intrinsically inaccurate due to the subjectivity of value generally and a lack of insight into the specifics of the currrent circumstance, something we're all struggling with. If you're enjoying this and wish to document the state of the club's lack of effective communication as an improbable tablow of ego, then continue to knock yourselves out. Do us all a favour though. **** off with this **** on this thread, when the chips start falling over the next day or two.
His career seems to have been hit by a couple of injuries - maybe Phelan can bring the best out of him
Long term injuries, the lad has had no luck in that department but it doesn't seem to have affected his confidence or ability.
Of course, but Peter decided to pick it back up and argue a contrary position to get this thread over 400 pages even if he is losing face by pretending to believe nonsense.
The discussion centred around player purchases affecting the price of the club. You've deliberately reinterpreted those comments and are now arguing that, yes it doesn't affect the price of the club, but it might maybe kind of affect the value one day when they try and sell the club which no one has argued at any point. Ironic, given the common accusation that I misread people's posts.
Valuation is a constant activity. It is separate to costs involved. You seem to think that cost and value are the same. They are not.
