Saint Nicolae!

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I was angry we sold Mane at all and am convinced we sold him cheap. Liverpool also came out and said it was a lot less than £34m. Why say that if they really gave us £34m up front? If we had sold him for £15m the year after it would have been better for our overall sales strategy. If they don't think we'll sell before the one year mark, the offers will be bumper ones when they come.

We are predictable. Our policy is predictable. If we vary it up and surprise people now and then we'll get better money in the long term.

Our policy to date works very well.
 
What big money have Palace spent? They have a net spend of about £11m, Benteke is a big buy for them but I'd be amazed if he wants to be there long term. Also, if you're worried about them getting long term results, just remember who their manager is.
Okay, net spend is important is it? :D
 
Our policy to date works very well.
But increasingly less well. Wanyama and Mane were two of the league's best player. Lost for peanuts. You can't rest on your laurels in business. That leads to reduced profit. You can't really argue that we aren't predictable. All I am saying is the method is mostly right, but we have to make it harder for others to guess what we will do.
 
But increasingly less well. Wanyama and Mane were two of the league's best player. Lost for peanuts. You can't rest on your laurels in business. That leads to reduced profit. You can't really argue that we aren't predictable. All I am saying is the method is mostly right, but we have to make it harder for others to guess what we will do.

Hold on, you were saying that keeping a player until his last year was a good strategy a minute ago, which is what we did with Wanyama (and is why he was sold cheaply).

Which one is it?
 
Although it is a good, and so far, successful business model, it is a little sad that we get excited about signing a player because of the profit we will make when we sell him rather than what he can help us achieve.

Thing is that, like hopeless romantics, we keep believing that maybe this time it'll be for real.
 
Hold on, you were saying that keeping a player until his last year was a good strategy a minute ago, which is what we did with Wanyama (and is why he was sold cheaply).

Which one is it?
Yes, read in context. I would take a loss on Mane's pathetic fee to make sure the next one was better. To be honest, I would have preferred us to keep Wanyama too. The point is to make life hard for buyers. I don't believe we do that anymore, where I did believe it with the Lallana's and co. The worstt hing we do is promise players they can leave if they sign a new contract. Do we really not know their agents will make this known to buying clubs and again reduce our bargaining power? And the end result is players feel they can go when they want rather than when we are ready.
 
It could be argued that this policy will only make the big clubs more secure and cement us in the mid table bracket, while clubs we currently call midtable may take the risks to leapfrog us and start taking our players too. Crystal Palace may soon take this step.


It could be argued, yes. But what does the evidence suggest? So far, it points to us making a successful bid for top six status and European football.
 
Yes, read in context. I would take a loss on Mane's pathetic fee to make sure the next one was better. To be honest, I would have preferred us to keep Wanyama too. The point is to make life hard for buyers. I don't believe we do that anymore, where I did believe it with the Lallana's and co. The worstt hing we do is promise players they can leave if they sign a new contract. Do we really not know their agents will make this known to buying clubs and again reduce our bargaining power? And the end result is players feel they can go when they want rather than when we are ready.

Okay, fair enough. I take that point. Not sure I'm in agreement with it, but fair call.
 
Then why sell him at all...

Well, because he wasn't going to sign a new contract, and at the end of the day we're a business. Letting him go for free when he has a decent resale value would be madness. Now of course if he was completely irreplaceable, that might be different. But he's not.
 
It could be argued, yes. But what does the evidence suggest? So far, it points to us making a successful bid for top six status.

Yes, so far. But as I have said, the policy is weakening as we are no longer the only club selling players for huge fees. In fact, other clubs are selling inferior product for higher prices. The Southampton Way is a selling strategy that can only be judge on the profit and the quality of replacements. It is a permanently ongoing gamble, rather than a nice steady rise, as some suggest.

Again, I am not knocking the strategy as a whole, but we have to have a summer at some stage where we are perceived to be totally in control or the strategy will weaken further.
 
It could be argued that this policy will only make the big clubs more secure and cement us in the mid table bracket, while clubs we currently call midtable may take the risks to leapfrog us and start taking our players too. Crystal Palace may soon take this step.

Just like Newcastle did, eh?

Doom, gloom, boom.
 
If you are a big club feeder you will never do more than irritate the status quo. The policy is no doubt a good one for a small club - but it pins us firmly in a bracket and gradually undermines itself as a posiition. The awful price we got for Mane is a case in point. We won't get terrific prices now as it I known we sell to bigger clubs and that we tell players they can go. Not a great bargaining chip.
For all your pointing our clear weaknesses, I can't recall ever reading your solution.

Are you as gloomy in real life Spacedsaint, because virtually every post I read of yours is pointing out a negative. Now you can call me out here for whatever you like, but I just want to try and understand why it is you only ever seem to see the negative in things our club does.

We didn't get a "terrible" fee for Mane. I am happy for someone to argue that with the current climate it could have been higher, but "terrible" ... really?
 
Well, because he wasn't going to sign a new contract, and at the end of the day we're a business. Letting him go for free when he has a decent resale value would be madness. Now of course if he was completely irreplaceable, that might be different. But he's not.
Agree entirely.