Transfer thread Summer 2015
- Thread starter Walsh.i.am
- Start date
-
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
-
Your stats are as bad as your valuations, he's played more games than that, he has more assists than that and he's scored goals, one of them against Norwich ffs.
For what it's worth (pardon the pun), I think the player's valuation is nearer to what Hull are wanting rather than what we are offering. Realistically our maximum offer IMO should be between £5-£6M, if the Tigers don't bite (pardon another pun
), then we should walk away and let some other club get mugged off 
J
JKCanary
Guest
Brady really isn't worth much more than £4.5m, if that tbh. If we offer anything like £5m Hull should (and I bet will) bite our hands off, because the guy will be able to leave in less than 12 months for absolutely nothing.
If we pay as much as £5-6m we are getting mugged off a bit, but that would be an indicator that we think he's got massive potential and Neil is really keen as he sees him as a good fit.
Lambretta doesn't have a clue, he's just wumming.
If we pay as much as £5-6m we are getting mugged off a bit, but that would be an indicator that we think he's got massive potential and Neil is really keen as he sees him as a good fit.
Lambretta doesn't have a clue, he's just wumming.
Assuming that we buy Brady, his value to us will be whatever we buy him for and the value to Hull will be whatever they sold him for. However that does not mean that is his true value. It's the same with Mings, the value Bournemouth bought him for and the value Ipswich sold him for is what both clubs agreed. It doesn't mean he's worth that to anyone else. Players never get bought or sold for there true value. I guess its a bit like houses they are generally bought & sold for a price that doesn't represent their value.
Nothing wrong with that, I´m possibly a bit biased in the other direction
, as I always thought that he was a touch overrated. Yes, he put in a good cross and yes, he had a lethal free-kick, when it worked for him, but as a winger he was fairly useless, he could never beat his man either with pace or trickery, and his only thought was to run at a defender, wait for a tackle, then hope for a free-kick, which very soon, both defenders and refs got wise to. I would still say that Hull paid over the top for him, and with prices as they are these days, £5 mill for Brady certainly doesn´t seem to be out of the way.
Last edited:
Carrabuh I've explained this before. You always react in such a close-minded fashion when you're ignorant about things.
The transfermarkt valuations are integral to clubs' balance sheets - it's how they calculate their total assets. It's absolutely imperative that you have an asset valuation so that you can offset the amortisation against your profit. It's exactly the same, if you run a business, as valuing your computers and then calculating the depreciation over time (because eventually they become worthless and need replacing).
Transfermarkt is a pro valuation company. Those ones online are rough (almost certainly computer-generated) valuations based on a few key variables.
Every time a club gets a player, they will hire a company like transfermarkt to carry out a full valuation. This will be based on the key variables above, with a whole load more assessments to get a very accurate figure of a player's "value" as a "fixed asset". It is absolutely imperative that an assessment like this is carried out because everything is counted down to the last penny.
There is absolutely nothing bollocks about them.
As for their utility for transfer prices, as others have already explained, it's a bit of a guessing game. But a player will rarely go for more than about 3.5-4 times asset valuation and that would only be if a club is desperate for them and they are on a long contract. I.e. not Brady.
It's obvious that the valuations are pretty much bang on, though, because if a club is keen to sell a player the price is almost always within a couple of hundred thousand (which is the margin of error when the more accurate valuation is carried out). Take a look at Tom Ince, as the perfect example of a player going for bang on his asset value because a club was keen to sell...
The other reason the valuations are essential, is not for us but from a legal perspective. This allows clubs to ensure their directors/managers etc aren't doing anything dodgy.
If you don't believe any of that, read up on the Jean Tigana case. It's all there. This valuation malarky has been going on for years and it gets ever more complicated and important.
Honestly, I think some of you see the Premier League as just an expensive version of village cricket. Open your eyes, it's big business. I would go so far as to say that if the above explanation is nothing less than slaphead style screamingly obvious once it's been explained why, then you really are more dogmatically ignorant than I thought.
See above. They are. It is perfectly legitimate to take the asset valuation, accept that it's a rough, but reasonably reliable estimate, and then multiply it by a number based on what you know about the circumstances.
You'll rarely be bang on, but:
(1) if the club is keen to sell, multiply by 1 (if they are desperate to offload it may well be less)
(2) if the club don't want to sell, but the player only has, say 12 months on his contract, multiply by somewhere between 1.5-3
(3) if the club don't want to sell and they have the player tied to a long term contract then it will probably be over 3 times
Obviously if it's Liverpol you might get as high as four times...
The only thing is that the players over about £10m the multiples get lower (because the risk is greater).
I see the latest rumour says Hull value Brady at £5m, quelle surprise 
(That's from the Irish Sun, the well-known Norwich City newspaper)
(That's from the Irish Sun, the well-known Norwich City newspaper)
I see the latest rumour says Hull value Brady at £5m, quelle surprise
No it doesn't, The Irish Sun has suggested £5m, Hull City are still saying £9m.
And amortisation over the term of a players contract for accountancy purposes, is completely different to their transfer value.
At the end of the day, what the buying team is prepared to pay and what the selling team is prepared to accept are the only things that determine a transfer fee.
Are you capable of reading? Executives owe their employer legal duties. They simply can't sign a player for any amount they fancy. And it would be a dereliction of duty not to sell a player for a good price. I guarantee Hull will lap it up gratefully if we get close to offering £5m. And rightly so, we will have been a little mugged off.
Of course your own biased papers are going to paint a pretty picture for you! I'm going to go with the independent source on this one
Are you capable of reading? Executives owe their employer legal duties. They simply can't sign a player for any amount they fancy. And it would be a dereliction of duty not to sell a player for a good price. I guarantee Hull will lap it up gratefully if we get close to offering £5m. And rightly so, we will have been a little mugged off.
Of course your own biased papers are going to paint a pretty picture for you! I'm going to go with the independent source on this one
I've posted nothing unreasonable on this thread, I've merely my opinion on the situation regarding a Hull City player, a topic on which I believe I'm far better informed than you are. I wouldn't presume to tell you what you'd accept for one of your players, I'll leave you to it, though I might pop back after you've bid £5m.
Yeah, ok WUM.
You're certainly no better informed than anyone on here. You needed transfermarkt explained to you FFS.
True, I take that back and apologise - I meant it simply being a question of who was supposedly "better informed".
I think it's easier if you think of it like buying a house. The Seller will only sell for an amount a buyer is prepared to pay. BUT, that will almost certainly have been primarily dictated by advice from the agents and then the buyer will be restricted by their mortgage lender's very detailed (and bloody expensive) valuation. The companies behind transfermarkt's data (e.g. Orb Finance although I don't think they're hooked up to transfermarkt - I'm not actually sure which company is) simply fulfil that sort of idea.
So they don't tell you what will be paid. But they help the clubs price the risk by restricting the parameters.
A lot of good points made about Brady but at the end of the day it is about what a player is worth to the buying Club. A player that Tony Pulis would pay over the odds for because of his style of play would not attract a bid from Arsene Wenger. If AN feels that he needs Brady to strengthen his side then we might have to pay a bit over the odds for him but if he can get something similar or even better elsewhere for less then just move on. Personally I would rather pay £5m for a good player than save a couple of million signing a lesser one and mentioning Wenger again let us not forget the number of times he has haggled to try and get a player he wanted at a ' realistic price' only to see another Club nip in and sign the player for the asking price. Surely it is simply a question of how much AN feels Brady is worth to the Club
I think the main attraction of this guy Brady is his versatility to cover more than one position comfortably. If AN moves on from pursuing this target, he might sign a wide man for say, £3m, and a back up LB for a similar figure - whereas £5m for Brady appears to tick both boxes, hence saving David McNally (alias frugal Dougal
) a cool one million English pounds