DB11 Posted 31 January 2007 Posted 31 January 2007 Hello, if you look on teletext or something.. wherever a list of all the transfers are, some have a price (disclosed) and some say undisclosed. Why do some clubs keep the price undisclosed? I mean, does it cost more to keep it private or...? I'm just wondering why some transfers are un disclosed. Is it a mutual agreement? And what are the benefits? Thanks
Collymore Posted 31 January 2007 Posted 31 January 2007 I suppose it's so that other clubs won't know how much money is involved e.g Watford buy Williams for 500k from leicester undisclosed - leicester negotiate to buy Joey from burnley, burnley don't know how much dosh leciester got from watford so may accept 200K guessing that we may have only sold Williams for 250k it's like a giant game of poker! Watford then might put a bid in for another player and pretend that Williams cost an arm and leg even though they got him on the cheap. I'm sure there are other reasons but that seems the most obvious.
DB11 Posted 31 January 2007 Author Posted 31 January 2007 Oh ok, thank you for your quick answer Maybe Leicester could tell us how much they got him from Forest for then now he's gone?
Collymore Posted 31 January 2007 Posted 31 January 2007 Oh ok, thank you for your quick answer Maybe Leicester could tell us how much they got him from Forest for then now he's gone? I'm not saying that's right! You would be able to find out i suppose if you asked the right people. Would have to be shown at some point for a PLC anyway.
Leonisco Posted 31 January 2007 Posted 31 January 2007 I think the club should friggin well tell us how much money is involved in a transfer cos ultimately it's the fans money they're using (gate receipts etc.), so we have a right to know.
Collymore Posted 31 January 2007 Posted 31 January 2007 Oh ok, thank you for your quick answer Maybe Leicester could tell us how much they got him from Forest for then now he's gone? I thought it was open knowledge that 500k was agreed through a tribunal?
davieG Posted 31 January 2007 Posted 31 January 2007 I think the club should friggin well tell us how much money is involved in a transfer cos ultimately it's the fans money they're using (gate receipts etc.), so we have a right to know. Maybe but would you want them to end up paying more for a playerv as a result?
DB11 Posted 1 February 2007 Author Posted 1 February 2007 I thought it was open knowledge that 500k was agreed through a tribunal? Yes, plus extra money based on whether or not Foxes got promotion in the first 2 years and a 15% sell on fee. I just forgot; that's all
Guest Posted 3 February 2007 Posted 3 February 2007 I'd like to think it was at the selling club's request..."and if we could keep it under wraps, we don't want our fans knowing that we accepted a bid of £2.84 and a collection of last year's NOTWs for our most gifted player...."
Sly Posted 3 February 2007 Posted 3 February 2007 I'm surprised more trasfers are undisclosed. Its all price wars when it comes to buying and selling assets and a football club is no different to that. I know I wouldn't want other potential customers (football clubs) benchmarking purchasing players from us on the sale of one of our previous players.
lildave3 Posted 4 February 2007 Posted 4 February 2007 I'm surprised more trasfers are undisclosed. Its all price wars when it comes to buying and selling assets and a football club is no different to that. I know I wouldn't want other potential customers (football clubs) benchmarking purchasing players from us on the sale of one of our previous players. Understand what you're saying, just annoys the fans because they want to know if they've let a player go for nowhere near high enough or got a great price.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.