Jump to content

The Mckenna Dilemma

dj_bollocks

By dj_bollocks,
in AFC and Scottish Football

Recommended Posts

Scotty_Toronto Mentor

Scotty_Toronto

Posted
Posted

2m would be a record fee, Albert

 

And by default, so would anything more.

 

That's like having a business worth 50k and going into the dragons den , asking for 50k for 10pc because it will be worth 500k next year

 

No it's not.

 

Doesn't work like that dumb dumb and for that reason, I'm out

 

You sure you're not out cause you're struggling?

 

HOW THE FUCK COULD YOU GET 2 PLAYERS EXACTLY THE SAME, IF ONE PLAYS AGAINST SPFL DROSS AND ONE PLAYS AGAINST TOP STRIKERS WEEK IN WEEK OUT YOU CRETIN

 

digging-a-hole.jpg

 

It was a hypothetical example to show the invalidity of value based on location.

Link to comment

  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Parklife
Parklife

Nope. He made his Netherlands debut 10/10/2015, after he had left Celtic.   His Champions league matches consisted of 6 games, 5 losses and the conceding of 13 goals. He was also part of the Celtic s

Parklife
Parklife

Anderson was a brilliant player for us. A very good defender and certainly a modern legend.  His weakness was definitely strong, physical forwards though. Which is probably why he struggled down

ebbe
ebbe

The windows in your house must be fucking spotless.

Scotty_Toronto Mentor

Scotty_Toronto

Posted
Posted

You don't buy potential though, you gamble on it.

 

Correct.

 

Managers with their jobs on the line and teams in for a push for promotion or facing relegation battles are more likely to be forced to gamble than when everyone is sitting on zero points.

 

As I've said... January would be the best time to re-evaluate.

Link to comment
SheepieBaaBaa Newbie

SheepieBaaBaa

Posted
Posted

What pitiful offer have we accepted, Magnus?

What pitiful offer have we accepted, Magnus?

No fucking idea why you are calling me "Magnus".

 

We haven't accepted a pitiful offer yet, but 2million would be one.

 

I always wondered why so many people on here seem to think you are a cunt, thanks for clarifying THAT point.

 

Now fuck off and play with your telephones or whatever you do.

Link to comment
SheepieBaaBaa Newbie

SheepieBaaBaa

Posted
Posted

Correct.

 

Managers with their jobs on the line and teams in for a push for promotion or facing relegation battles are more likely to be forced to gamble than when everyone is sitting on zero points.

 

As I've said... January would be the best time to re-evaluate.

Gamble is the wrong word.

 

Assessment of potential and the possibility of a player not fulfilling that potential is a measurable and controllable risk.

 

Notice I said Risk, not uncertainty. The difference between taking measured and calculated investment and blindly gambling.

 

Potential can be assessed and so has a value. No you don't pay full whack for it, but you do pay a risk weighted premium for it.

Link to comment
craegDAMH Newbie

craegDAMH

Posted
Posted

If Scottish clubs accept pitiful offers, they will continue to receive pitiful offers.

 

It is not different market. It is a market for football talent and potential.

 

Last time I checked it was the same game, same rules and sane physical attributes for success.

 

No one is saying accept derisory offers.

 

There are a number of factors which mean Scottish players can be purchased for less than "the same" player from a club in England. Football talent isn't a commodity traded on an exchange. Each transfer is a deal between two parties, that's how the valuation is determined.

 

Things that would mean a lower valuation for McKenna because he is an Aberdeen player and not a Huddersfield player include:

 

- Home Grown Rules - teams have to have a certain number of players who were developed by English academies in their European squad. This is why the English player market is so inflated, there is a limited supply of quality home grown players and when things are in short supply they cost more. McKenna wouldn't fulfill the same home grown requirement and so is worth less a "foreign" developed player.

 

- Transfer Fees vs Club Revenue - A club like Huddersfield has a much higher revenue than us, so the proportionate valuation where they just "have to sell" because it's too good an offer compared to their financial situation. If we were offered half our annual revenue for a player and deemed that too good to refuse, imagine what the bid would have to be for it to be half of Huddersfield's revenue?

 

- Wage Demands - The promise of a £20k a week contract down south for McKenna if there was interest would be impossible for us to match. Therefore there is going to be a point where he wants to leave and the ball will be in his court. He can run down his contract and leave, or we can sell him. If he played for Huddersfield and there was interest, they could easily match any contract offer (within reason) so they are under much less pressure to accept an offer to stop him leaving for free, or to move on an unsettled player.

 

These things all matter. The relative size of each club in a negotiation matters. It's too simplistic to say "aye but the same player doon there wid be £20 million if he played fir Huddersfield" and expect that we should expect the same.

 

You could build the same house in two different locations, and they are going to be valued differently. You could have two of the same house on the same street, but one owner is wealthy and the other is desperate to sell, they would sell for different values.

Link to comment
craegDAMH Newbie

craegDAMH

Posted
Posted

 

Agreed.

 

If our evaluation isn't met, then we simply keep McKenna for now in the likelihood of his stock continuing to rise.

 

All too often the valuation has been dictated to us and we wilt.

 

Yes, and the number at which we would sell is lower than the number at which Huddersfield would sell, for the reasons I outlined.

Link to comment
Scotty_Toronto Mentor

Scotty_Toronto

Posted
Posted

Yes, and the number at which we would sell is lower than the number at which Huddersfield would sell, for the reasons I outlined.

 

I'd still hold out for parity.

 

Home Grown Rules - we can easily get the money I'm suggesting outwit the top 7 teams in the EPL.

 

Transfer Fees v Club Revenues - shouldn't be a determining factor for us. We're quite simply just selling to a richer club. We have the player. They have the money. Pay up.

 

Wage Demands - realistically not worried about McKenna running down his 5 year contract. He's wise enough to accept that he currently needs to continue to develop at AFC for now.

 

You could build the same house in two different locations, and they are going to be valued differently. You could have two of the same house on the same street, but one owner is wealthy and the other is desperate to sell, they would sell for different values.

 

We're not desperate to sell, though.

 

We have to understand the value that comes from holding the cards.

Link to comment
Scotty_Toronto Mentor

Scotty_Toronto

Posted
Posted

Your problem though is you think for some reason he is worth just now, what he would be after playing in the premiership down there

 

I don't.

 

I've simply continually said that we should hold out until a club with loads of dosh NEEDS Scott McKenna (cause we don't need to sell him right now).

 

We have leverage.

 

We just need brains, a spine, and some patience now.

Link to comment
Scotty_Toronto Mentor

Scotty_Toronto

Posted
Posted

Same player in a Celtic top...bids would have another zero on the end.

That is not due to their stellar champions league performances, that is due to the fact that bidding clubs know that derisory offers will not be entertained.

 

 

Correct.

 

Things like 'Celtic' tops, club revenues, TV money, etc. all unnecessarily muddy the waters when they shouldn't be factors at all.

 

It's all smoke and mirrors reasoning.

Link to comment
dj_bollocks Experienced

dj_bollocks

Posted
  • Author
Posted

You don't buy potential though, you gamble on it.

 

Example; Celtic quoted £25m for Tierney but Everton not willing to gamble on paying Tierney the equivalent salary a player of that value would command, eg £100k per week for 5 years. They might pay him £50k per week for 5 years as he has not yet proved he can cut it week in week out against top class strikers, so Tierney at best is probably worth £12.5m, a similar level to what Southampton paid for van Dijk. Players like Tierney, Dembele, like van Dijk before them, have all just about hit a ceiling at Celtic; their value can't really develop too much more until such time Celtic regularly get through ECL group stages.

 

Similar rule applies to McKenna until we get to Europa League group stages and beyond. Right now, with a good agent he might be able to get a 4yr £15k per week contract and with that he'd be worth £3m. For this reason the future for Scottish clubs getting reward for developing potential is through the sell-on clauses.

 

And that's clearly why the bonus is in the sell on clause.... Celtic pocketing and extra £7 million quid or whatever it was means the got a bumper £20+ million quit for a defender that cost them what, £2.5 million ? If McKenna gets bought by someone for £3 million who goes on to sell him for £30 million and we have a 10% clause we'd make £6 million quid. That's the gamble. To many of our so called wonder boys in the past all got released after moving down south for a pittance.

Link to comment
robbojunior Collaborator

robbojunior

Posted
Posted

 

I don't.

 

I've simply continually said that we should hold out until a club with loads of dosh NEEDS Scott McKenna (cause we don't need to sell him right now).

 

We have leverage.

 

We just need brains, a spine, and some patience now.

Ironically 3 things Millertime has a severe lack of
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
euan2020 Explorer

euan2020

Posted
Posted

HOW THE FUCK COULD YOU GET 2 PLAYERS EXACTLY THE SAME, IF ONE PLAYS AGAINST SPFL DROSS AND ONE PLAYS AGAINST TOP STRIKERS WEEK IN WEEK OUT YOU CRETIN

 

wind your beak in, Buzby, no wonder everyone on here takes you for the fool

 

what are the top strikers you speak of in League 1 ?

Link to comment
dj_bollocks Experienced

dj_bollocks

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Your last sentence is a total contradiction

 

If they got released after moving, then getting a "pittance" for them kinda levels out?

 

Huh ? They should have been sold for a larger amount. Either we were bullied into accepting a sell on clause or more generally we haven't got a clue as a club how to negotiate a decent layered deal....

Link to comment
minijc Grand Master

minijc

Posted
Posted

He's too slow to ever get a huge transfer anyway, everyone seems to be getting carried away.

He will stay for this season possibly till January 2020 or summer '20 he will leave for four million with a 10% sell on clause to newly promoted Derby County.

 

FACT

Arite AgentScotland, don't shit yersel.

Link to comment
Chewie37 Newbie

Chewie37

Posted
Posted

Or, they were actually shite and that's why ended up released

Look at the "legend" Anderson as a prime example

What Anderson who was bought for a decent fee to play in the Premiership then got a major career threatening injury? Bought by one of the bigger name managers at the time who'd played against him and was one of arguably the best midfielders ever to play in the British Isles? THAT (MT™) Anderson

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...