The Arsenal Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joss
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 21K
  • Views Views 2M
fuelledbypassion said:
Kinda does because if there has been inflation in the market, then everone's value theoretically rises. So despite Fabregas not playing as well this season as last, his value is probably around the same as it was last year.
Click to expand...


look at the circumstances both of them were bought in
 
Fabregas for just 35 ******* Million? Lol. He is worth way more than that.. I agree with whoever was arguing for "Prices depend on other transfers". Thats how it works. Barca are ready to pay close to 40 Million pounds (Cash plus player) for Sancez and no way he is worth more than Fabregas.. And we are talking about European market here, not just English..
 
Ride The Walrus said:
to be fair, Torres was always going to be sold for whatever Carroll cost plus 15 million, that was the plan.
Click to expand...

And Carroll is not worth 35 Million. Chelsea just panicked and paid lot of money and Newcastle did well to squeeze every penny..
 
fuelledbypassion said:
So the transfer values were not independent from one another? That's kind of the point that I'm arguing...
Click to expand...

According to rumors, Chelsea negotiated with Newcastle and Chelsea had to pay Carroll plus 15 Million for Torres. I wont believe this, but this was the rumor..
 
Ride The Walrus said:
to be fair, Torres was always going to be sold for whatever Carroll cost plus 15 million, that was the plan.
Click to expand...

that is absolute Bull ****.. Torres was going to be sold for a maximum price possible, Liverpool never intended to just make 15million, thats why they bidded for Gomez on deadline day.
 
Scott said:
that is absolute Bull ****.. Torres was going to be sold for a maximum price possible, Liverpool never intended to just make 15million, thats why they bidded for Gomez on deadline day.
Click to expand...

We didn't bid for Gomez on deadline day, we bid for him early January time.Look I cannot be bothered arguing, especially since this isn't the thread to talk about it.
 
Ride The Walrus said:
We didn't bid for Gomez on deadline day, we bid for him early January time.Look I cannot be bothered arguing, especially since this isn't the thread to talk about it.
Click to expand...

Well then dont beileve stupid rumours, and just so you know You had 20million reject on deadline day...
 
Scott said:
Well then dont beileve stupid rumours, and just so you know You had 20million reject on deadline day...
Click to expand...

Just so you know, we didn't.

John Henry was quoted saying we wanted whatever Carroll cost plus 15 million, hardly rumours.
 
fuelledbypassion said:
The circumstance being that Torres was in terrible form and still fetched £50m?
Click to expand...


1. As for the Torres transfer we were in desperate need of a striker, the Drog had malaria, Kalou and Malouda were at their inconsistent best and Anelka was never gonna get us through... it was transfer deadline day and we badly need players who can turn around that season as our Project Youth had failed miserably plus Torres did not want to stay at Liverpool and Liverpool did well to squeeze us out of every penny considering they knew we were loaded and needed players badly ... so yes that was unfortunate but it happened, we may have overpaid but that was that

2. As for the Carroll Transfer, Liverpool were about to sell Torres which they would have had 2 as he was unhappy at the club and wanted a move to a bigger club leaving them with one striker in Kuyt who is more of a winger these days meaning they would have been desperately short upfront had they not bought a new frontman on the last day, they were after Suarez but they neded someone to cover for him... Newcastle exploited this fact and squeezed Pool out of every penny as Newcastle knew Pool desperately needed Carroll and they exploited this fact by making Pool overpay


They were deadline day transfers in the midst of bad seasons for both Chelsea and Liverpool, what did u expect... for people to remain calm
 
Ride The Walrus said:
Just so you know, we didn't.

John Henry was quoted saying we wanted whatever Carroll cost plus 15 million, hardly rumours.
Click to expand...

Show me this Quote, Or is it another Tabloid exclusive..... And Funny how he likely said this after you over paid for Carrol.
 
Scott said:
Show me this Quote, Or is it another Tabloid exclusive..... And Funny how he likely said this after you over paid for Carrol.
Click to expand...

There's no denying that £35 million for Andy Carroll was a fee that turned heads on the final day of the transfer window -- double what many considered the young English striker's value. Selling Fernando Torres for £50 million, though, may have actually been a considerably crazier transaction, given the Spaniard's form over the past 18 months, and given the £15 million net profit from the two deals, Liverpool owner John Henry believes that the Reds won out on the frenzied final day of transfers.

"The fee for Torres was dependent on what Newcastle asked for Carroll,'' Henry told the Guardian.

"The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle. Those prices could have been £35million [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20million [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a **** of a deal. We felt the same way," he said.

Henry, in fact, was shocked that Chelsea was willing to pay so much money for Torres, given the club's financial woes.

"I was surprised Monday morning to receive an offer [from Chelsea for Fernando Torres] in that amount [£50 million] at the same time they were announcing such large losses [£71million for 2009-10],'' Henry said.

Considering the sale of Ryan Babel and the acquisition of Luis Suarez, Liverpool spent and sold nearly identical sums in January.

"We've always spent money we've generated rather than deficit-spending and that will be the case in Liverpool,'' Henry explained. "It's up to us to generate enough revenue to be successful over the long term. We have not and will not deviate from that.''

Check and mate.
 
Ride The Walrus said:
There's no denying that £35 million for Andy Carroll was a fee that turned heads on the final day of the transfer window -- double what many considered the young English striker's value. Selling Fernando Torres for £50 million, though, may have actually been a considerably crazier transaction, given the Spaniard's form over the past 18 months, and given the £15 million net profit from the two deals, Liverpool owner John Henry believes that the Reds won out on the frenzied final day of transfers.

"The fee for Torres was dependent on what Newcastle asked for Carroll,'' Henry told the Guardian.

"The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle. Those prices could have been £35million [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20million [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a **** of a deal. We felt the same way," he said.

Henry, in fact, was shocked that Chelsea was willing to pay so much money for Torres, given the club's financial woes.

"I was surprised Monday morning to receive an offer [from Chelsea for Fernando Torres] in that amount [£50 million] at the same time they were announcing such large losses [£71million for 2009-10],'' Henry said.

Considering the sale of Ryan Babel and the acquisition of Luis Suarez, Liverpool spent and sold nearly identical sums in January.

"We've always spent money we've generated rather than deficit-spending and that will be the case in Liverpool,'' Henry explained. "It's up to us to generate enough revenue to be successful over the long term. We have not and will not deviate from that.''

Check and mate.
Click to expand...

Oh, so i didnt say, He most likely said this afterwards... He is a clever man and it looked like his little Bullshit Story fooled a few deluded scousers after all.
 
Scott said:
Oh, so i didnt say, He most likely said this afterwards... He is a clever man and it looked like his little Bullshit Story fooled a few deluded scousers after all.
Click to expand...

What ever you say Scott, know when to admit defeat and leave since this is an Arsenal thread.
 
Ride The Walrus said:
What ever you say Scott, know when to admit defeat and leave since this is an Arsenal thread.
Click to expand...

You deluded, If you think he would only sell Torres to make a 15million pofit on Carrol. So if Toon demanded 70 for carrol, you would of asked for 85 for Torres.. Thought as much.
 
Scott said:
You deluded, If you think he would only sell Torres to make a 15million pofit on Carrol. So if Toon demanded 70 for carrol, you would of asked for 85 for Torres.. Thought as much.
Click to expand...

Urm...yes? That is the whole point I've been trying to get across, nice to see you're realising my original point after about 10 posts on this topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top