CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 All those 'free' transfers may not be quite as free as we thought : http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/sport/Pilgrims-paid-144-000-agents-month-period/article-731334-detail/article.html Par for the course I suppose but still a lot of money for a club that had to sack the kit man to save a few quid . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 What can you do though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 van de Waals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 So when we are lying 23rd in the division following Rupey Baby's decision to loan out Stern John... We are 5th in the whole CCC for payments made to agents. Hmmm...hardly good business sense to pay out that much considering? OK then, look at some examples... Lee Holmes - good buy, but hmmm arranged through Van Der Waals? Ryan Smith - sh1te, hmm but arranged through Van Der Waals???? Sense a trend anyone?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribbo Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 put that into context plymouth did £144,000 for 28 transfers in agent fees, thats what 5grand and a bit per transfer isnt it? if anyone has more time than me spare the report from the football league can be found here : http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/5c/32/0,,10794~143964,00.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordswoodsaints Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 clubs should own players,effectively becoming their agents,they decide when they should be sold and for how much. when they are sold to another club they then become the property of that club and they then become their agents..........i cant see the point in paying some jumped up little double glazing salesman for something that could be done by the club. an agent is just a parasite,if any problems arise with a player then the players union could step in to sort it out,the agent is not needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribbo Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 So when we are lying 23rd in the division following Rupey Baby's decision to loan out Stern John... We are 5th in the whole CCC for payments made to agents. Hmmm...hardly good business sense to pay out that much considering? OK then, look at some examples... Lee Holmes - good buy, but hmmm arranged through Van Der Waals? Ryan Smith - sh1te, hmm but arranged through Van Der Waals???? Sense a trend anyone?? ok right, i'll bite with my last post of the night. http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/5c/32/0,,10794~143964,00.pdf cut from the official report. - 1st jul 2008 - 31 dec 2008 new registrations -17 updated contract - 4 cancelled contract 3 loans - 3 total transactions - 27 total transactionstotal amount to agents - 252,674 thats under £10,000 for each transaction if you just divvie it up, obviously some more, some less AND it's down on the amount committed 1 jul -> 31 dec '07 (312,950). Ribbo (ps, no im not a lowe luvvie) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 Maybe we paid agents to get rid of players. 252K to save a couple of million isn't such a bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 27 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 27 February, 2009 Newsflash................... Football Agent caught on camera leaving St Mary's last night . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 Maybe we paid agents to get rid of players. 252K to save a couple of million isn't such a bad idea. I was wondering that as well...sad state of our national game if we end up paying those paracites to get players OFF the wage bill.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 ok right, i'll bite with my last post of the night. http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/5c/32/0,,10794~143964,00.pdf cut from the official report. - 1st jul 2008 - 31 dec 2008 new registrations -17 updated contract - 4 cancelled contract 3 loans - 3 total transactions - 27 total transactionstotal amount to agents - 252,674 thats under £10,000 for each transaction if you just divvie it up, obviously some more, some less AND it's down on the amount committed 1 jul -> 31 dec '07 (312,950). Ribbo (ps, no im not a lowe luvvie) Interesting, but that's still £10k too much - not aportioning blame towards our board though, just football in general. Appreciate for every Graeme Le Saux (intelligence wise) you get a Jermaine Pennant but can't see how those sort of fees could be justified.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dicko Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 Is it any different to companies using employment agencies to find new employees? I think the arrangement is usually 25% of the successful candidate's salary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyer Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 Is it any different to companies using employment agencies to find new employees? I think the arrangement is usually 25% of the successful candidate's salary Isnt that what a club scouting network is for? Clubs should be banned from paying agents, any cut should come out of the players money. Either that or ban them altogether, the leeches arent needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docker-p Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 With agents come kick backs and bungs. Is that a small window into why Askham, Richards, and Withers etc continue to support Lowe? :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilsburydoughboy Posted 27 February, 2009 Share Posted 27 February, 2009 With agents come kick backs and bungs. Is that a small window into why Askham, Richards, and Withers etc continue to support Lowe? :roll: Get on the case Columbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAULACZT Posted 28 February, 2009 Share Posted 28 February, 2009 van de Waals? trousers....little equation for you to ponder....our friend van der waals...his friend....Tony Pulis.....D.Gorre currently our rotational reserve/first team coach (ex.reserve coach Stoke City FC)....Pulis junior (Portsmouth 0 games,Stoke 2,Torquay 3,Plymouth 5,Grimsby 9,Bristol Rovers 1,Southampton 0, 2 year contract)....Andrew Davies to Stoke City ('un-disclosed fee',now on loan at Preston North End).... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Godfather Posted 28 February, 2009 Share Posted 28 February, 2009 Their is no such thing as a 'free transfer' all it means is the player gets a larger signiing on fee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 28 February, 2009 Share Posted 28 February, 2009 trousers....little equation for you to ponder....our friend van der waals...his friend....Tony Pulis.....D.Gorre currently our rotational reserve/first team coach (ex.reserve coach Stoke City FC)....Pulis junior (Portsmouth 0 games,Stoke 2,Torquay 3,Plymouth 5,Grimsby 9,Bristol Rovers 1,Southampton 0, 2 year contract)....Andrew Davies to Stoke City ('un-disclosed fee',now on loan at Preston North End).... Hmmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelkel31 Posted 28 February, 2009 Share Posted 28 February, 2009 What can you do though? the agents work for the players, the players should be paying there agents. the only reason a club pays an agent is because the agent says they will not let a player do this or that unless they get there share, there is no place in football for this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 28 February, 2009 Share Posted 28 February, 2009 Hmmm... Hmmmm.... +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Perrin Posted 28 February, 2009 Share Posted 28 February, 2009 trousers....little equation for you to ponder....our friend van der waals...his friend....Tony Pulis.....D.Gorre currently our rotational reserve/first team coach (ex.reserve coach Stoke City FC)....Pulis junior (Portsmouth 0 games,Stoke 2,Torquay 3,Plymouth 5,Grimsby 9,Bristol Rovers 1,Southampton 0, 2 year contract)....Andrew Davies to Stoke City ('un-disclosed fee',now on loan at Preston North End).... I see the link, but I struggle with the problem with Pulis junior. He was clearly a makeweight in the Davis deal (ie. here's a million quid for Davies, but we'll give you £1.3m if you take Pulis Jr off our hands, and pay him £100K a year). If it didn't make business sense to take Pulis on, I am sure that Lowe wouldn't do it. For all his faults, he drives a hard transfer bargain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alanh Posted 28 February, 2009 Share Posted 28 February, 2009 the agents work for the players, the players should be paying there agents. the only reason a club pays an agent is because the agent says they will not let a player do this or that unless they get there share, there is no place in football for this! Not true. Clubs employ agents to act on their behald in negotiations oer player transfers. I would think that the bigger fees that we paid were to find homes for the players we have loaned out this season as that was where we needed to be proactie. I doubt many of the players coming into the club cost much in agent fees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 5 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 5 March, 2009 http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/sport/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=NeilDoncaster&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=NeilDoncaster&itemid=NOED05%20Mar%202009%2000%3A32%3A26%3A380 In total SFC has paid around £1.75m to football agents over the last 3 years , most of it in 2006 when Skacel , Davis , Viafara . Rasiak ...etc signed . 2006 - £1.1m 2007 - £350k 2008 - £300k That's the price of doing business in the the modern game I suppose but I can't help thinking that £1.7m could have got us a pretty good player or made a sizeable dent in the overdraft . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribbo Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/sport/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=NeilDoncaster&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=NeilDoncaster&itemid=NOED05%20Mar%202009%2000%3A32%3A26%3A380 In total SFC has paid around £1.75m to football agents over the last 3 years , most of it in 2006 when Skacel , Davis , Viafara . Rasiak ...etc signed . 2006 - £1.1m 2007 - £350k 2008 - £300k That's the price of doing business in the the modern game I suppose but I can't help thinking that £1.7m could have got us a pretty good player or made a sizeable dent in the overdraft . if you chart the ups and downs of saints over those last 3 seasons, you can see how they were racked up, the cost cutting, the renegotiation of contracts, releasing players, buying a whole new team in, selling a couple of lorry load worth of players etc, alll the loans. It all adds up, stability is the key, but stability is something thats not been around our club in a while and wont be either for the forseeable (but lets not go down that road ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 (edited) van de Waals? That was my question. In the Sun last weekend it had Saints, Norwich and Charlton as the largest payers of agents fees - between us paying 20% of all CCC fees, I think was the figure. So, why? Why Mr Lowe? Kim need to make some Harryesque payments? Sounds VERY strange to me when we are in such a financial state. Edited 5 March, 2009 by SaintRobbie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 Hmmmm.... +1 +2... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribbo Posted 5 March, 2009 Share Posted 5 March, 2009 That was my question. In the Sun last weekend it had Saints, Norwich and Charlton as the largest payers of agents fees - between us paying 20% of all CCC fees, I think was the figure. So, why? Why Mr Lowe? Kim need to make some Harryesque payments? Sounds VERY strange to me when we are in such a financial state. 2006 - £1.1m 2007 - £350k 2008 - £300k as per Chapels post further up and the evidence given in this thread, you can see the cost breakdown quite easily, the biggest money was spent when we were trying to push for promotion, further costs were occured trying to cut back when that bid failed and we overspent. Ruperts dutch guard dog having contacts at other clubs and in the game is nothing knew in the world of football, Lawrie had contacts, his son was/is an agent it's very advantagous for aquiring playing staff and sorting mutually beneficial deals. whats key to all this is that the financial aspect is controlled and the money stays within the football industry which is pretty hard these days! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 2006 - £1.1m 2007 - £350k 2008 - £300k as per Chapels post further up and the evidence given in this thread, you can see the cost breakdown quite easily, the biggest money was spent when we were trying to push for promotion, further costs were occured trying to cut back when that bid failed and we overspent. Ruperts dutch guard dog having contacts at other clubs and in the game is nothing knew in the world of football, Lawrie had contacts, his son was/is an agent it's very advantagous for aquiring playing staff and sorting mutually beneficial deals. whats key to all this is that the financial aspect is controlled and the money stays within the football industry which is pretty hard these days! Not the point though is it? Point is that we are currently paying out more agents fees than almost any other club in the CCC. Why is that? And for what return? Seems shall we say - somewhat.... errr.... strange... given Lowe's revulsion of agents in the past and need for prudence. Buying credit as you outline above for agents fees (another drain on resources) seems a little luxurious given the financial situation Mr Lowe accuses Crouch of leaving for him... personally I'd have rather seen Rasiak and/or Stern John in a Saints shirt than be one of the largest squanderers of money on agents in the CCC. Perhaps having a couple of quality players wages paid may have ensured survival in the league. Doesn't add up. Lowe (who hates agents and has to run a tighter ship fanancially than at any other time) + the mysterious Kim van de Waal + Press reports of strangely high payments to agents = at least an explanation dont you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 That was my question. In the Sun last weekend it had Saints, Norwich and Charlton as the largest payers of agents fees - between us paying 20% of all CCC fees, I think was the figure. So, why? Why Mr Lowe? Kim need to make some Harryesque payments? Sounds VERY strange to me when we are in such a financial state.well who do you believe the Sun or the league who have the figures. We were not even in the top 3. The agents fees have gone down this season and last , well done to all who have trimmed that bill over the last 2 seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 6 March, 2009 Share Posted 6 March, 2009 Not the point though is it? Point is that we are currently paying out more agents fees than almost any other club in the CCC. Why is that? And for what return? Maybe it because we have negotiated contracts and contract changed for more players than any other club. Players coming in, going out and signing new contracts/extensions all involve agent cuts... plus loans both ways too!. Seeing as we have done the above so many times, it perfectly natural that we would have spend more on agents than other clubs. As for the return, I cant say for sure but I would assume that by moving some players off the book either on loan or permanently has helped us stay fluid for a while. And of course, when they go out, you need to cheaper options in. So if spending a few hundred thousand on agent fees has meant that we have saved a few million on wages, the return (on a purely financial basis) as been OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now