You Get What You Pay For!

Most interesting thing in common for you both is the suggestion that the source might not be perfect rather than my point might not be accurate.

Well yeah. It's not that I disagree with what you're saying, I was just commenting that the source has questionable numbers (e.g., Ozil's valuation at €45m, but Sturridge's at €25m). Like I said, I love Transfermarkt but their numbers can be dodgy.

Well yeah. It's not that I disagree with what you're saying, I was just commenting that the source has questionable numbers (e.g., Ozil's valuation at €45m, but Sturridge's at €25m). Like I said, I love Transfermarkt but their numbers can be dodgy.

Given Sturridge is out injured for long periods he might not actually be undervalued, given we got him for 12 Million.

Anyway this wasn't where I wanted the thread to go. More important is that we lack investment in world class players.

Given Sturridge is out injured for long periods he might not actually be undervalued, given we got him for 12 Million.

Anyway this wasn't where I wanted the thread to go. More important is that we lack investment in world class players.

Well, if you can tell me a time when we bought world renowned star players I'll agree with you.

OK, we sometimes bought the best of British, but that's hardly the same thing.

Well, if you can tell me a time when we bought world renowned star players I'll agree with you.

OK, we sometimes bought the best of British, but that's hardly the same thing.

Again, wasn't really the point.

Given Sturridge is out injured for long periods he might not actually be undervalued, given we got him for 12 Million.

Anyway this wasn't where I wanted the thread to go. More important is that we lack investment in world class players.

The figures for the players were last updated August 2014, so his injury has no part in their valuation. But I digress.

Yes, we don't invest enough in top quality players. Lately it seems it has more to do with not paying high enough wages than it is not paying transfer fees.

Transfermarkt are rarely right (in Liverpool's case, basically never) when it comes to getting the transfer fee right. Why trust them on getting the subjective valuation of a player right?

Also, as a website they notoriously undervalue liverpool players.

Transfermarkt are rarely right (in Liverpool's case, basically never) when it comes to getting the transfer fee right. Why trust them on getting the subjective valuation of a player right?

It's good enough for Swiss Ramble to use for some of their analysis,
so it's good enough for me.

Raise a point about how our rivals have moved ahead by investing in proven attacking talent.
Watch as everybody focuses on transfermarkt and choose to ignore the F***ing point.

Thing is Racer other clubs get what they pay for we don't. We've spent over £200M (gross) since June 2012 and can anybody honestly, hand on heart, tell me that we're any better now than we were then?

It's good enough for Swiss Ramble to use for some of their analysis,
so it's good enough for me.

Raise a point about how our rivals have moved ahead by investing in proven attacking talent.
Watch as everybody focuses on transfermarkt and choose to ignore the f**king point.

Yet they are typically substantially off the CIES reports' valuations, a vastly more reputable (and indeed accurate) source - they have a margin of error of 7.5%

Yet they are typically substantially off the CIES reports' valuations, a vastly more reputable (and indeed accurate) source - they have a margin of error of 7.5%

If somebody wants to put those figures up or give me the link that would be great.
Otherwise....

Thing is Racer other clubs get what they pay for we don't. We've spent over £200M (gross) since June 2012 and can anybody honestly, hand on heart, tell me that we're any better now than we were then?

Well here's another way of looking at it:

1. Man City: £233m 2012 - 2013
2. Man United: £183m wage bill. 2014 - £215m
3. Chelsea: £179m wage bill. 2012 - 2013
4. Arsenal: £154m wage bill. 2014 -  £180m
5. Liverpool: £132m wage bill.

Figures taken from deloitte and telegraph.
The gap is widening.



They're last season's figures.
We've since offloaded Suarez and Agger.
United and Arsenal have dramatically increased theirs.

If somebody wants to put those figures up or give me the link that would be great.
Otherwise....

Google mate.
http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/pdf/ar2014_excerpt.pdf

Well here's another way of looking at it:

1. Man City: £233m 2012 - 2013
2. Man United: £183m wage bill. 2014 - £215m
3. Chelsea: £179m wage bill. 2012 - 2013
4. Arsenal: £154m wage bill. 2014 -  £180m
5. Liverpool: £132m wage bill.

Figures taken from deloitte and telegraph.
The gap is widening.



They're last season's figures.
We've since offloaded Suarez and Agger.
United and Arsenal have dramatically increased theirs.

Unfortunately we're in a self perpetuating problem and have been for more than a decade. Our refusal to invest in high quality players and player wages has lead to a decrease in quality of the players playing for LFC which in turn has lead to a decline in our success and so a decline in our revenues which has lead to a lack of money to invest in high quality players. At some point we have to take a risk like United have, gamble on finishing in a particular league position and invest money accordingly. Continue as we are and we will continue to decline both on and off field.

Google mate.
http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/pdf/ar2014_excerpt.pdf

"A third player could break the record for the highest transfer fee ever spent: Luis
Suárez (€ 107 million)."

Bargain for Barca, and would fill the rather large hole in our team value/wages.
Hmm.

You get what you pay for.

Suarez was the 3rd most valuable player in the world.
We let him go for less than he was worth, we all know why.

100M + spent.

Our most valuable player now: Raheem Sterling.

You can't look at wages in isolation.
They have to be looked at as a percentage of turnover.
Even now, our wage bill isn't much below 70% of turnover.

You can't look at wages in isolation.
They have to be looked at as a percentage of turnover.
Even now, our wage bill isn't much below 70% of turnover.

Which further demonstrates how unsuccessful our transfer business has been over the years. Here's the league's wages by club as a percentage of turnover during 2012-2013 season.



We actually spend more on wages as a percentage of turnover than Arsenal or United, and almost as much as Chelsea, all of whom have arguably better squads than we do (certainly Arsenal and Chelsea do) and all of whom have bought at least one already established world class player. It will be interesting to see last year's results when they're published.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/may/01/premier-league-club-accounts-debt-wages