Jürgen Klopp - Liverpool FC Manager

You're assuming we know the other club's valuation of their players, but information is asymmetric in this case.

It's not like Dortmund would say "we value Pulisic at 25m, but won't sell even at 30m". Wouldn't make any sense for them to do it, I guess.

It's probably more like Liverpool might value him at 25m and tried bidding 30, but in reality Dortmund might value him at 40m.

What I mean is that there are absolutely no guarantees that we have actually met a club's valuation of their player, for I find it very unlikely that a club would openly admit how much they value a certain player, only to reject a bid higher than that. It's a contradiction in terms, really - if you value something at 25m but still don't sell at 30m, then you actually value that thing over 30m, surely

Yes kind of but each player does have a value which is fairly well known amongst clubs, the variance comes in how key/important that player is to the selling club and this adds a premium. Take for example Coutinio, his value is probably about £50 million I'd guess, but the premium we would put on him might be an extra £20 or £30 million because we view him as one of our key player. On the other hand Markovic probably has a value of £10 million and if someone offered us that we'd snap their bloody hand off as he is not a key player, in fact they could probably offer £1 million and we'd sell :-)

Agents always know the selling clubs valuation.
Always.

Once you agree with that valuation, it's no longer subjective, but accepted as pretty much fact.

The reasons Klopp laid out were very clear; it wasn't about valuation, but about the other clubs being able to get a replacement.
I have no idea why this very simple premise causes so much confusion.

Because you can almost guarantee that if we had offered 'enough' over the valuation they wouldn't be as concerned

Again our premium to the selling clubs premium

Because you can almost guarantee that if we had offered 'enough' over the valuation they wouldn't be as concerned

Again our premium to the selling clubs premium

Well I suppose we could go all round the houses, all day long talking about semantics, but I really can't be arsed.

Like I said, I'm prepared to take Klopp at his word, and he was very clear in what he said, as far as I'm concerned.

Like he said, it was less about money and very much to do with the fact of not being able to get a replacement.
Crystal clear as far as I'm concerned.

Agents always know the selling clubs valuation.
Always.

Once you agree with that valuation, it's no longer subjective, but accepted as pretty much fact.

The reasons Klopp laid out were very clear; it wasn't about valuation, but about the other clubs being able to get a replacement.
I have no idea why this very simple premise causes so much confusion.

To help those that are clearly struggling:

For illustration purposes I value my house at £1m.

If someone came along and said I'll give you £1.1m but you have to be homeless for the next 6 months, I'm going to tell them to do one. Not because they haven't met my valuation but because circumstances dictate that I am unable to sell at this time. I am unwilling to put myself in a homeless position to earn more than my valuation.

Now I totally understand when people suggest then the value has changed during this month due to circumstance but that is essentially what Klopp is saying that even at values where we know we're paying a premium clubs are not prepared to leave themselves short. This is why January has and always will be a tremendously difficult month to do business. Just like last season, look around, what deals are being done which we absolutely should be competing for? None that I see.

Now someone may say, but you can move into a hotel, in the scenario presented by those that suggest a value has been met there is actually NO alternative accommodation.

(Just a point to Kopite78 above, a house is not independently valued it is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Like anything in the world for that matter. If you choose to take an independent valuation as part of your guidance to reach that value then that's fine, in most cases a valuation is done for the purposes of a mortgage and under those conditions is only done so to secure finance, what you actually choose to pay for that property is up to you and the seller to agree and completely separate from the valuation.)

What I mean Diego is that Dortmund may well value him at 25m and in a summer window would reluctantly sell, in a winter window there tends to get a premium added to get them to really turn their heads, we may not have added enough to do that

I know mate and I agree, I'm just not too good at explaining myself I think

Agents always know the selling clubs valuation.
Always.

Once you agree with that valuation, it's no longer subjective, but accepted as pretty much fact.

The reasons Klopp laid out were very clear; it wasn't about valuation, but about the other clubs being able to get a replacement.
I have no idea why this very simple premise causes so much confusion.

Look, if a club doesn't sell for 30m, it's because in current market conditions, they value him higher than that. To assume there's a fixed price on every player's heads is a bit of fantasy I'm afraid. It depends on lots of things like how the club is currently doing, possible replacements, contract details, etc, and those things change. Did Newcastle have time to replace Andy Caroll in January 31? I don't think so. Which is why under those conditions they valued him higher than they probably would have done so in August.

By the way I'm only discussing the theory behind this, I'm not even suggesting that we should panic and go around throwing 35m for Andy Carrolls, I have plenty of faith in Klopp even if sometimes I do feel a bit frustrated. But for me it's clear that it is a contradiction of terms to suggest we have exceeded club's valuations of their players and are somehow a victim of the market. It's much more likely that we have increased an offer for players above our initial valuation of them (that is, we have added a premium on OUR valuation), and even so have failed to sign anyone. The thing is, you could always go higher and higher after that, until you reach a certain ceiling which reflects the club's willingness to spend. The problem might be, however, in how low or high that ceiling is.

All of which becomes quite pointless really as the weaknesses of our squad today are the same ones we had back in August. So if January really is the only problem in our lives, then we should have done business earlier. It's not as if the African Cup of Nations was announced in November, I guess.

I know mate and I agree, I'm just not too good at explaining myself I think

Look, if a club doesn't sell for 30m, it's because in current market conditions, they value him higher than that. To assume there's a fixed price on every player's heads is a bit of fantasy I'm afraid. It depends on lots of things like how the club is currently doing, possible replacements, contract details, etc, and those things change. Did Newcastle have time to replace Andy Caroll in January 31? I don't think so. Which is why under those conditions they valued him higher than they probably would have done so in August.

By the way I'm only discussing the theory behind this, I'm not even suggesting that we should panic and go around throwing 35m for Andy Carrolls, I have plenty of faith in Klopp even if sometimes I do feel a bit frustrated. But for me it's clear that it is a contradiction of terms to suggest we have exceeded club's valuations of their players and are somehow a victim of the market. It's much more likely that we have increased an offer for players above our initial valuation of them (that is, we have added a premium on OUR valuation), and even so have failed to sign anyone. The thing is, you could always go higher and higher after that, until you reach a certain ceiling which reflects the club's willingness to spend. The problem might be, however, in how low or high that ceiling is.

All of which becomes quite pointless really as the weaknesses of our squad today are the same ones we had back in August. So if January really is the only problem in our lives, then we should have done business earlier. It's not as if the African Cup of Nations was announced in November, I guess.

Again, it's not about money.
It's about the other clubs finding a replacement.
People can float all the economic theory in the world, and it doesn't make a jot of difference to what Klopp was saying.
They wouldn't sell because they wouldn't be able to find a replacement.
He even stated in the article that it was nothing to do with money, which is why he stated we added a "premium", so it's not about "market conditions" or valuation, it is about the other club simply refusing to sell for any amount because it would F**k their season up.

I don't understand why people are struggling with this.

Well I suppose we could go all round the houses, all day long talking about semantics, but I really can't be arsed.

Like I said, I'm prepared to take Klopp at his word, and he was very clear in what he said, as far as I'm concerned.

Like he said, it was less about money and very much to do with the fact of not being able to get a replacement.
Crystal clear as far as I'm concerned.

To help those that are clearly struggling:

For illustration purposes I value my house at £1m.

If someone came along and said I'll give you £1.1m but you have to be homeless for the next 6 months, I'm going to tell them to do one. Not because they haven't met my valuation but because circumstances dictate that I am unable to sell at this time. I am unwilling to put myself in a homeless position to earn more than my valuation.

Now I totally understand when people suggest then the value has changed during this month due to circumstance but that is essentially what Klopp is saying that even at values where we know we're paying a premium clubs are not prepared to leave themselves short. This is why January has and always will be a tremendously difficult month to do business. Just like last season, look around, what deals are being done which we absolutely should be competing for? None that I see.

Now someone may say, but you can move into a hotel, in the scenario presented by those that suggest a value has been met there is actually NO alternative accommodation.

(Just a point to Kopite78 above, a house is not independently valued it is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Like anything in the world for that matter. If you choose to take an independent valuation as part of your guidance to reach that value then that's fine, in most cases a valuation is done for the purposes of a mortgage and under those conditions is only done so to secure finance, what you actually choose to pay for that property is up to you and the seller to agree and completely separate from the valuation.)

Look ultimately I'm agreeing with you that's the confusing thing here, I've said what you're both saying all window

The only I'm saying is that it still comes down to your valuation and your premium which may well not match the selling clubs valuation and premium

So where Klopp says we offered premium it may well not be what the selling club deem premium so there is a grey area

Look back to a Andy Carroll, we paid because they didn't want to sell and didn't have a replacement near on double what we wanted to to get them not sure to care about that

Luke houses are independently valued yes for mortgages but unless you are cash buying then you have to have that valuation as a seller or a buyer and that valuation is the ball park figure you work to

If your house was worth 1m and someone offered you 1.1m then you may well think it's not worth it, but if someone offered you 2m? You'd probably think you know what I'll live in a hotel or rent for 6 months

It's about the other clubs finding a replacement.

Newcastle never found a replacement for their starting number 9. We just paid them enough to convince them to sell.

I also can't see what's so difficult to understand about that. You can always pay enough to convince a club to go without a player. And no, they won't be living in the streets during the winter because of that they already have a squad and will have to make do with someone else in the starting eleven, hardly the end of the world.

If we're not willing to go far enough because we think it's too much, then fair enough. There must be a ceiling somewhere, which is perfectly normal. We just can't possibly know how high or low that ceiling is, which is where it becomes subjective. Some people will think we've tried hard enough; some won't; there are no certainties here.

Newcastle never found a replacement for their starting number 9. We just paid them enough to convince them to sell.

I also can't see what's so difficult to understand about that. You can always pay enough to convince a club to go without a player. And no, they won't be living in the streets during the winter because of that they already have a squad and will have to make do with someone else in the starting eleven, hardly the end of the world.

If we're not willing to go far enough because we think it's too much, then fair enough. There must be a ceiling somewhere, which is perfectly normal. We just can't possibly know how high or low that ceiling is, which is where it becomes subjective. Some people will think we've tried hard enough; some won't; there are no certainties here.

But we're not dealing with Newcastle and Mike Ashley getting horny at the thought of all that money.

What is hard to understand about Klopp saying they (the selling club) were not interested in money at this stage of the season?
That's what he said, clear as day, so your opinion doesn't matter at all.
If you have an issue, or need clarification, perhaps you should take it up with the bloke who said it, and I'll take it at face value as I've said I would all along.

Luke houses are independently valued yes for mortgages but unless you are cash buying then you have to have that valuation as a seller or a buyer and that valuation is the ball park figure you work to

Having bought and sold houses for years mate it's honestly not the case. The valuer, in 95%+ occasions will set the value of the property at the agreed price between seller and buyer (give or take 5% due to defects). Ask yourself why he does this because it is his job to say what the price would sell in the open market and when instructed by either party he has evidence in front of him that tells him exactly what this property will sell for because he has a buyer and seller both in agreement before he comes out.

His principle role is to ensure that no dodgy deals are being done (in other words you are actually buying the property in question) and to ensure that the property is in fit condition and will still be standing by the end of the mortgage. Sure he has guidance by the mortgage company on what the street cap is but again that is not for your benefit and has no influence on or the seller's or your valuation unless you choose to take that advice.

Hence why we got into the problems of the financial crisis, people were buying properties for far more than their realistic value because market conditions were forcing those prices up (sub prime mortgages). How can a valuer truly say a flat is worth £165000 one day and the next say it is worth £50000 which is essentially what happened. Consider auction properties, what would a valuer actually set the price of one of those, they're all considerably cheaper than traditional sales but he is compelled to set the value at the price you are paying for obvious reasons.

If your house was worth 1m and someone offered you 1.1m then you may well think it's not worth it, but if someone offered you 2m? You'd probably think you know what I'll live in a hotel or rent for 6 months

I did actually mention that no hotel (other player) was available mate or that would change the value and might make a deal possible, Jürgen has basically described to us that no other player is available for the selling club and I am prepared to believe him (as I suspect you are too).

A big assumption here that Klopp is sitting with the other clubs representatives and negotiating!

I'm sure he is identifying players he wants and it's up to the likes of Edwards at al to land the player.

Klopp gets told we tried but they wouldn't budge - offering a bag of crisps as a premium is hardly going to convince the selling party!

Newcastle never found a replacement for their starting number 9. We just paid them enough to convince them to sell.

I also can't see what's so difficult to understand about that. You can always pay enough to convince a club to go without a player. And no, they won't be living in the streets during the winter because of that they already have a squad and will have to make do with someone else in the starting eleven, hardly the end of the world.

If we're not willing to go far enough because we think it's too much, then fair enough. There must be a ceiling somewhere, which is perfectly normal. We just can't possibly know how high or low that ceiling is, which is where it becomes subjective. Some people will think we've tried hard enough; some won't; there are no certainties here.

Well obviously if you just pay double or tripple a players worth then you can buy him, but that is terrible business and I'd be fairly unhappy if we did that and blew our entire transfer budget on one player who might or might not work out, if he doesn't work out then you are fu**ed because you'll never recoup the amount you paid for the player.

A big assumption here that Klopp is sitting with the other clubs representatives and negotiating!

I'm sure he is identifying players he wants and it's up to the likes of Edwards at al to land the player.

Klopp gets told we tried but they wouldn't budge - offering a bag of crisps as a premium is hardly going to convince the selling party!

Great.
The conspiracy theories are back.

No offense, but that's a load of sh*te.

But we're not dealing with Newcastle and Mike Ashley getting horny at the thought of all that money.

What is hard to understand about Klopp saying they (the selling club) were not interested in money at this stage of the season?
That's what he said, clear as day, so your opinion doesn't matter at all.
If you have an issue, or need clarification, perhaps you should take it up with the bloke who said it, and I'll take it at face value as I've said I would all along.

Are you suggesting that Dortmund would not sell Pulisic (for example) for all money in the world because it's January and they can't find a replacement for a player who doesn't even start every game for them? I don't care who says it, I'll call it bullshit anyway.

It might be that the money necessary to convince them is too much, and above our willingness to spend, which again I'm fine with in theory (this is not, however, taking what has been said at "face value"). The problem might be how far up that is, which I can't possibly know. Given our history of "trying" and failing to get so many of our targets, I don't blame fans who might be a bit unconvinced about the whole thing.

My personal opinion is that I am more than willing to trust Klopp's judgement on how much he thinks is reasonable to spend on a certain player in current conditions. What frustrates me is that if we're indeed constrained only by the January market, it means we've made a mistake earlier on in the season and possibly underestimated the challenges we would be facing. For if the sole reason we can't get Pulisic is because Dortmund won't find a replacement in the winter, then why didn't we sign him in the summer? I suppose that means we didn't try - which for me translates to us not finding it necessary to buy him then, which in hindsight is a mistake.

Well, mistakes happen. I'm not giving up on anything this season though. It's probably the only chance I'll ever have in my life of being a regular attendant at Anfield for a whole season and it would mean the world to me if that was a title winning one, which is why I'm probably the most anxious person in the whole world right now. I genuinely will only stop believing when there are no mathematical chances anymore.

Great.
The conspiracy theories are back.

No offense, but that's a load of sh*te.

No conspiracy theory mate just going by our past form.

Klopp is not the sort of manager who is likely to get over worked by the measly amount of premium we are likely to offer.
He has always said the training ground is more important to him than the transfer market.

Remember the Zielinski deal in the summer where we would not stump up a couple of million!

Well obviously if you just pay double or tripple a players worth then you can buy him, but that is terrible business and I'd be fairly unhappy if we did that and blew our entire transfer budget on one player who might or might not work out, if he doesn't work out then you are fu**ed because you'll never recoup the amount you paid for the player.

Yes I agree. It's normal that there must be a limit to what we're prepared to spend.

Given LFC had the largest profit in the league for the 2014/15 season (if I'm not mistaken), and then followed it up with a net transfer expenditure of less than £10m over the two seasons after that (so far), I can however understand why some people might be a bit skeptical about that ceiling being not too high.

Again I'm not saying I'm on that skeptical camp myself, I'm just pointing out it is not unreasonable to question things in this context - there are no certainties here.

Are you suggesting that Dortmund would not sell Pulisic (for example) for all money in the world because it's January and they can't find a replacement for a player who doesn't even start every game for them? I don't care who says it, I'll call it bullshit anyway.

It might be that the money necessary to convince them is too much, and above our willingness to spend, which again I'm fine with in theory (this is not, however, taking what has been said at "face value"). The problem might be how far up that is, which I can't possibly know. Given our history of "trying" and failing to get so many of our targets, I don't blame fans who might be a bit unconvinced about the whole thing.

My personal opinion is that I am more than willing to trust Klopp's judgement on how much he thinks is reasonable to spend on a certain player in current conditions. What frustrates me is that if we're indeed constrained only by the January market, it means we've made a mistake earlier on in the season and possibly underestimated the challenges we would be facing. For if the sole reason we can't get Pulisic is because Dortmund won't find a replacement in the winter, then why didn't we sign him in the summer? I suppose that means we didn't try - which for me translates to us not finding it necessary to buy him then, which in hindsight is a mistake.

Well, mistakes happen. I'm not giving up on anything this season though. It's probably the only chance I'll ever have in my life of being a regular attendant at Anfield for a whole season and it would mean the world to me if that was a title winning one, which is why I'm probably the most anxious person in the whole world right now. I genuinely will only stop believing when there are no mathematical chances anymore.

No, I'm not suggesting anything.

I'm repeating, as clear as F***ing clear can be, what Klopp has said, and that I'm taking it at face value.
So like I said before, if you have an issue with that, take it up with the bloke who said it, because frankly, this is boring the F**k out of me, and I really can't be arsed playing silly forum semantic games.

No, I'm not suggesting anything.

I'm repeating, as clear as f**king clear can be, what Klopp has said, and that I'm taking it at face value.
So like I said before, if you have an issue with that, take it up with the bloke who said it, because frankly, this is boring the f**k out of me, and I really can't be arsed playing silly forum semantic games.

Yeah, I'm taking the phone to call him up.

It's not about semantics - the idea that a club will not sell for any price is simply not true. I don't think that's what Klopp means either, for there's obviously an underlying context to what he's said. Which is why I see no need to pervert logic to take the manager at "face value".

No conspiracy theory mate just going by our past form.

Klopp is not the sort of manager who is likely to get over worked by the measly amount of premium we are likely to offer.
He has always said the training ground is more important to him than the transfer market.

Remember the Zielinski deal in the summer where we would not stump up a couple of million!

Past form?
Klopp has been very clear about how he views the transfer market, the qualities he values in a player, and that he won't spend for the sake of it, preferring to wait until he can get his target.

I honestly have no idea what the issue is here.
Surely this can't come as a surprise to anyone who has actually listened to what he has said in the past.
He's also stated he has plenty of money to spend, that the owners have backed him whenever he has wanted a player, and that he won't "settle" for someone just for the sake of it.

Where's the confusion and conspiracy theories come from?
It's all there, all quoted verbatim in any number of publications, or all over youtube if you prefer to watch him while he speaks.

Yeah, I'm taking the phone to call him up.

It's not about semantics - the idea that a club will not sell for any price is simply not true. I don't think that's what Klopp means either, for there's obviously an underlying context to what he's said. Which is why I see no need to pervert logic to take the manager at "face value".

Oh, you "don't think" that's what he means, but then go on to talk about "perverting logic" whilst talking about some "underlying context" that exists only in your mind?

That's a lot of twisting and tortured (lack of) logic right there.

I'll make it simple for you so you don't strain your eyes any more rolling them so much.

Either you think he's telling the truth, or you think he's lying.
It's that F***ing simple, and exactly what I mean by taking him at face value.

For fans of this club who absolutely hate us selling our best players for any price in summer or winter I don't understand why they're so adamant other clubs should bend over for us when we want their players.

Take Lucas for example, not even one of our best but still an important member of the squad, twice now our valuation has been met and accepted but then we've refused to sell as circumstances have changed.

It's not F***ing rocket science guys, 3 parties have to agree for a deal to be done and it has to benefit them all or it won't happen.

I'd like a poll up asking who has actually sold something they didn't want to sell or bought something knowing it's massively overpriced and that you can buy it later at its proper price.  It's too easy sitting on your high horses saying it's ridiculous, pathetic etc when in reality you probably wouldn't do it yourself.

Either you think he's telling the truth, or you think he's lying.
It's that f**king simple, and exactly what I mean by taking him at face value.

Is it? Well, I think he's speaking the truth. He said we would like to sign players but are struggling because clubs would find it hard to replace them in January. I believe that. His exact words, for reference, were "the players we want because we think they help us, the clubs don’t sell. It is not about money in this situation, it is the winter transfer window."

What I don't think this implies is that clubs wouldn't sell for any kind of money. That's rubbish and simply not true.

The underlying context here is that the club will not simply going to spend any sort of money, and Klopp's own approach is not to just throw money at problems, he seems far more reluctant to do that than other managers. So when he says it's not about money, I believe him - in this context. However if we just offered 60m for Pulisic (again just an easy example), would they not sell? Do you actually believe that?

If it's so hard to buy in January then we should have added the necessary players in the summer knowing that it would be hard to buy in January and knowing that Mane would be out for AFCON and knowing that injuries happen and we'd likely need quality backups. There is no surprise to the situation we find ourselves in. It's not like we've dealt with any extraordinary circumstances that other clubs at our level haven't had to deal with. It's simply not an excuse.