The Summer Transfer Thread

CSF

Dempsey wrote: »

They can sell a player for whatever price they want, no chance of catching them on a bullsiht technicality tbh

Monaco can sell a player for whatever price they want, but I don't think Porto can buy for whatever price they want. I mean you have transfers like Carroll that were massively over the market price, but an investigation would almost certainly find no foul play there, whereas in this case any investigation would almost certainly find foul play at work and Porto would be in big trouble.

It isn't a bull**** technicality either. It is the regulated world of business.

klose

Xavi6 wrote: »

Dirty if true!

Jaysus! So Rodriguez will go down in the top 5, 3? Most expensive players ever? :P

Paully D

N'Zonzi has submitted a transfer request at Stoke. He'd be a useful addition for any club outside of the big boys IMO and wouldn't cost too much by way of fee or wage.

Knex*

klose wrote: »

Jaysus! So Rodriguez will go down in the top 5, 3? Most expensive players ever? :P

Anything that pushes Carroll down the list is a good thing by my books :P

Dempsey

CSF wrote: »

Monaco can sell a player for whatever price they want, but I don't think Porto can buy for whatever price they want. I mean you have transfers like Carroll that were massively over the market price, but an investigation would almost certainly find no foul play there, whereas in this case any investigation would almost certainly find foul play at work and Porto would be in big trouble.

It isn't a bull**** technicality either. It is the regulated world of business.

Regulated world of business, lol. Porto have reportedly received 1m for the player and given that player values are highly subjective and volatile, there isnt a hope of any legal repercussions. Sporting CP got burnt, but nothing illegal happened. But good luck to Porto getting a player off them again!

CSF

Dempsey wrote: »

Regulated world of business, lol. Porto have reportedly received 1m for the player and given that player values are highly subjective and volatile, there isnt a hope of any legal repercussions. Sporting CP got burnt, but nothing illegal happened. But good luck to Porto getting a player off them again!

You blatantly have no idea what you are talking about here. Moutinho to Monaco for 1 million is not subjective. Rodriguez for 69 million is not subjective. Very unlikely Porto would get away with such a move.

gnfnrhead

CSF wrote: »

You blatantly have no idea what you are talking about here. Moutinho to Monaco for 1 million is not subjective. Rodriguez for 69 million is not subjective. Very unlikely Porto would get away with such a move.

Yes, they are subjective. I could argue that a player is worth £10m, you could argue they are worth £30m. Neither is wrong as it depends on what the club value's them at. It's 100% subjective.

CSF

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Yes, they are subjective. I could argue that a player is worth £10m, you could argue they are worth £30m. Neither is wrong as it depends on what the club value's them at. It's 100% subjective.

If the world actually worked like that, money laundering would be so much easier than it actually is. Porto would not have a hope of proving that 1 million was the best they could have gotten for Moutinho.

mayordenis

Yea there is no court that would let them get away with that, fraud central

gnfnrhead

CSF wrote: »

If the world actually worked like that, money laundering would be so much easier than it actually is. Porto would not have a hope of proving that 1 million was the best they could have gotten for Moutinho.

Might not be the best value but they could argue they wanted rid of him and accepted the first offer made.

CSF

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Might not be the best value but they could argue they wanted rid of him and accepted the first offer made.

They could also argue that they thought he had a curse placed on him by a maegi. Wouldn't get laughed at any less.

Headshot

Fair scummy by Porto . Sporting are in deep financial trouble and Porto are putting the nail in the coffin. I know they are rivals but that is down right scummy

Red Crow

Are Monaco going to even be allowed play football in Ligue 1? Surely they shouldn't be allowed play without first relocating and paying some tax. It's extremely unfair on all the other teams if the FFF allow them to play.

gnfnrhead

Eli Manning wrote: »

Are Monaco going to even be allowed play football in Ligue 1? Surely they shouldn't be allowed play without first relocating and paying some tax. It's extremely unfair on all the other teams if the FFF allow them to play.

They will be playing. They are taking FFF to court over it and the FFF wont have a leg to stand on. Platini is on Monaco's side and said it best. Nobody in France had a problem until they started winning.

PeterTwo

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Yes, they are subjective. I could argue that a player is worth £10m, you could argue they are worth £30m. Neither is wrong as it depends on what the club value's them at. It's 100% subjective.

I don't know what law governs this transfer, but a court of equity has a massive discretion over what is fair and what is unfair. Also, I'm sure there is some term in the contract transferring Moutinho to Porto that says that Porto can't do this (unless massive legal negligence took place.)

gnfnrhead

PeterTwo wrote: »

I don't know what law governs this transfer, but a court of equity has a massive discretion over what is fair and what is unfair. Also, I'm sure there is some term in the contract transferring Moutinho to Porto that says that Porto can't do this (unless massive legal negligence took place.)

What, a term that decides how much Porto can sell a player for?

They could have sold him for £100 if they wanted to, it's 100% up to them.

PeterTwo

gnfnrhead wrote: »

What, a term that decides how much Porto can sell a player for?

They could have sold him for £100 if they wanted to, it's 100% up to them.

No, some kind of fair price clause, stating that the price must be deemed fair by an independent third party.

Or they could include something that forbids unfair dealing to artificially lower the price paid.

There are numerous terms that could deal with this issue.

CSF

gnfnrhead wrote: »

What, a term that decides how much Porto can sell a player for?

They could have sold him for £100 if they wanted to, it's 100% up to them.

No no. I don't know where you got this notion but it's so far removed from the reality.

Cantona's Collars

Mail reporting that Monaco have joined Barca in showing interest in signing Kompany.

Dempsey

CSF wrote: »

You blatantly have no idea what you are talking about here. Moutinho to Monaco for 1 million is not subjective. Rodriguez for 69 million is not subjective. Very unlikely Porto would get away with such a move.

I've a far better idea than you it seems. You are talking out your hat as nothing illegal happened in the transaction by selling those players for those prices.

CSF wrote: »

If the world actually worked like that, money laundering would be so much easier than it actually is. Porto would not have a hope of proving that 1 million was the best they could have gotten for Moutinho.

Rangers FC was bought for a £1, nobody batted an eyelid and history is littered with cases where one company sells to another whereby a 3rd party believes the transaction is worth more/less. In those cases, where it has been challenged, it has been proven that the seller can decide whatever price he likes.

Porto keep books and its highly doubtful that any money laundering case would stick. You think they didnt consult their lawyers & accounts in a transfer like this?

PeterTwo wrote: »

I don't know what law governs this transfer, but a court of equity has a massive discretion over what is fair and what is unfair. Also, I'm sure there is some term in the contract transferring Moutinho to Porto that says that Porto can't do this (unless massive legal negligence took place.)

Plenty of dodgy transfers deals in football, its rare that any of them get challenged legally by a 3rd party. Sporting CP might but its doubtful they would waste money going to court about this.

There is no term like that in any contract, ever, the club that holds the players registration can sell a player for whatever they believe to be acceptable.

GavRedKing

Seeming that none of us here are privy to the finer details of the deal its all just guess work at this point really.

If Sporting have a problem and have a potential case to take against Porto or Monaco or both, they will in due course.

Cantona's Collars

Isco looks to be Madrid's first signing of the Summer & they have their eye on Neymar.

http://www.cadenaser.com/deportes/

Neymar Hiring can be a disbursement of one hundred million euros to the European club that wants to hire him next season. As reported by José Ramón de la Morena in 'The Rail' , once the player has decided to leave the Brazilian league, the struggle to gain his services has intensified and it seems the FC Barcelona is no longer as high on the operation.

The footballer's father and received ten million Blaugrana. However, this amount is significant only in the amount of the transaction, which may be around one hundred million euros. Santos has a 55% of the rights of the player and only accept about 60 million euros by the departure of its star. All other rights are in the hands of the father of the player and are valued at approximately 40 million.

In full pre-campaign for election to the presidency of Real Madrid, Florentino Perez not only looks set to achieve these one hundred million, but it has already sent two emissaries to Brazil with the mission to convince the player of the advantages that can report call at Real Madrid instead of FC Barcelona, ​​a club which until now seemed destined to have him. The reality is that the player is quite confusing and not too clear on what team wants to play when the league leave their country.

Moreover, the white club has already taken steps to get his squad Dani Carvajal , who this season has played in the Bundesliga in the ranks of Bayer Leverkusen . It is also considering selling its lateral Coentrao, who does not want to have to count on the template while Marcelo. Do not rule out Real Madrid, in any case, use Portuguese as a bargaining chip in a possible operation to recruit Tottenham's Gareth Bale.

GavRedKing

That hurt my brain on a Friday morning. ^

CSF

Dempsey wrote: »

Rangers FC was bought for a £1, nobody batted an eyelid and history is littered with cases where one company sells to another whereby a 3rd party believes the transaction is worth more/less. In those cases, where it has been challenged, it has been proven that the seller can decide whatever price he likes.

Porto keep books and its highly doubtful that any money laundering case would stick. You think they didnt consult their lawyers & accounts in a transfer like this?

That Rangers thing isn't correct as such. 85.3% of an individual's (not an entity) shares were sold for that figure for an asset which had no real positive value due to the massive tax bill. You know as well as I do that there was a sizeable fee to be paid for the shares until the size of the crippling tax bill came to light. Chalk and cheese.

All companies keep books and have legal representation, but it doesn't stop companies from acting in an illegal manner. The courts would be a quiet place if these 2 constants were enough to keep companies acting only legally.

Seaneh

CSF wrote: »

That Rangers thing isn't correct as such. 85.3% of an individual's (not an entity) shares were sold for that figure for an asset which had no real positive value due to the massive tax bill. You know as well as I do that there was a sizeable fee to be paid for the shares until the size of the crippling tax bill came to light. Chalk and cheese.

All companies keep books and have legal representation, but it doesn't stop companies from acting in an illegal manner. The courts would be a quiet place if these 2 constants were enough to keep companies acting only legally.

Jack Hayward sold Wolverhampton Wanderers for £10, debt free.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2007/may/21/newsstory.wolverhamptonwanderersfootball

Pepe LeFrits

I doubt Sporting can do much about it, but good luck to Porto ever getting another club to accept a sell on clause as part of a player sale. They'll have to pay other clubs more money up front from now on.

CSF

Seaneh wrote: »

Jack Hayward sold Wolverhampton Wanderers for £10, debt free.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2007/may/21/newsstory.wolverhamptonwanderersfootball

Charitable donation from an individual to the club as per the condition that Morgan would invest 30 million for benefit of the club. Chalk and cheese, again we're comparing individuals with private entities designed for profit, which makes no sense. An individual's functions in relation to his own shares in a company or membership, are not comparable with those functions he has in relation to the assets of the company and his responsibility to shareholders, partners or members.

mayordenis

Lads honestly this is ridiculous, the courts can look at something that is clearly an attempt to stop another party getting their entitlement and put a stop to it.
The Rangers and Wolves issues are nothing like that.

It's why you can't just go around selling houses to families and friends for a euro to avoid all tax implications.

Dempsey

CSF wrote: »

That Rangers thing isn't correct as such. 85.3% of an individual's (not an entity) shares were sold for that figure for an asset which had no real positive value due to the massive tax bill. You know as well as I do that there was a sizeable fee to be paid for the shares until the size of the crippling tax bill came to light. Chalk and cheese.

All companies keep books and have legal representation, but it doesn't stop companies from acting in an illegal manner. The courts would be a quiet place if these 2 constants were enough to keep companies acting only legally.

Pointless Pedantry. Its still had assets worth millions and those assets were subsequently transferred to a new company and the new company is operating debt free and are now floated on the stock exchange in an IPO worth well over £10m. Not bad for a company that was once offloaded for £1.

Its not chalk and cheese as the principle of the matter still applies, and thats what will have to be argued in court. Its a sellers market and you wont win a case in court arguing otherwise. Again, there is nothing illegal with selling Moutinho for £1m, he could have been sold for £1 and it would still be legal.

CSF

Dempsey wrote: »

Pointless Pedantry. Its still had assets worth millions and those assets were subsequently transferred to a new company and the new company is operating debt free and are now floated on the stock exchange in an IPO worth well over £10m. Not bad for a company that was once offloaded for £1.

Its not chalk and cheese as the principle of the matter still applies, and thats what will have to be argued in court. Its a sellers market and you wont win a case in court arguing otherwise. Again, there is nothing illegal with selling Moutinho for £1m, he could have been sold for £1 and it would still be legal.

Present me a case of a legal entity selling an asset for significantly less than its actual worth (what the entity could receive elsewhere), where there was no legitimate business reason (if there is such a thing, I'm not sure because I've never seen this happen) for doing, so.

Comparing individuals who make transactions for many other reasons other than profit and prosperity, does not make any sort of case for your argument.

EuropeanSon

JPA wrote: »

Transfers are supposed to have a knock on and trickle down effect within the game. Falcao will leave for 40 million but Athletico wont have 40 million to spend.

But Athletico didn't pay for him either. The trickle down affect is still in play here. They got a world class player, for not very much (as they didn't pay much of his fee), and didn't even have to pay his salary. They did excellently out of it.

Dempsey

CSF wrote: »

Present me a case of a legal entity selling an asset for significantly less than its actual worth (what the entity could receive elsewhere), where there was no legitimate business reason (if there is such a thing, I'm not sure because I've never seen this happen) for doing, so.

Comparing individuals who make transactions for many other reasons other than profit and prosperity, does not make any sort of case for your argument.

Thats the thing, you can sell for higher or lower than what the perceived market value for any reason you want. Porto could easily argue that they wanted him off the wage bill. Thats all they have to say.

AdamD

Pretty sure they will either get away with it, or have a net gain from whatever fine they pay. The club definitely have better legal advice and knowledge than the people posting in this thread and they come across as an extremely well run club. I'd wager that this was a extremely well calculated move, despite amateur legal opinions.

Corholio

It's probably legal, and they probably will get away with it. It just seems more and more is accepted as fine once it's within the rules. Deals like this send football down a bleak road in terms of the sport part of the game.

Mitch Connor

The press in portugal are reporting the fees as 45million for Rodriguez and 25million for Mountinho.

missingtime

Would be very interested to know who Porto have in mind to replace Rodriguez and Mountinho. .

Chucky the tree

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

I doubt Sporting can do much about it, but good luck to Porto ever getting another club to accept a sell on clause as part of a player sale. They'll have to pay other clubs more money up front from now on.

This is why I wouldn't believe the story. Porto would just be shooting themselves in the foot.

Morzadec

missingtime wrote: »

Would be very interested to know who Porto have in mind to replace Rodriguez and Mountinho. .

Probably 2 lads from South America that we've never heard of who in 3 years will be at the top of the shopping list of all the big clubs in Europe.

Jax Teller

Porto confirmed the transfers . 45M for Rodriguez & 25M for Moutinho .

http://www.fcporto.pt/English/News/news_eng_futjamesmoutinhomonaco_240513_75604.asp

Nuri Sahin

Confirmed.

ASM FC - OFFICIEL
@ASMFC_MONACO
Accord avec le FC Porto pour #JoaoMoutinho et @jamesdrodriguez

CSF

Jax Teller wrote: »

Porto confirmed the transfers . 45M for Rodriguez & 25M for Moutinho .

Knew it wouldn't be done the way reported.

Jax Teller

Dortmund have signed Sokratis Papastathopoulos from Werder Bremen .

miralize

The Monaco wiki now reads :pac:

In 2013 on the 24th of May the club began an new era in bringing in Porto duo Joao Moutinho and James Rodriguez on five-year contracts for a combined fee of 70 million euros (45 million for James Rodriguez and 25 million for Joao Moutinho). The club also expect Falcao,Victor Valdes and Patrice Evra to sign for the club under ambitious owners.

kryogen

Jax Teller wrote: »

Porto confirmed the transfers . 45M for Rodriguez & 25M for Moutinho .

http://www.fcporto.pt/English/News/news_eng_futjamesmoutinhomonaco_240513_75604.asp

45 million for Rodriquez, good player that he is, is hilarious. Well done to Porto on that one

Didnt believe the other crap that was said earlier about them selling one for 69 and one for 1 to screw Sporting, it would be bad business for Porto long term as no club would ever deal with them the same again when selling them a player

batistuta9

missingtime wrote: »

Would be very interested to know who Porto have in mind to replace Rodriguez and Mountinho. .

Carlos Eduardo & Lica both from Estoril Praia

Seaneh

Anyone else thing Colombia have been quietly developing a lot of very good footballers over the last 5/6 years?
Could be a good bet to get to the 1/2 finals of the world cup next year.

kryogen

Seaneh wrote: »

Anyone else thing Colombia have been quietly developing a lot of very good footballers over the last 5/6 years?
Could be a good bet to get to the 1/2 finals of the world cup next year.

Yep, off topic for this thread but I have them back E/W for the WC and will look at some other bets in a little while

CSF

Seaneh wrote: »

Anyone else thing Colombia have been quietly developing a lot of very good footballers over the last 5/6 years?
Could be a good bet to get to the 1/2 finals of the world cup next year.

Might have been heading that direction if Valencia hadn't went to ****. Right now I think Falcao is still the only player they have who is really at the top level already, Rodriguez included.

yohan the great

CSF wrote: »

Might have been heading that direction if Valencia hadn't went to ****. Right now I think Falcao is still the only player they have who is really at the top level already, Rodriguez included.

Valencia isn't even from Colombia

Jax Teller

Benitez confirmed as Napoli's new manager .