Our transfer policy

[StartingPrice]

But the problem is that this isn't a straight-up auction for an inanimate object/commodity

The item for sale is also essential to your success in a particular environment. And there are also time-limits put on the sale of the commodity and the purchase of a replacement commodity, again which aides your success in a certain environment

Usually I'd agree with your reasoning, but the normal rules of negotiating and dealing-making are slightly warped when it comes to football because the end-result isn't making money per se, but having the resources to finish against competitors in a league table

EDIT I know you weren't having a go at me, but I do deals for contracts on a weekly basis in my job so I know how negotiation works. But as I've said, the rules that apply to me, don't necessarily work in the footballing world.

I understand the point you are making, and I do agree that the end result in football, as opposed to most tansactions isn't making a profit in return for a comodity but in exchanging commodities in order to improve the squad of commodities you have viz. your rivals (although according to some members of this forum ENIC/Levy are solely interested in profit and have weakened our squad).

But I do believe I've answered this already. It works only in regard to one commodity once, on the understanding that all remaining commodities will understand not to attempt the same sheeeee-ite. But what happens if they do? What happens if we take a massive (and in the financial sums we are talking off with Modric, it would be massive) hit on Modric, but next Summer Bale and VDV decide they are gonna kick up a stink and refuse to play anyway, them and their agents being capable of reasoning that taking the hit on Modric to prove a point may have made us look firm and plucky, but in reality we just can't take that kind of hit again and again, so, in reality, in reality it was something of a pyrrhic victory (look up the etymology, an interesting and instructive story). We could posture that we would do the same again, but what would we do if they called our bluff? Joe Lewis said he would back Levy over his Modric stance, but would he really do so indefinitely? I don't think so.

And the answer, really, lies in your own first sentence - these aren't inanimate commodities, but human beings, with opinons, priorities and lots of advisors.

I think the best answer would be to alter the time and/or duration of teh transfer window - but, again, how would that relate to the situation we had this summer with a new manager coming in and wanting to assess the squad before making any decisions. That can only be done after pre-season and not before.

Also, I think you are conflating all transfers - only a few are problematic in the sense that the Modric one has been, but that is because of his unethical behaviour and Madrid's deliberate low-balling/unsettling tactic. If we apply it to, say, Seb Bassong, who has gone this morning after patiently waiting, and been ncie about the club and his former team-mates, I really don't see any comparison. And, aside from getting the money a little earlier being nice, I don't really see the issue with it going through today rather than a month ago, TBH.

Actually I think it was a bit condescending, but I'm a big-boy - I can take it

Sure, I think that my idea has validity, but it's not set in stone. If that were the case I wouldn't bother to debate it

I'm all about discussing ideas and learning new things


Anyway, back to the debate....

It would be interesting to get both (Sloth and SP...and anyone else) your views on my post #91 in this thread. For me, this is the crux of my argument

Mate, I'll take that from you...but not that big, poncy tart Slothio

Seriously, I don't see it as condescending at all. As far as I'm concerned I've said just about all I can on how the trasnfer system works and agreed with you up to a point (re: ruin that little Modric's career if needs be), and then explained my objection to it, and you still prefer your hypothesis - I don't see what else I can say to change your opinion that they hypothesis you have drawn in your mind wouldn't work in reality. You're entitled to that - just like I am entitled to believe it's validity would be shown to be only hypothetical when faced with reality. People do this all the time in making assessments and judgements. That's all I'm doing. I've never had a bad word to say against you Helleva even though I fricking hate you

 

[leffe186]

To shift focus a bit.

Somewhere in the plethora of near-identical threads, someone made a point about this window being a terrible way to welcome AVB, and others that he was not being "backed". I find it instructive that we are now talking about shifting on the Hudd and Dawson, players who might be thought integral to our squad. While this is still conjecture, looking to move on these two plus Rose and Bassong surely points to an increased involvement of the manager in deciding our transfer policy. He has a particular style of play which the above players simply do not suit. I like that this suggests a more coherent, less scattergun approach, and hope that anyone who feels that AVB is not being backed can see that this is simply not the case. Backing a manager does not just mean throwing money at him, but it does mean having enough confidence in his vision to move on players who might otherwise seem useful.

I think it's blatantly obvious that Levy is backing AVB as much as he possibly can.

 

[StartingPrice]

To shift focus a bit.

Somewhere in the plethora of near-identical threads, someone made a point about this window being a terrible way to welcome AVB, and others that he was not being "backed". I find it instructive that we are now talking about shifting on the Hudd and Dawson, players who might be thought integral to our squad. While this is still conjecture, looking to move on these two plus Rose and Bassong surely points to an increased involvement of the manager in deciding our transfer policy. He has a particular style of play which the above players simply do not suit. I like that this suggests a more coherent, less scattergun approach, and hope that anyone who feels that AVB is not being backed can see that this is simply not the case. Backing a manager does not just mean throwing money at him, but it does mean having enough confidence in his vision to move on players who might otherwise seem useful.

I think it's blatantly obvious that Levy is backing AVB as much as he possibly can.

Exactly.
He wanted time to assess the squad during pre-season - reason enough to think our transfer business would be delayed.
Also makes me think he had some input into buying Verts and Sigurdsson.