Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively less...

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

Oh good lord, now you're not actually reading. I nowhere claimed he's "not any good".

No kidding. That's why this is so tragically funny.

No, they make a lot of money because there are only 32 teams and there's a limited amount of players and the tv contracts are ludicrously rich. Its not because there are no transfer fees. Keep in mind, baseball does actually allow trades for cash in limited circumstances. In addition, baseball allows "salary dumping", which is effectively the same thing - when the Braves traded for Mike Hampton, his bloated salary was partially paid for by the Marlins. This had no impact on salaries.
Baseball has a fundamentally different structure - it only has 32 teams. Whereas in football purchases of players are commonplace, because they track through divisions (i.e., I sell Carrick to Utd to buy Chimbonda from Wigan who buy Aghahowa from another club who buys a player from the second division, etc.). In baseball, only the very rich clubs would start buying players if they could, because there's no one for the poor clubs to buy from. Thus, its actually highly unlikely transfer fees would make any difference to salaries.

Why would this money come out of their payroll? Teams have operating expenses, that's what it would come out from.
You are making terrible analogies because you don't understand EITHER sport.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

You still haven't answered the question of why this money would come out of payroll. I don't see why it should. If the Yankees are already spending 200M on salaries, I don't see why they wouldn't spend another 30M to acquire players.
Furthermore, if the Yankees bought players, but middle of the road clubs like, say, the Giants, didn't, the Yankees wouldn't be able to lower salaries, because the top players' market would be set by all clubs. No one would agree to be sold to the Yankees if they had to take a pay cut.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

If there were no transfer fees, then United would have more money from not buying Carrick, but they'd also lose the money from selling Van Nistleroy and Mikel.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

And the small teams gain on them, meaning they have more money to pay players. In case you missed it, transfer fees are ZERO SUM.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

Rich football clubs are in the buying business, poorer ones are in the selling business. A club like PSV for that reason will buy players with potential who need further developing. Once they are of a certain standard, the players are sold and PSV makes money. Clubs like Chelsea typically buy the finished article because they don't have the time to develop a squad, they want results right now. This is the difference between the relatively rich and poor in football.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

Top teams in England also made money from transfers selling players like Anelka and Beckham.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

they also get the players maybe two years earlier than they could if the had to wait until their contracts expired, which to them is worthwhile. If it wasn't them why don't top clubs just wait until the players that they want are out of contract?

and, has been explained numerous times without it seeming to sink in - clubs do not generally have a fixed salary budget which any transfer fees will have to be deducted from. so......

spending £20 million on a player doesn't mean the salary budget drops by £20 million.

For an 'elite' club it means a £20 million expense, potentially a £20 million drop in profit. Now here's the thing. As clubs here tend to be run with the object of being sports clubs rather than with the objective of making large profits for the owners, clubs will see that £20 million as an investment. One that will make the team better, and increase revenue that way.


Could you please give at least an inkling that any of the reasons you are given against your theories are at least making some impression.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

Why not? If the Red Sox payroll is close to $150 million (it may be more these days), why would spending 15% more mean players take 15% less? If, with the added money, the Red Sox reach the playoffs, for example, the team gets more money from selling tickets to playoff games.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

I'm sure they want to but it's not a must for them. For poorer clubs it's a must to survive.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

I could have sworn that the Red Sox paid fifty million for some Japanese player.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

no. no. and just for good measure, no again.

As with every single other increase in revenue that's been seen in the last 10,20,30,40,50 etc years, that money might well increase salaries overall, but there is absolutely nothing, a big fat zero of evidence, to suggest that having more money will see a comparative jump in salaries for top players. Nothing.

This is the basic problem.

For particular reasons relating to the salary cap, and the closed market in US sports, you get a situation where the average and weaker players see their salaries squeezed to accommodate the top players. As those players have absolutely no alternative, it's like or lump it.

The same situation does not exist elsewhere, which is why salaries are flatter. It does not matter whether the club has a budget of £1 million or £100 million, that is not going to change, and does not change.

Again, please give at least some indication that you have grasped this fundamental point in the whole argument, or I might as well go outside and find some nice walls to talk to in expectation of it being more likely to make them understand.



Ok, I'll flip it round. Say there was a baseball team.

they paid 3 elite players $10 million a year, 10 players $1 million a year, and 10 others $250k a year, in a league where the salary cap is $42.5 million a year.

suddenly the league drops a bombshell that from the following year that the cap is going to be cut by half, so clubs only have half the salary budget.

Now you can either suggest those elite players will suffer and bear the brunt of those salary cuts (as there's now $21.25 million less money available) or you can think that teams will budget in a similar pattern as before, any everyone will be getting about half.


Or you can live in world where you could imagine that Baseball become popular around the world overnight, and the budget goes up by 10 times.

do you think in that case it would bonanza day for those elite players, who can now expect to get that extra $382.5 million shared between them, as the club now has $382.5 million extra to spend on salaries, or you could possibly guess that pay scales would settle down to be similar as before, with everyone making 10 times what they do now?



And again, just a crumb of recognition of at least some of the reasons put to you would be nice, rather than just saying "...yes, but if clubs had $20 million more they could spend it a on salaries of elite players!"

Yes, we all know they could. We all know we could take our monthly salary and stick it on a horse at the 3.15 at Doncaster, but generally we don't as we realise it wouldn't necessarily be the best thing to do.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

A posting fee is NOT a transfer fee. You need to read as to what it actually is.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

no, you are just stating exactly the same thing time and time again and ignoring what is being said.


There is nothing at all in the real world that actually exists to suggest what you are saying is true.


but you have decided, ignoring all contrary evidence, that it's a major reason. It's not.

Until you make some effort to try and understand why pay scales are flatter elsewhere than in US sports, you will never understand, but the feeling I get is that you don't want to understand.

Every single one of the nine thousand threads you've started on this subject has gone the same way.

pc4th: if the top clubs had $20 million more each year they could pay it to the elite players.

someone else: yes, but they would because of reason "a"

pc4th: maybe, but if the top clubs had $20 million more each year they could pay it to the elite players.

somebody else: yes, but they would because of reason "b"

pc4th: I understand, but if the top clubs had $20 million more each year they could pay it to the elite players.

another person: that wouldn't happen becasue of reason "c"

pc4th: yes, but if the top clubs had $20 million more each year they could pay it to the elite players.

(repeat forever)

you aren't entering into any degree of discussion. You are just repeating your belief over and over again without at any time trying to say why any of the reasons given by other people are flawed.

Your examples are useless because they are founded entirely on the assumption that more money will lead to salaries for elite players rising hugely, and it's that very assumption that's being challenged.

Just repeatedly restating that you believe something would happen isn't an argument. You have to have something to back it up beyond hypothetical examples which only work if your assumption is correct.

And currently you've shown no willingness to accept that your assumption is anything less than cast iron fact.

so perhaps it is time to say hello to...



...and see if I have any more joy in discussing the matter with him.

 

Re: Is transfer fee expense 1 of the big reasons why elite soccer players are earning relatively les

I think that most well-run teams if they had money to spare due to not spending money on transfer fees, would use it to increase the depth of their squads.

If Man United had ten million extra a year would they spend it on giving Ronaldo and Ferdinand higher wages, or getting some reserve strikers?