Jump to content
RUMBELOWS91

Wednesday's "outrageous" Rhodes valuation

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Mr. Tom said:

I don’t think we can really talk about Rhodes in terms of the general model of our (broadly pretty dreadful) transfer activity/policy over the past 3-4 years. Despite the fact that most of us were delighted to get him here, the deal that brought him in was a uniquely naive and shortsighted one, even by our own maddeningly clumsy standards.

 

We paid so wildly over the odds for him that we can’t possibly sell at a ‘reasonable’ price now, having had so little out of him for the investment we made, without looking like total mugs. (Although the coldly pragmatic part of me says we probably still should do, for his sake and ours - even if it amounts to a tacit public admission that we got our pants pulled down.)

 

On the other hand, I’d love to see what he can do under Bruce, who I do believe will focus on bringing in some pace down the flanks to provide better service into the box. Finally. We haven’t had that in YEARS, and it was a big part of why JR didn’t get any joy here. Who knows, it could change things massively.

 

Either way, point is we’ve timed it all so badly that if we give him another season here and it doesn’t work again, we’ll barely be able to ask anything for him the year after - 30, contract winding down, high wage. (A million if we’re lucky?)

 

Had we made a better post-CC appointment than Jos, who knows. But the time we wasted treading water there played a big part in putting us where we are now re: Rhodes, ie. in a very awkward position.

 

One thing I really think we must bear in mind either way is that none of this is Jordan’s fault, and it’s unfair to talk the way some do as if he had anything to do with the fee. We’ve spent considerably more, collectively, on at least four or five other players who’ve contributed far less between them even than Rhodes has been able to in his frustrating time here so far.

 

There’s no use in pointing the finger at any one person, because it’s been a joint effort really, but the money we’ve frittered in the past few years on weird agent shenanigans and gross errors of judgment really has been shocking.

 

Rhodes may have had the highest individual price tag, but reactions to his time at Norwich have for me confirmed what we already knew: look past the silly numbers and he’s a player who will score goals (9 for Norwich = joint third top scorer for us, level with Reach), even when not fully sharp/on form/starting. A true pro who always works his butt off and is great for the dressing room. He’s still ours as things stand - it’d be absolutely joyful to see him hit 20 in a season here. Can he? I suspect so, but it’s a gamble.

 
We know we’ve stuffed up financially, and selling for just £3-4m now - although exacerbating our FFP issues in the very short-term - might well be less damaging overall than getting next to nothing in 12 months’ time (having already paid another year of his wages). Or perhaps not, depending on how the 3-year rolling loss period works out - you’d need the full accounts in front of you to really see all the permutations clearly.
 
Can we afford to roll the dice again on keeping him? Fletcher has played brilliantly this season, but not as a finisher, whereas that’s really all Rhodes does in the right setup. Bruce badly needs a player LIKE Rhodes, but we’ve not got the money to buy anyone established - it’s JR or a young loan gamble.
 
High stakes. Very tricky situation.

 

If the gamble had come off his fee would have been considered peanuts and a very astute financial move.  

 

Small margins.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


In a world where Gary Madine is worth 6m who's to say what's outrageously high or not.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kagoshimaowl said:

Don’t we still owe Boro 4 million? Surely we’d have to recoup at least that.

 

That's the magic number for me. If Norwich pay what we still owe and take Rhodes' wage permanently off our books...they can have him. I still believe Rhodes can score a quantity of goals, but I don't think he has the legs to play the way Bruce speaks of, nor does he seem to wanna come back here. So, we need a deal.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

They didn't seem to think it was 'outrageous' when they agreed to pay it last year.

It’s called negotiation

Wednesday apparently started out over valuing him in some sort of loan to buy arrangement which Norwich agreed.

Now Norwich have the money they probably think they can do better and are trying to wriggle out.

Chansiri being a man of honour will expect an agreement to be honoured.

 

I just hope Chansiri Lets Bruce handle it rather than trying to do it himself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, A12owl said:

The art of selling anything is to stsrt high and negotiate down. If someone is prepared to pay your valuation then good. If not then negotiate . It's the way of the world .

Ask £7m someone offers £3m eventually you can settle for £5m and everybody has compromised and will feel satisfied that they have a good deal.

Ask £4m and somebody will offer £2m . Then you settle for £3m. Same situation. Everybody got a deal. Problem for seller ...they have lost £2m on previous scenario.

Anybody who is or has been involved in selling will know what I mean. 

There may be some mug who will pay your high asking price . You can always come down in price but not go up on and advertised price unless you have more than one buyer . Then it becomes an auction.

Simply sales technique 

Your explanation isn't incorrect, but I don't believe it's accurate to the goings on at Wednesday. 

Simply because we've had to sell the ground, and the only sales we've made over the last 4 years that weren't for a pittance was Jack Hunt to Bristol City. One sale in four years and the sale of our historic ground is indicative of our starting position in a negotiation is just too high. You'd of course be right... if we were making a reasonable amount on player sales.

 

You wouldn't say the entrepreneur whose starting price for selling his Snickers bars was £2 (one sale in four years) was a better negotiator than the entrepeneur selling his Snickers Bars for £1 (five sales in four years). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If rhodes doesnt want to be here (if true), contract or otherwise its pointless. We wont get the best out of him. If he wants to leave best thing we can do is a deal with another club. No point digging our heels in to keep a player and pay his wages so he can sit and underperform. Waste of time for everyone and we cant afford it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, A12owl said:

The art of selling anything is to stsrt high and negotiate down. If someone is prepared to pay your valuation then good. If not then negotiate . It's the way of the world .

Ask £7m someone offers £3m eventually you can settle for £5m and everybody has compromised and will feel satisfied that they have a good deal.

Ask £4m and somebody will offer £2m . Then you settle for £3m. Same situation. Everybody got a deal. Problem for seller ...they have lost £2m on previous scenario.

Anybody who is or has been involved in selling will know what I mean. 

There may be some mug who will pay your high asking price . You can always come down in price but not go up on and advertised price unless you have more than one buyer . Then it becomes an auction.

Simply sales technique 

This This This!!!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DC really could use some help on selling players and not massively over pricing them. It is one of the main reasons why we are in such a mess with FFP. Personally I’m a big fan of Rhodes still and would love him to get back to his best in a Wednesday shirt. Unfortunately we are desperate for money and it would make business sense to sell him for a fair amount. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

They didn't seem to think it was 'outrageous' when they agreed to pay it last year.

 

13 minutes ago, Blatter said:

It’s called negotiation

Wednesday apparently started out over valuing him in some sort of loan to buy arrangement which Norwich agreed.

Now Norwich have the money they probably think they can do better and are trying to wriggle out.

Chansiri being a man of honour will expect an agreement to be honoured.

 

I just hope Chansiri Lets Bruce handle it rather than trying to do it himself

 

They didn't agree to pay anything last year when they did the loan apparently..

 

But Webber conceded the club may have to look elsewhere to strengthen their attacking options.He said: "First of all, we never had the option to buy him, in writing. We couldn't agree that last summer so we didn't have it. It was just a straight forward loan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple equation 

 

Is a player with Rhodes pedigree and promise of returning to form. Worth more to us in our side.

Than the 3/4 million we may get for him?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, A12owl said:

The art of selling anything is to stsrt high and negotiate down. If someone is prepared to pay your valuation then good. If not then negotiate . It's the way of the world .

Ask £7m someone offers £3m eventually you can settle for £5m and everybody has compromised and will feel satisfied that they have a good deal.

Ask £4m and somebody will offer £2m . Then you settle for £3m. Same situation. Everybody got a deal. Problem for seller ...they have lost £2m on previous scenario.

Anybody who is or has been involved in selling will know what I mean. 

There may be some mug who will pay your high asking price . You can always come down in price but not go up on and advertised price unless you have more than one buyer . Then it becomes an auction.

Simply sales technique 

 

Or you put Norwich off. They are not desperate for Rhodes, no matter what the sporting director says. He wasn’t crucial to their success last season. You take what you can. 7 million is ludicrous.

 

When has DC ever shown he knows what he’s doing when it comes to selling players? 

  • Like 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lively discussion.  I'd like to see Rhodes get a run under Bruce, because there were plenty of "poaching" chances last half-season, just no "poachers."  Not saying build a team around him, just saying that he might be able to do some good, and likely as not, he'll be on the payroll come August.  Might as well try, to see if he can add 10 or 15 goals, we're  paying for him anyway.  

 

Nothing wrong with a Sub-In role, expensive Sub-In for sure, but, if Bruce can ignite him, look out.  To my mind he didn't really crap out, CC and Jos did.  We did not play attacking football, but we do now, plus, Bruce knows him, which counts for a lot.  If there's anything left in Rhodes, Bruce will extract it, if not, he'll be on the payroll (probably), but not playing, First 11 or Sub, because Bruce is looking to win.

 

I'd love it if Norwich would offer stupid money, or even reasonable money, but they're not going to, and neither is anybody else.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the statement from Norwich is pretty fair , they value his tallent and personality but are not prepared to help mitigate the ridiculous price that we stumped up for him.

I agree with Mr. Tom... I think that he would be very prolific when given an effective pacey supply chain. 

I’m quite relaxed about the situation, we’re undoubtedly going to have to take a financial hit if we move him on...but if he stays then it’s fine by me because given the right circumstances he’s a 25-30 goal a season man.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr. Tom said:

I don’t think we can really talk about Rhodes in terms of the general model of our (broadly pretty dreadful) transfer activity/policy over the past 3-4 years. Despite the fact that most of us were delighted to get him here, the deal that brought him in was a uniquely naive and shortsighted one, even by our own maddeningly clumsy standards.

 

We paid so wildly over the odds for him that we can’t possibly sell at a ‘reasonable’ price now, having had so little out of him for the investment we made, without looking like total mugs. (Although the coldly pragmatic part of me says we probably still should do, for his sake and ours - even if it amounts to a tacit public admission that we got our pants pulled down.)

 

On the other hand, I’d love to see what he can do under Bruce, who I do believe will focus on bringing in some pace down the flanks to provide better service into the box. Finally. We haven’t had that in YEARS, and it was a big part of why JR didn’t get any joy here. Who knows, it could change things massively.

 

Either way, point is we’ve timed it all so badly that if we give him another season here and it doesn’t work again, we’ll barely be able to ask anything for him the year after - 30, contract winding down, high wage. (A million if we’re lucky?)

 

Had we made a better post-CC appointment than Jos, who knows. But the time we wasted treading water there played a big part in putting us where we are now re: Rhodes, ie. in a very awkward position.

 

One thing I really think we must bear in mind either way is that none of this is Jordan’s fault, and it’s unfair to talk the way some do as if he had anything to do with the fee. We’ve spent considerably more, collectively, on at least four or five other players who’ve contributed far less between them even than Rhodes has been able to in his frustrating time here so far.

 

There’s no use in pointing the finger at any one person, because it’s been a joint effort really, but the money we’ve frittered in the past few years on weird agent shenanigans and gross errors of judgment really has been shocking.

 

Rhodes may have had the highest individual price tag, but reactions to his time at Norwich have for me confirmed what we already knew: look past the silly numbers and he’s a player who will score goals (9 for Norwich = joint third top scorer for us, level with Reach), even when not fully sharp/on form/starting. A true pro who always works his butt off and is great for the dressing room. He’s still ours as things stand - it’d be absolutely joyful to see him hit 20 in a season here. Can he? I suspect so, but it’s a gamble.

 
We know we’ve stuffed up financially, and selling for just £3-4m now - although exacerbating our FFP issues in the very short-term - might well be less damaging overall than getting next to nothing in 12 months’ time (having already paid another year of his wages). Or perhaps not, depending on how the 3-year rolling loss period works out - you’d need the full accounts in front of you to really see all the permutations clearly.
 
Can we afford to roll the dice again on keeping him? Fletcher has played brilliantly this season, but not as a finisher, whereas that’s really all Rhodes does in the right setup. Bruce badly needs a player LIKE Rhodes, but we’ve not got the money to buy anyone established - it’s JR or a young loan gamble.
 
High stakes. Very tricky situation.

Wow. Someone with ayf a brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, quinnssweetshop said:

Just get rid of him, he's no desire to play for us, didn't give a to55 whilst he was here, bottled out of taking a penalty against his beloved Huddersfield


An absolute waste of money.  get him off the books. And no...I never wanted him here at the time either ( before anyone uses that excuse )
 

We don't need bottlers this season. We need people that want to play for the club.

And back to morons. :biggrin:

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Your explanation isn't incorrect, but I don't believe it's accurate to the goings on at Wednesday. 

Simply because we've had to sell the ground, and the only sales we've made over the last 4 years that weren't for a pittance was Jack Hunt to Bristol City. One sale in four years and the sale of our historic ground is indicative of our starting position in a negotiation is just too high. You'd of course be right... if we were making a reasonable amount on player sales.

 

You wouldn't say the entrepreneur whose starting price for selling his Snickers bars was £2 (one sale in four years) was a better negotiator than the entrepeneur selling his Snickers Bars for £1 (five sales in four years). 

I'm not talking about general sales  . I mean a price for an individual item you are selling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day we need to reduce the wage bill. We have far too many strikers at the club. If Norwich want Rhodes and if he wants to go, we should do everything we can to make the move happen.

 

I’m not saying we settle for peanuts, but we certainly don’t put Norwich off by pricing him at 7 million. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, quinnssweetshop said:

 

Yawn



 

Punting the ball into the channels and expecting JR as a lone striker to do something with it is like expecting a bichon frise to mount a newfoundland. What’s even more infuriating is we’d get the ball in the fvxking box when Rhodes wasn’t on the pitch to no one there!! Give him a chance under Bruce if he wants to use him or sell him, I’m not too fussed. But just short sightedly bashing players is daft. (Especially after he was signed because of the fans)

Edited by SettleForADraw
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

Or you put Norwich off. They are not desperate for Rhodes, no matter what the sporting director says. He wasn’t crucial to their success last season. You take what you can. 7 million is ludicrous.

 

When has DC ever shown he knows what he’s doing when it comes to selling players? 

The sporting director isn't going to say " we really want to buy Rhodes" is he? 

He will play it cool  . He is a very good negotiator . You don't declare your hand when playing poker do You? Regardless of DC's previous ventures or not into the transfer market , forget them  . He's got Steve Bruce now. Bruce is one of the shrewdest managers at this level. He will tell DC what and when to do in the player market. That's why Bruce is here. In Bruce DC trusts 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...