Ousmane Dembélé

We are not only better than everyone, we only sign better than everyone. so yes we will mock.

Net Spend 0

You questioning my age?

I’ll agree that we have paid large undeserving fees for a a whole lot of players that didn’t work out, but so have most clubs. I wasn’t arguing that EPL teams and PSG are wrong for the escalation of fees and of course we have done it more often in the past than others. I was pointing out that Perez is trying something different this time around. This conversation started on this new escalation of transfer fees in the 100M+ range. If you look at when we actually broke record fees aka Ronaldo, Figo, Zidane, Beckham, CRonaldo, Kaka, Bale or going way back Di Stefano or Puskas, they all worked out except Kaka and some questions re Bale and Beckham.

futbol_bill wrote:You questioning my age?

I’ll agree that we have paid large undeserving fees for a a whole lot of players that didn’t work out, but so have most clubs. I wasn’t arguing that EPL teams and  PSG are wrong for the escalation of fees and of course we have done it more often in the past than others. I was pointing out that Perez is trying something different this time around. This conversation started on this new escalation of transfer fees in the 100M+ range. If you look at when we actually broke record fees aka Ronaldo, Figo, Zidane, Beckham, CRonaldo, Kaka, Bale or going way back Di Stefano or Puskas, they all worked out except Kaka and some questions re Bale and Beckham.

No, the conversation started two pages before you posted, it started when Nick laughed at Barcelona for spending almost 200m on Dembele and Malcom (which is laughable tbf) then Casciavit posted that it's ironic that Real Madrid fans are laughing at other clubs for spending too much on undeserved players (which is true) then you came along and argued that Real Madrid didn't break transfer fee's for these signings, only for the deserved ones (also true, mostly) but then if this is your argument then Barcelona also didn't break any records with Dembele did they? Neymar was signed for more before him.

Which ultimately proves that both Real Madrid and Barcelona spend a shit load of money on players who sometimes prove that they deserve it and most of the times they don't.

http://www.goallegacy.net/t39665-fans-need-to-stop-talking-about-worth?highlight=worth

farfan wrote:http://www.goallegacy.net/t39665-fans-need-to-stop-talking-about-worth?highlight=worth

this is a dirty tackle

Betrayed like this by a fellow Madrid fan smdh

Mr Nick09 wrote:

farfan wrote:http://www.goallegacy.net/t39665-fans-need-to-stop-talking-about-worth?highlight=worth

this is a dirty tackle

Betrayed like this by a fellow Madrid fan smdh

Unfortunately for you, I remembered that you put " worth " in the title. otherwise the worthless search function would've helped you escape this tackle.

urbaNRoots wrote:

futbol_bill wrote:You questioning my age?

I’ll agree that we have paid large undeserving fees for a a whole lot of players that didn’t work out, but so have most clubs. I wasn’t arguing that EPL teams and  PSG are wrong for the escalation of fees and of course we have done it more often in the past than others. I was pointing out that Perez is trying something different this time around. This conversation started on this new escalation of transfer fees in the 100M+ range. If you look at when we actually broke record fees aka Ronaldo, Figo, Zidane, Beckham, CRonaldo, Kaka, Bale or going way back Di Stefano or Puskas, they all worked out except Kaka and some questions re Bale and Beckham.

No, the conversation started two pages before you posted, it started when Nick laughed at Barcelona for spending almost 200m on Dembele and Malcom (which is laughable tbf) then Casciavit posted that it's ironic that Real Madrid fans are laughing at other clubs for spending too much on undeserved players (which is true) then you came along and argued that Real Madrid didn't break transfer fee's for these signings, only for the deserved ones (also true, mostly) but then if this is your argument then Barcelona also didn't break any records with Dembele did they? Neymar was signed for more before him.

Which ultimately proves that both Real Madrid and Barcelona spend a shit load of money on players who sometimes prove that they deserve it and most of the times they don't.

Not to mention EPL teams and PSG. In other words all big clubs do, but at end of day, going by our European/ CL trophies, we do make better signings than most!

We weren't big spenders until Perez came.  Nobody's going to tell me that he was anything other than an unmitigated disaster during his first tenure... and it took Mourinho to contractually force him to require manager sign off to reign in him during his second term.

Let's not act like Madrid is better at this than anyone.  We spent a ton when nobody could compete with us in terms of money for years... now, there are a lot of teams with equal spending power or close to it.  So it's become a competitive transfer market... the way it should be.

Comparing bananas to oranges was never a good look.

And what’s your point. I didn’t say Madrid was better than others in terms of spending. I was making 2 points, one that when we have broken a transfer fee record, it almost always has worked out well. But you and Urban are right, we are just as bad as most big teams in spending money with bad results. it’s not just confined to the two Spanish teams as someone suggested.

The second point is Perez is trying a different approach this time around and it’s too early to know whether he will succeed or not with this youth approach.

And as much as you detest Perez, how do think we got both Di Stefano and Puskas, as this was long before Perez?

Perez is trying a different approach LUL.

Where was this different approach when you were spending literally 100s of millions every summer?

You don't get to talk from your high horse like you are some smart football club when you spent literally billions to get to this point to begin with.

I don't dislike Perez...  I like him a lot.  However, my perspective takes into account his entire time at Madrid.  Not just the most recent times.  

Mole made my point exactly... you spend billions to get to this point.  Just because you decided to stay conservative once your club started winning CLs doesnt make you some kind of genius.  It's common sense (which is actually nice to see FOR A CHANGE at Madrid). I'll wait and see what happens when we don't win a major title.  What he does then will indicate how much he has or hasn't changed.

Unless your name is Wolverhampton, clubs actually aren't spending "sugar daddy" money that much any more. I think we're past that, mostly.

Art Morte wrote:Unless your name is Wolverhampton, clubs actually aren't spending "sugar daddy" money that much any more. I think we're past that, mostly.

PSG and City?

rincon wrote:

Art Morte wrote:Unless your name is Wolverhampton, clubs actually aren't spending "sugar daddy" money that much any more. I think we're past that, mostly.

PSG and City?

Even City can make the argument that they're not spending sugar daddy monies any more. They signed Mahrez this summer, but also had some sales and a lot of departures ( = lower wage bill). Frankly, they probably turned a profit this year to fund some of last summer's big spenditure.

PSG's only signing (apart from a strange free signing of Buffon) has so far been Mbappe. They've had some sales, too. It's not like either of these clubs are blowing mountains of cash every window. You have a club like West Ham spending tens of millions, Liverpool spending over a hundred, frankly, I don't think Man City and PSG are in the crazy category any more.

Art Morte wrote:

rincon wrote:

Art Morte wrote:Unless your name is Wolverhampton, clubs actually aren't spending "sugar daddy" money that much any more. I think we're past that, mostly.

PSG and City?

Even City can make the argument that they're not spending sugar daddy monies any more. They signed Mahrez this summer, but also had some sales and a lot of departures ( = lower wage bill). Frankly, they probably turned a profit this year to fund some of last summer's big spenditure.

PSG's only signing (apart from a strange free signing of Buffon) has so far been Mbappe. They've had some sales, too. It's not like either of these clubs are blowing mountains of cash every window. You have a club like West Ham spending tens of millions, Liverpool spending over a hundred, frankly, I don't think Man City and PSG are in the crazy category any more.

Is the definition of "any more" just this summer? because last summer these two teams dropped 400 and 300m respectively. Of course its sugar daddy money, what is the source of income that allows PSG to blow 400m on two players? or for City to spend like 1 billion over the years.

They didn't spend anything on Mbappe until this summer.  It was a year long loan and a purchase option that just triggered.

As far as Neymar, they bet that his marketability would help them recoup the majority of their cost since PSG is really a new brand... and it did.  They sold an additional 100+ mil in merchandising compared to the previous year that can only be realistically attributed to Neymar and some to Mbappe.

Ligue 1 also struck gold with foreign TV licensing rights this past winter given Neymar and PSG... so that was a big boost too.

PSG isn't a mature brand.  So the opportunity to increase exposure and revenue is infinitely larger than the mature football brands... those guys are more concerned about protecting market share.

One of the reason FFP couldn't really do anything to them. The books looked solid. They really wanted to as well.

Their deficit this past season was 50 mil euros and they need to sell that amount, which they will with Guedes, etc.

Yes of course My mistake for thinking PSG had a sugar daddy. I should have looked into their past properly and seen all the 100m signings before Qatar arrived.

Mr Nick09 wrote:We are not only better than everyone, we only sign better than everyone. so yes we will mock.

Net Spend 0

Nick, I think we have been drowned out!

sportsczy wrote:They didn't spend anything on Mbappe until this summer.  It was a year long loan and a purchase option that just triggered.

As far as Neymar, they bet that his marketability would help them recoup the majority of their cost since PSG is really a new brand... and it did.  They sold an additional 100+ mil in merchandising compared to the previous year that can only be realistically attributed to Neymar and some to Mbappe.

Ligue 1 also struck gold with foreign TV licensing rights this past winter given Neymar and PSG... so that was a big boost too.

PSG isn't a mature brand.  So the opportunity to increase exposure and revenue is infinitely larger than the mature football brands... those guys are more concerned about protecting market share.

Which means the Mbappe balancing will fall onto next summer's agenda.

As for the branding, look at the impact Ronaldo had at Juventus, which is definitely a very established clubs. Certain global icons will always have this kind of impact, Neymar last summer and now Mbappe because of the World Cup is the best marketing PSG has ever done. They spent years pillaging Serie A of Cavani, Thiago Silva, Ibra, Pastore, Lavezzi, etc. but they eclipsed that with signing the best French talent in decades and the best current Brazilian player, from Barcelona no less. Credit to PSG for that

But still easily considered a sugar daddy club, just a really well ran one

The whole reason Mbappe was first on loan was FFP. This summer, their only real signing has been making Mbappe permanent. I don't think that screams "sugar daddy!" in 2018.

Sugar daddies are getting less and less interested in blowing their own money in football. You have the odd Chinese buckling the trend, but that's pretty much it.

Sure, when you ignore the fees of both Neymar and Mbappe, then you're right, it's no different than Everton signing Mina and Andre Gomes

Couldn't disagree more with my fellow Madrid fans.

It's true, Barcelona paid a lot more money than they should have to acquire the services of Dembélé. However, he remains a great talent to have on your bench. Even if he doesn't make it into the first eleven, he still gives them the luxury of having a player as talented as he is come off the bench.

Do you know what's that reminiscent of? Madrid not too long ago when they bought the likes of Isco, Kova and James, who at the time weren't good enough to start, but formed a very strong bench and were more than reliable every time they were called upon.

Barcelona understood what gave Madrid the edge all these years, and started working on that. They used to have scrubs on their bench. Now they have Dembelé, Vidal and Rakitic.

At one point, we had even Bale on the bench. We were so stacked, it felt like God's team.

Now, we're slowly but steadily losing one after the other. Morata is gone. James is gone. Kova is gone. Pepe is gone. heck even Ronaldo is gone.

And this is all without replacing any of them.

I like the youngsters we have, but they are way too green for the highest level. We have weakened our bench and our starting eleven without making proper replacements. Barcelona on the other hand are dropping 150m in every turn.

I don't know about you, but I really like the old version of Madrid better. The ruthless one that goes after world beaters and not shy away from paying what everybody else is paying for world class talent.

This is the game of transfers; you either spend like all the top teams to stay competitive, or you die.

Luca wrote:Sure, when you ignore the fees of both Neymar and Mbappe, then you're right, it's no different than Everton signing Mina and Andre Gomes

Last summer PSG's paid transfer fees were about €240m and sales about €80m = net spend of about €160m.

This summer they made the Mbappe signing permanent for some €130m.

Is this really outrageous spending considering the players that money bought? You bring up a sorry wannabe club like Everton who spent some €45m on Sigurdsson last summer and the same amount on Richarlison this summer. PSG's two big purchases look like excellent pieces of business compared to that.

The matter of the fact is that all sugar daddy money will come to an end sooner or later. It's been made painfully obvious to Chelsea fans. Man City's craziest spending days are behind them. Even PSG are taking it easy apart from these two big signings. These billionaires get all excited for a while and then they decide it's time to stop wasting money on this particular hobby and that's just a fact.

Two summers in a row of a team in the French league making two of the top 5 highest transfer of all time (including the highest) = not sugar daddy money and taking it easy. Seems legit.

I wonder why Lyon and Marseille aren't out there signing Hazard and Kane.

Art Morte wrote:

Luca wrote:Sure, when you ignore the fees of both Neymar and Mbappe, then you're right, it's no different than Everton signing Mina and Andre Gomes

Last summer PSG's paid transfer fees were about €240m and sales about €80m = net spend of about €160m.

This summer they made the Mbappe signing permanent for some €130m.

Is this really outrageous spending considering the players that money bought? You bring up a sorry wannabe club like Everton who spent some €45m on Sigurdsson last summer and the same amount on Richarlison this summer. PSG's two big purchases look like excellent pieces of business compared to that.

The matter of the fact is that all sugar daddy money will come to an end sooner or later. It's been made painfully obvious to Chelsea fans. Man City's craziest spending days are behind them. Even PSG are taking it easy apart from these two big signings. These billionaires get all excited for a while and then they decide it's time to stop wasting money on this particular hobby and that's just a fact.

My apologies, how you framed your initial post seemed to be downplaying the costs of both Mbappe and Neymar, both of which are near World Record fees with wages to match. Both are excellent pieces of business though, I agree and said that above, it's the single two best signings that PSG have made in their era of dominance.

I would argue though that spending 400M on two players isn't all that different than signing 10 players at 40M a piece, it may get downplayed because it's "only" two signings and the two signings happen to be some of the best players playing but I don't see spending wise it being too different than PSG a few seasons ago.

Eventually you do get to a point when hopefully you aren't making 6-7 signings each summer because you're players are sticking around and playing well at that. Best example being Real Madrid 2014- present.