Saint-Armstrong Posted 30 November, 2013 Posted 30 November, 2013 Saints spent £2.18m on agents fees during this period. Only Crystal Palace, Hull City and Swansea City spent less.
Bearsy Posted 30 November, 2013 Posted 30 November, 2013 Mental to spend £100m a year greasing the palms of c*nts whose sole aim is to screw you over.
Whitey Grandad Posted 30 November, 2013 Posted 30 November, 2013 Mental to spend £100m a year greasing the palms of c*nts whose sole aim is to screw you over. Yes, some of these players can be quite mercenary.
aintforever Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 That is very low considering how much we have spent on transfer fees so should be applauded. On the flip side though, we have spent £27mill on Ramirez and Osvaldo. Maybe if we were prepared to bung more money at agents we would have got better value for money. Who knows?
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 Would love to know where QPR rank on here. Has Ben-Haim even played for them? Is he even a footballer?
positivepete Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 The table would look even better if the number of deals and the value of those deals were alongside the agent spend, I suspect our ratio of agent spend to transfer fees would be pretty good.
The Cat Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 Wasn't it like £200k last time? I'm pretty sure we were the lowest spenders last time. One of my favourite things about Cortese is his refusal to cave in to agents demands. Some of the figures in that table are obscene.
itchen Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 I'm pretty sure we were the lowest spenders last time. One of my favourite things about Cortese is his refusal to cave in to agents demands. All of the figures in that table are obscene. Fixed it for you ;-)
david in sweden Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 a necessary evll, but at least Saints haven't succumbed to the measures that some of the so-called " big clubs " seemed to have done.
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 Was the wanyama deal off then on due to agent disputes? Have I got this confused?
VectisSaint Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 That is very low considering how much we have spent on transfer fees so should be applauded. On the flip side though, we have spent £27mill on Ramirez and Osvaldo. Maybe if we were prepared to bung more money at agents we would have got better value for money. Who knows? Ramirez' agent fees would have been included in the previous season's table. If we have paid as little as we have then we have great value for money with Ossie, Lovren and VW.
The Kraken Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 Was the wanyama deal off then on due to agent disputes? Have I got this confused? Correct. Wanyama's agent wanted a £1M fee. SFC, quite naturally, ruled that out so the agent started whoring the player around to other clubs who would stump up the fee.
positivepete Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 Correct. Wanyama's agent wanted a £1M fee. SFC, quite naturally, ruled that out so the agent started whoring the player around to other clubs who would stump up the fee. He should have tried Newcastle, they seem to pay a high proportion of fees!
david in sweden Posted 1 December, 2013 Posted 1 December, 2013 Was the wanyama deal off then on due to agent disputes? Have I got this confused? .....that was my understanding of it. Until they found out that Cardiff - was it ? - weren't interested in buying him anyway, and they had to come back to SFC.
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now