Transfer values dropping for our players?

[Major Isewater]

During the last transfer window we were worrying about selling Semenyo, Scott and even Weimann but I am just wondering if in January these stars go , how much we will get for them considering our middling season so far ? 
Talk of 20 million for Semenyo at the moment looks  excessive. Scott is ticking over but not exactly hitting too many heights. 
Our soon to be out of contract players are mostly not doing the business to attract fantastic offers in January, see Bentley, Massengo…

Wass think? 

[77 punk]

teams will still buy semenyo and scott for future potential, lansdown will not let these players go cheap

[robinforlife2]

4 minutes ago, 77 punk said:

teams will still buy semenyo and scott for future potential, lansdown will not let these players go cheap

Semenyo is out of contract at the end of next season. January is our best time to sell him, but he wont make what we could have got in the summer. 10m-12m in January would be a lot better than the 4-5m in the summer when he can be got for free at the end of the season, as it's unlikely he will sign a new deal.

Scott is about the only one (possibly Conway if he keeps improving) that we will get good value from, given their contracts. 

[pongo88]

I always thought the high transfer valuation placed on Semenyo by various forum members was rather optimistic. He’s always had potential, but you need more than potential to attract a really big bid. Since he returned to City from Newport, as a goal scorer, he’s really only had periods when he looked good. At other times he’s lacked composure.  Over his career he’s scored a goal approx every 7 games. His benefit to the team is often the assists he provides. I’m sure he will attract bid(s) from the Premier League but they will be on the basis of an expensive punt in the expectation that potential can be developed into consistency. 
 

As for Massengo, he couldn’t  hold down a regular place in a struggling Championship team last season so it’s no surprise there weren’t any bids in the summer. Alex Scott has age on his side so, imo, he’s the one most likely to attract a decent bid. Weimann, on the other hand, has age against him

[italian dave]

I know that it will be controversial to say this, and that suggesting Mark Ashton is anything less than the devil incarnate is frowned on, but………..

he did extract maximum value from selling our best players at the right time (financially) and getting the most we could for them. Something we’d been hopeless at before he arrived, and jury is out on whether we’re reverting to type. 

And, just to be clear, I’m not talking about the players he brought in, about the impacts of those sales on the team, all sorts of things - or any of the many other problems with his time here. 

Edited October 22, 2022 by italian dave

[Sir Geoff]

3 minutes ago, italian dave said:

I know that it will be controversial to say this, and that suggesting Mark Ashton is anything less than the devil incarnate is frowned on, but………..

he did extract maximum value from selling our best players at the right time (financially) and getting the most we could for them. Something we’d been hopeless at before he arrived, and jury is out on whether we’re reverting to type. 

And, just to be clear, I’m not talking about the players he brought in, about the impacts of those sales on the team, all sorts of things - or any of the many other problems with his time here. 

Easy to sell players/ anything when someone wants to buy them / it.

[Sheltons Army]

Just now, Sir Geoff said:

Easy to sell players/ anything when someone wants to buy them / it.

And in the case of Bryan , Reid , Webster , Flint they all wanted to move on so timing was in reality set by them

[steveybadger]

2 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Easy to sell players/ anything when someone wants to buy them / it.

But tbf as Italian Dave said, he got top dollar.

There was actually a seller’s market then mind

[pongo88]

4 minutes ago, italian dave said:

I know that it will be controversial to say this, and that suggesting Mark Ashton is anything less than the devil incarnate is frowned on, but………..

he did extract maximum value from selling our best players at the right time (financially) and getting the most we could for them. Something we’d been hopeless at before he arrived, and jury is out on whether we’re reverting to type. 

And, just to be clear, I’m not talking about the players he brought in, about the impacts of those sales on the team, all sorts of things - or any of the many other problems with his time here. 

I don’t think you can split getting max value for players out,  from the cost of brining players in. It’s the net value that counts. With Bryan, Reid and Flint they were not Ashton signing and as @Sheltons Army said they wanted to leave. And, as @steveybadger said, it was a sellers market. How much did Ashton waste on the transfer fees and salaries of all the many other signings? 

[steveybadger]

3 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

I don’t think you can split getting max value for players out,  from the cost of brining players in. It’s the net value that counts. With Bryan, Reid and Flint they were not Ashton signing and as @Sheltons Army said they wanted to leave. And, as @steveybadger said, it was a sellers market. How much did Ashton waste on the transfer fees and salaries of all the many other signings? 

I did but I just think he did get max value, regardless of the state of the market, who brought in the players and how much he paid for those he brought in.

[italian dave]

46 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

I don’t think you can split getting max value for players out,  from the cost of brining players in. It’s the net value that counts. With Bryan, Reid and Flint they were not Ashton signing and as @Sheltons Army said they wanted to leave. And, as @steveybadger said, it was a sellers market. How much did Ashton waste on the transfer fees and salaries of all the many other signings? 

As I was very clear to say, I’m not arguing that his time here was a success, far from it, I acknowledge all of the things you say. All I’m saying is that wherever they came from, however much they cost etc etc etc, I still think he did better than we’ve done before or since at extracting maximum value when we sold. 

[italian dave]

56 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Easy to sell players/ anything when someone wants to buy them / it.

Of course. But that’s the whole point. It’s not just about ‘when someone wants to buy’, it’s about when and how we want to sell, and when and how we can get the absolute maximum we can. 

[GrahamC]

3 hours ago, italian dave said:

I know that it will be controversial to say this, and that suggesting Mark Ashton is anything less than the devil incarnate is frowned on, but………..

he did extract maximum value from selling our best players at the right time (financially) and getting the most we could for them. Something we’d been hopeless at before he arrived, and jury is out on whether we’re reverting to type. 

And, just to be clear, I’m not talking about the players he brought in, about the impacts of those sales on the team, all sorts of things - or any of the many other problems with his time here. 

That was pre pandemic.

A totally different transfer market.

I’m not saying a couple of the sales weren’t smart business, but the whole financial landscape has changed hugely since then.

[Mr Popodopolous]

26 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

That was pre pandemic.

A totally different transfer market.

I’m not saying a couple of the sales weren’t smart business, but the whole financial landscape has changed hugely since then.

In which case we can cite a nice added transfer profit or impairment and FFP problems solved.

I don't disagree with your point though but a combination of the bottom falling out of the market during and post Covid and our model which relied on big sales to absorb big costs...it won't wash in reality I know that.

Edited October 22, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Red-Robbo]

23 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

That was pre pandemic.

A totally different transfer market.

I’m not saying a couple of the sales weren’t smart business, but the whole financial landscape has changed hugely since then.

 

Was going to say exactly the same. 

We have no Tammy Abrahams here now. Someone who even a blind man could see was Premier League (and international) football level.

However, we have players who potentially top flight teams might think they can improve and who can do a job for them. 

Even the monopoly money PL takes less expensive punts on lower league players these days. The moneygoround has spun off its axis. 

[italian dave]

29 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

That was pre pandemic.

A totally different transfer market.

I’m not saying a couple of the sales weren’t smart business, but the whole financial landscape has changed hugely since then.

Of course, and players won’t attract the sort of fees that they did pre pandemic. But that fact doesn’t alter the principe around getting the best value by selling at the right time. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Of course, and players won’t attract the sort of fees that they did pre pandemic. But that fact doesn’t alter the principe around getting the best value by selling at the right time. 

Except his final year...

Could we have looked to offload a range of players in January 2021 to get something for them and free up some wages in the process. Then again we may have gone down so perhaps not!

[italian dave]

15 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Except his final year...

Could we have looked to offload a range of players in January 2021 to get something for them and free up some wages in the process. Then again we may have gone down so perhaps not!

Fair comment. Diedhiou being his biggest mistake. I wonder whether he thought he could bullshit Famara into signing a new contract, and by the time that evidently wasn’t happening he was losing interest in City anyway. It now seems evident that he knew he was going to Ipswich long before then end of that final year. 

[italian dave]

32 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Was going to say exactly the same. 

We have no Tammy Abrahams here now. Someone who even a blind man could see was Premier League (and international) football level.

However, we have players who potentially top flight teams might think they can improve and who can do a job for them. 

Even the monopoly money PL takes less expensive punts on lower league players these days. The moneygoround has spun off its axis. 

Tammy was never ours to sell anyway.

I completely get the point about the transfer market being very different now. But if you take, say Adam Webster. You might only get £10m for the same player in the same situation now, and not the £20m we got pre pandemic. But you still have to get the timing and the negotiation right in order to get that. 

I’m thinking of players like Nicky Maynard, Marvin Elliott, Luke Ayling, arguably even Andy Cole. We didn’t get half the maximum we could have got for them. 

Having said all this I can’t stress too much that I realise there’s a whole load more to this. I still think that, while we might have got maximum financial value out of Webster and Brownhill, the timing in terms of our progress on the field was a complete disaster. 

[PHILINFRANCE]

49 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Fair comment. Diedhiou being his biggest mistake. I wonder whether he thought he could bullshit Famara into signing a new contract, and by the time that evidently wasn’t happening he was losing interest in City anyway. It now seems evident that he knew he was going to Ipswich long before then end of that final year. 

If, as does seem very likely, this was indeed the case, one may also question as to why Webster's sale was rushed through in to the existing year's accounts, rather than holding on a few days and putting it in to the following year, resulting in a profit and, presumably, a nice bonus for MA.

I believe @Davefevs has already alluded to this, but it would be fascinating to know the amount of any increased bonus MA received.

The downshot, of course, certainly as far as City were/are concerned, is that whilst MA was presumably lining his already handsomely remunerated pockets as a result of the financial year's profits, the following financial year was deprived of a nice transfer fee, a sum that would have gone a long way to smoothing out our current FFP problems. 

[real_bristol]

7 hours ago, pongo88 said:

I always thought the high transfer valuation placed on Semenyo by various forum members was rather optimistic. He’s always had potential, but you need more than potential to attract a really big bid. Since he returned to City from Newport, as a goal scorer, he’s really only had periods when he looked good. At other times he’s lacked composure.  Over his career he’s scored a goal approx every 7 games. His benefit to the team is often the assists he provides. I’m sure he will attract bid(s) from the Premier League but they will be on the basis of an expensive punt in the expectation that potential can be developed into consistency. 

Yeah 1 goal in 7 doesn’t do him justice. We played him for something like 50 games and he scored very little. Then he had that run last season where he was getting at least a goal a game and that’s where all the  excitement was coming from. IMO he needs more games now in the staring XI to find that form again. Knowing our luck he’ll start scoring again just before the World Cup. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Believe that you are thinking of the Kelly transfer @PHILINFRANCE

Yes it would have improved our combined average by £6.5m. Think the fee was £13m, and academy product=pure profit. Took place in mid May 2019 iirc, or thereabouts- perhaps a fortnight before the accounting period for 2018-19 came to an end.

Assuming expenditure the same it would have given us maybe even a couple to a few million in headroom FFP wise to 2022-23, in terms of margin for error.

The bonus point is interesting although quite sure SL himself referenced the whole finally making a profit thing after so many years, unsure if it was a bit of a badge of honour for him too.

Edited October 23, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Engvall’s Splinter]

I don’t think players values have dropped as the wild prices quoted from our fans were never realistic anyways. Clubs would be paying more for potential - that potential is still there. Figures of 25m+ was that of fantasy.  

[pongo88]

1 hour ago, real_bristol said:

Yeah 1 goal in 7 doesn’t do him justice. We played him for something like 50 games and he scored very little. Then he had that run last season where he was getting at least a goal a game and that’s where all the  excitement was coming from. IMO he needs more games now in the staring XI to find that form again. Knowing our luck he’ll start scoring again just before the World Cup. 

He scored 8 goals in 31 matches last season which is hardly a goal a game. (admittedly some were sub appearances). I’m not saying he’s a bad player, as he also provides lots of assists, just his value is not as high as some people say. 

[Davefevs]

 

16 hours ago, GrahamC said:

That was pre pandemic.

A totally different transfer market.

I’m not saying a couple of the sales weren’t smart business, but the whole financial landscape has changed hugely since then.

Yep, and look at what we paid out in fees and wages too…I don’t believe he was the great negotiator made out, just a market that looked favourable to him.  But if you look at the accounts…he overspent.  It’s there in black and white.

[W-S-M Seagull]

On 22/10/2022 at 17:28, robinforlife2 said:

Semenyo is out of contract at the end of next season. January is our best time to sell him, but he wont make what we could have got in the summer. 10m-12m in January would be a lot better than the 4-5m in the summer when he can be got for free at the end of the season, as it's unlikely he will sign a new deal.

Scott is about the only one (possibly Conway if he keeps improving) that we will get good value from, given their contracts. 

I argued that we should have sold in the summer as for the remainder of his contract, he was at peak value in the summer. 

OK maybe the interest wasn't quite there with the injury. 

Most people just wanted to see him stay at all costs. He's not signing a new contract. Not in a million years. We need to cash in. 

The way I see it is if we get let's say 2 million less for him in January than we would in the summer then we've essentially spent 2 million on keeping him for a few months and for me, I don't think that's worth it. 

[Simon bristol]

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

Yep, and look at what we paid out in fees and wages too…I don’t believe he was the great negotiator made out, just a market that looked favourable to him.  But if you look at the accounts…he overspent.  It’s there in black and white.

Yes, and selling lloyd kelly wasn’t exactly miracle working, he was an exceptional talent. The list of signings under ashton though, with one or two exceptions was shocking,, he might have been a slippery customer to deal with, but had he overseen a decent transfer strategy he will have left with more goodwill than he has got.

[alexukhc]

If Semenyo doesn’t make the World Cup he will go for less in January 

[Sir Geoff]

19 hours ago, Engvall’s Splinter said:

I don’t think players values have dropped as the wild prices quoted from our fans were never realistic anyways. Clubs would be paying more for potential - that potential is still there. Figures of 25m+ was that of fantasy.  

Don't think many clubs do that or can even afford to in todays market. Most Prem clubs want ready made players. There are exceptions like the lad from Villa whom Chelsea bought and Djed Spence to Tottenham. Both have stalled their careers and will be getting a lot of splinters in their backsides this season.

If potential was the key then I suspect we would only get  lower fees with generous add ons.

imo, Semenyo will end up at a top end Championship club looking for a bit of fire power to boost a promotion push. Scott will be taken by a top end Prem club who may pay us for the potential but It wouldn't surprise me if any deal was based on a lower fee with generous add ons.

All about opinions, re valuations and what clubs are prepared to pay and the way we value the players both on and off the pitch.

Edited October 23, 2022 by Sir Geoff
extra text

[Engvall’s Splinter]

4 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Don't think many clubs do that or can even afford to in todays market. Most Prem clubs want ready made players. There are exceptions like the lad from Villa whom Chelsea bought and Djed Spence to Tottenham. Both have stalled their careers and will be getting a lot of splinters in their backsides this season.

If potential was the key then I suspect we would only get  lower fees with generous add ons.

imo, Semenyo will end up at a top end Championship club looking for a bit of fire power to boost a promotion push. Scott will be taken by a top end Prem club who may pay us for the potential but It wouldn't surprise me if any deal was based on a lower fee with generous add ons.

All about opinions, re valuations and what clubs are prepared to pay and the way we value the players both on and off the pitch.

I think you have missed my point. The valuations our fans have set / spoken of are unrealistic (ie 20-25m). 
 

I would suggest we would get between 7-10m max for them (at a push) as you say with generous add ons. Majority of that fee would be based on potential. Semenyo is nowhere near consistent enough and Scott also has some way to go.