Oh Elvis!
If you just stated from the beginning that this is your personal opinion, then that would have been that.
You act like most United fans aren't plastics at all and are the fountain of knowledge...
Serial WUManiser - Disciple of Boy Bastin - No longer a whinging (U1410)
posted 4 minutes ago
Oh Elvis!
If you just stated from the beginning that this is your personal opinion, then that would have been that.
You act like most United fans aren't plastics at all and are the fountain of knowledge...
------------
I blame tooo much champ manager, lol
The thing that you guys keep on missing is that when the tabloids report figures of 200k per week or 250k per week, they are including image rights and other add-ons.
All the reputable media outlets put Rooney on 160k per week. Go back and have a look when he signed his new contract - it was the figure reported by all of the ones I mentioned earlier.
Now, since that time The Guardian has to some extent gone down the drain and become a bit more sensationalist and are reporting inflated wages - so they are now coming out with RVP being on 200k+ per week - probably being rather vague about whether that is just the wage, or with add-ons.
As for the bit about Berba not being on parity with Rooney, my exact words were:
"And I doubt very seriously that the club have brought in RVP and given him immediate parity with Rooney."
Notice the words 'I doubt'? They signify that it is my opinion. Okay?
Oh and by the way, any United fan would know about how the United wage structure works, because SAF has spoken about it before in interviews. Discussing how youth players move up the ladder and how it works with players coming into the club on a transfer. I'll see if I can dig it out for you.
But Elvis, like i said, not a single reputable source suggests that RVP isn't on parity with Rooney. The fact that they all suggest he is must mean they have to be right, no?
comment by Serial WUManiser - Disciple of Boy Bastin - No longer a whinging (U1410)
posted 4 minutes ago
But Elvis, like i said, not a single reputable source suggests that RVP isn't on parity with Rooney. The fact that they all suggest he is must mean they have to be right, no?
------------------------------------
With the Guardian, I don't place too much stock in them considering some of the rubbish they have published over the last few years - they have gone downhill quite rapidly. A point I have made on these boards a few times if you can be bothered to dig back through my posts
The Telegraph tend to be better, but the link provided above states that RVP will have parity will have Rooney on 220k per week wages. Yet, back when Rooney signed his new deal, they were talking of him being on 160k per week. So I have to wonder if The Telegraph has gone down the same route as The Guardian? Or maybe it is down to the journalist that wrote each article?
Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable - but I can't find anything from them on whether RVP is on parity with Rooney. Same with the BBC. I have noticed that whenever the BBC report a players wages, The Times also report the same figure. So I suspect that they share information. On this occasion (RVP contract) I think they have both kept quiet on the figure, so obviously have no info.
So what are we left with to suggest that RVP does have parity with Rooney? Some claims from sensationalist newspapers with no quotes to back them up?
I'd rather rely on my own experience and knowledge of my club, in addition to the managers explanation of how our wage structure works, to decide that I believe it is UNLIKELY that RVP has parity with Rooney.
If you don't agree with that logic then that is fair enough.
Why on earth is that moaning now when the season is up and running? I guess I should know by now that footballers are not the smartest bunch.
"The thing that you guys keep on missing is that when the tabloids report figures of 200k per week or 250k per week, they are including image rights and other add-ons."
No, the original post you questioned said exactly that - so as far as I['m concerned we've always been talking about "extras and add-ons".
Image rights or not, 'overall' reported to 200k + like Rooney as we have said. the same 'overall' not offered by AFC.
"Oh and by the way, any United fan would know about how the United wage structure works, because SAF has spoken about it before in interviews. "
The same interview every other not united fan has read and listened too? I thought you were referring to some inside information. Obviously not. Does being a 'united fan' give you privvy to more knowledge to say a City/Liverpool fan working as an agent to united players? or say 'Darren Ferguson' currently Manager of Peterborough? ('United fan' supercedes the fergie bloodline, lol)
"Now, since that time The Guardian has to some extent gone down the drain and become a bit more sensationalist and are reporting inflated wages "
You just stated to take heed of that paper and in the time of 15mins it has gone down hill? is that cause it does not agree with your opinions/assumptions and in 15min from "The ones I take notice of are The Times, Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC." to the above.
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 2 minutes ago
"The thing that you guys keep on missing is that when the tabloids report figures of 200k per week or 250k per week, they are including image rights and other add-ons."
No, the original post you questioned said exactly that - so as far as I['m concerned we've always been talking about "extras and add-ons".
-------------------------------------------
Something that were clarified about an hour ago in my second post.
The fact that Sagna has said this is a positive in my eyes. It means he wants the club to act, and is pushing them through the press. The fact that he feels he has to do so is worrying, but we did just sell RVP and Song so I can totally see where he is coming from.
There are many players that I would be weary of offering a new contract to, but Sagna is not one of them. He is a consummate professional, and should be treated as such
"Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable"
You nerbert, The Times is nothing more than just another Murdock tabloid. If any paper has 'gone downhill' it's very much The Times. Hell, it's even 'tabloid' sized now.
You can dress it up in all the arrogant wordy assertions you like, but you don't appear to have a clue what you're talking about.
Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable - but I can't find anything from them on whether RVP is on parity with Rooney. Same with the BBC. I have noticed that whenever the BBC report a players wages, The Times also report the same figure. So I suspect that they share information. On this occasion (RVP contract) I think they have both kept quiet on the figure, so obviously have no info.
Conveneient!!!
Also conveneient that you cant see any of there articles on line so I would be surprised if you have read any of their online articles.
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 2 minutes ago
Image rights or not, 'overall' reported to 200k + like Rooney as we have said. the same 'overall' not offered by AFC.
"Oh and by the way, any United fan would know about how the United wage structure works, because SAF has spoken about it before in interviews. "
The same interview every other not united fan has read and listened too? I thought you were referring to some inside information. Obviously not. Does being a 'united fan' give you privvy to more knowledge to say a City/Liverpool fan working as an agent to united players? or say 'Darren Ferguson' currently Manager of Peterborough? ('United fan' supercedes the fergie bloodline, lol)
"Now, since that time The Guardian has to some extent gone down the drain and become a bit more sensationalist and are reporting inflated wages "
You just stated to take heed of that paper and in the time of 15mins it has gone down hill? is that cause it does not agree with your opinions/assumptions and in 15min from "The ones I take notice of are The Times, Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC." to the above.
------------------------------------------------
Take a look back through my posing history if you can be bothered and you will find at least 3 or 4 occasions were I have discussed with other posters how the Guardian have gone down hill in the last few years. But at the time Rooney signed his new deal, they were still reasonably reliable in my opinion.
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 48 seconds ago
"Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable"
You nerbert, The Times is nothing more than just another Murdock tabloid. If any paper has 'gone downhill' it's very much The Times. Hell, it's even 'tabloid' sized now.
You can dress it up in all the arrogant wordy assertions you like, but you don't appear to have a clue what you're talking about.
------------------------------------------
So what do you believe then? The Daily Mail? The Mirror? The Sun?
I prefer to take notice of the The Times and the BBC, which have proven to be much more reliable over the years. I'm not saying they are perfect, but certainly worth paying more attention to than the tabloids.
Why you think that it is arrogant I have no idea. It is just my opinion based on the sources I think I most reliable and my knowledge of my club. If you prefer to form your opinions using other methods then great. I don't have a problem with that.
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 4 minutes ago
Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable - but I can't find anything from them on whether RVP is on parity with Rooney. Same with the BBC. I have noticed that whenever the BBC report a players wages, The Times also report the same figure. So I suspect that they share information. On this occasion (RVP contract) I think they have both kept quiet on the figure, so obviously have no info.
Conveneient!!!
Also conveneient that you cant see any of there articles on line so I would be surprised if you have read any of their online articles.
----------------------------------
You can if you have a subscription.
"I'd rather rely on my own experience and knowledge of my club, in addition to the managers explanation of how our wage structure works, to decide that I believe it is UNLIKELY that RVP has parity with Rooney.
Bit silly really, So if I said to you that United bought RVP for £48m as this is how Wenger works, and HE always gets $$$ for players and we know him best as arsenal fans?
You can if you have a subscription.
Like you do, lol
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 28 seconds ago
"I'd rather rely on my own experience and knowledge of my club, in addition to the managers explanation of how our wage structure works, to decide that I believe it is UNLIKELY that RVP has parity with Rooney.
Bit silly really, So if I said to you that United bought RVP for £48m as this is how Wenger works, and HE always gets $$$ for players and we know him best as arsenal fans?
----------------------------------
Transfer fees are sometimes revealed by the two teams, sometimes undisclosed. The fact that every outlet, whether reputable or less reputable, has the price for RVP at 24m would suggest that Arsenal wanted to let people know how much they got for the player - it was a good price for the selling club and they rightly wanted to let their fans know that.
Wages on the other hand tend to be kept quiet - after all, it is only between the player and the club he is signing for. So it isn't really in the interests of either party to reveal the figure. As a result, the real figure is much harder to find out and I suspect is why The Time and the BBC don't always quote a figure yet the tabloids are happy to quote any figure they choose.
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 5 minutes ago
You can if you have a subscription.
Like you do, lol
---------------------------------
I don't personally, but we have one at work.
"has the price for RVP at 24m would suggest that Arsenal wanted to let people know how much they got for the player - it was a good price for the selling club and they rightly wanted to let their fans know that. "
Erm wrong. This is the official statement on the RVP exit on the AFC site
http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/van-persie-completes-manchester-united-move
And I am certain it is stated as undisclosed on the Man U site?
So where has this 24m come from?
"So what do you believe then? The Daily Mail? The Mirror? The Sun?"
None of them. My news comes pretty much exclusively from the BBC website, radio and TV. Gave up on newspapers about 20 years ago when I realised they're all full of ****. All of them.
"Why you think that it is arrogant I have no idea."
I don't, I think you're arrogant due to the tone of your posts. You seem to assume everyone else is an idiot.
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 3 minutes ago
"has the price for RVP at 24m would suggest that Arsenal wanted to let people know how much they got for the player - it was a good price for the selling club and they rightly wanted to let their fans know that. "
Erm wrong. This is the official statement on the RVP exit on the AFC site
http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/van-persie-completes-manchester-united-move
And I am certain it is stated as undisclosed on the Man U site?
So where has this 24m come from?
-------------------------------------
The 24m has come from every report I have seen. Do you not think it is funny that they all have the same figure?
For me, that indicates that it has come from one source - which I suspect would be Arsenal. Just because they haven't reported the figure on their site doesn't mean that someone at the club wasn't instructed to let the figure be known the press in the hope that it would go some way to appeasing the fans. It really was a good price for Arsenal.
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 7 minutes ago
"So what do you believe then? The Daily Mail? The Mirror? The Sun?"
None of them. My news comes pretty much exclusively from the BBC website, radio and TV. Gave up on newspapers about 20 years ago when I realised they're all full of ****. All of them.
"Why you think that it is arrogant I have no idea."
I don't, I think you're arrogant due to the tone of your posts. You seem to assume everyone else is an idiot.
-------------------------------------------
Not sure what makes you think that. All I have done is try to explain my thought process and how I form my opinions - as you have just done.
"You seem to assume everyone else is an idiot."
Are you not doing some assuming of your own right there?
Elvis,
Thank you. So you have contradicted yourself. Its ok to listen to the reports about transfer fees but not wages?
As I stated above, Articles stating 250k, but if we for arguments sake take the lowest off every single article (not even the average) but the lowest you are still left with 195k for RVP and 200k for Rooney per week.
Sign in if you want to comment
Sagna next one to call it a day at Arsenal?
Page 4 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 6/9/12
Oh Elvis!
If you just stated from the beginning that this is your personal opinion, then that would have been that.
You act like most United fans aren't plastics at all and are the fountain of knowledge...
posted on 6/9/12
Serial WUManiser - Disciple of Boy Bastin - No longer a whinging (U1410)
posted 4 minutes ago
Oh Elvis!
If you just stated from the beginning that this is your personal opinion, then that would have been that.
You act like most United fans aren't plastics at all and are the fountain of knowledge...
------------
I blame tooo much champ manager, lol
posted on 6/9/12
The thing that you guys keep on missing is that when the tabloids report figures of 200k per week or 250k per week, they are including image rights and other add-ons.
All the reputable media outlets put Rooney on 160k per week. Go back and have a look when he signed his new contract - it was the figure reported by all of the ones I mentioned earlier.
Now, since that time The Guardian has to some extent gone down the drain and become a bit more sensationalist and are reporting inflated wages - so they are now coming out with RVP being on 200k+ per week - probably being rather vague about whether that is just the wage, or with add-ons.
As for the bit about Berba not being on parity with Rooney, my exact words were:
"And I doubt very seriously that the club have brought in RVP and given him immediate parity with Rooney."
Notice the words 'I doubt'? They signify that it is my opinion. Okay?
posted on 6/9/12
Oh and by the way, any United fan would know about how the United wage structure works, because SAF has spoken about it before in interviews. Discussing how youth players move up the ladder and how it works with players coming into the club on a transfer. I'll see if I can dig it out for you.
posted on 6/9/12
But Elvis, like i said, not a single reputable source suggests that RVP isn't on parity with Rooney. The fact that they all suggest he is must mean they have to be right, no?
posted on 6/9/12
comment by Serial WUManiser - Disciple of Boy Bastin - No longer a whinging (U1410)
posted 4 minutes ago
But Elvis, like i said, not a single reputable source suggests that RVP isn't on parity with Rooney. The fact that they all suggest he is must mean they have to be right, no?
------------------------------------
With the Guardian, I don't place too much stock in them considering some of the rubbish they have published over the last few years - they have gone downhill quite rapidly. A point I have made on these boards a few times if you can be bothered to dig back through my posts
The Telegraph tend to be better, but the link provided above states that RVP will have parity will have Rooney on 220k per week wages. Yet, back when Rooney signed his new deal, they were talking of him being on 160k per week. So I have to wonder if The Telegraph has gone down the same route as The Guardian? Or maybe it is down to the journalist that wrote each article?
Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable - but I can't find anything from them on whether RVP is on parity with Rooney. Same with the BBC. I have noticed that whenever the BBC report a players wages, The Times also report the same figure. So I suspect that they share information. On this occasion (RVP contract) I think they have both kept quiet on the figure, so obviously have no info.
So what are we left with to suggest that RVP does have parity with Rooney? Some claims from sensationalist newspapers with no quotes to back them up?
I'd rather rely on my own experience and knowledge of my club, in addition to the managers explanation of how our wage structure works, to decide that I believe it is UNLIKELY that RVP has parity with Rooney.
If you don't agree with that logic then that is fair enough.
posted on 6/9/12
Why on earth is that moaning now when the season is up and running? I guess I should know by now that footballers are not the smartest bunch.
posted on 6/9/12
"The thing that you guys keep on missing is that when the tabloids report figures of 200k per week or 250k per week, they are including image rights and other add-ons."
No, the original post you questioned said exactly that - so as far as I['m concerned we've always been talking about "extras and add-ons".
posted on 6/9/12
Image rights or not, 'overall' reported to 200k + like Rooney as we have said. the same 'overall' not offered by AFC.
"Oh and by the way, any United fan would know about how the United wage structure works, because SAF has spoken about it before in interviews. "
The same interview every other not united fan has read and listened too? I thought you were referring to some inside information. Obviously not. Does being a 'united fan' give you privvy to more knowledge to say a City/Liverpool fan working as an agent to united players? or say 'Darren Ferguson' currently Manager of Peterborough? ('United fan' supercedes the fergie bloodline, lol)
"Now, since that time The Guardian has to some extent gone down the drain and become a bit more sensationalist and are reporting inflated wages "
You just stated to take heed of that paper and in the time of 15mins it has gone down hill? is that cause it does not agree with your opinions/assumptions and in 15min from "The ones I take notice of are The Times, Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC." to the above.
posted on 6/9/12
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 2 minutes ago
"The thing that you guys keep on missing is that when the tabloids report figures of 200k per week or 250k per week, they are including image rights and other add-ons."
No, the original post you questioned said exactly that - so as far as I['m concerned we've always been talking about "extras and add-ons".
-------------------------------------------
Something that were clarified about an hour ago in my second post.
posted on 6/9/12
The fact that Sagna has said this is a positive in my eyes. It means he wants the club to act, and is pushing them through the press. The fact that he feels he has to do so is worrying, but we did just sell RVP and Song so I can totally see where he is coming from.
There are many players that I would be weary of offering a new contract to, but Sagna is not one of them. He is a consummate professional, and should be treated as such
posted on 6/9/12
"Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable"
You nerbert, The Times is nothing more than just another Murdock tabloid. If any paper has 'gone downhill' it's very much The Times. Hell, it's even 'tabloid' sized now.
You can dress it up in all the arrogant wordy assertions you like, but you don't appear to have a clue what you're talking about.
posted on 6/9/12
Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable - but I can't find anything from them on whether RVP is on parity with Rooney. Same with the BBC. I have noticed that whenever the BBC report a players wages, The Times also report the same figure. So I suspect that they share information. On this occasion (RVP contract) I think they have both kept quiet on the figure, so obviously have no info.
Conveneient!!!
Also conveneient that you cant see any of there articles on line so I would be surprised if you have read any of their online articles.
posted on 6/9/12
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 2 minutes ago
Image rights or not, 'overall' reported to 200k + like Rooney as we have said. the same 'overall' not offered by AFC.
"Oh and by the way, any United fan would know about how the United wage structure works, because SAF has spoken about it before in interviews. "
The same interview every other not united fan has read and listened too? I thought you were referring to some inside information. Obviously not. Does being a 'united fan' give you privvy to more knowledge to say a City/Liverpool fan working as an agent to united players? or say 'Darren Ferguson' currently Manager of Peterborough? ('United fan' supercedes the fergie bloodline, lol)
"Now, since that time The Guardian has to some extent gone down the drain and become a bit more sensationalist and are reporting inflated wages "
You just stated to take heed of that paper and in the time of 15mins it has gone down hill? is that cause it does not agree with your opinions/assumptions and in 15min from "The ones I take notice of are The Times, Telegraph, Guardian and the BBC." to the above.
------------------------------------------------
Take a look back through my posing history if you can be bothered and you will find at least 3 or 4 occasions were I have discussed with other posters how the Guardian have gone down hill in the last few years. But at the time Rooney signed his new deal, they were still reasonably reliable in my opinion.
posted on 6/9/12
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 48 seconds ago
"Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable"
You nerbert, The Times is nothing more than just another Murdock tabloid. If any paper has 'gone downhill' it's very much The Times. Hell, it's even 'tabloid' sized now.
You can dress it up in all the arrogant wordy assertions you like, but you don't appear to have a clue what you're talking about.
------------------------------------------
So what do you believe then? The Daily Mail? The Mirror? The Sun?
I prefer to take notice of the The Times and the BBC, which have proven to be much more reliable over the years. I'm not saying they are perfect, but certainly worth paying more attention to than the tabloids.
Why you think that it is arrogant I have no idea. It is just my opinion based on the sources I think I most reliable and my knowledge of my club. If you prefer to form your opinions using other methods then great. I don't have a problem with that.
posted on 6/9/12
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 4 minutes ago
Of the newspapers, The Times are quite easily the most reliable - but I can't find anything from them on whether RVP is on parity with Rooney. Same with the BBC. I have noticed that whenever the BBC report a players wages, The Times also report the same figure. So I suspect that they share information. On this occasion (RVP contract) I think they have both kept quiet on the figure, so obviously have no info.
Conveneient!!!
Also conveneient that you cant see any of there articles on line so I would be surprised if you have read any of their online articles.
----------------------------------
You can if you have a subscription.
posted on 6/9/12
"I'd rather rely on my own experience and knowledge of my club, in addition to the managers explanation of how our wage structure works, to decide that I believe it is UNLIKELY that RVP has parity with Rooney.
Bit silly really, So if I said to you that United bought RVP for £48m as this is how Wenger works, and HE always gets $$$ for players and we know him best as arsenal fans?
posted on 6/9/12
You can if you have a subscription.
Like you do, lol
posted on 6/9/12
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 28 seconds ago
"I'd rather rely on my own experience and knowledge of my club, in addition to the managers explanation of how our wage structure works, to decide that I believe it is UNLIKELY that RVP has parity with Rooney.
Bit silly really, So if I said to you that United bought RVP for £48m as this is how Wenger works, and HE always gets $$$ for players and we know him best as arsenal fans?
----------------------------------
Transfer fees are sometimes revealed by the two teams, sometimes undisclosed. The fact that every outlet, whether reputable or less reputable, has the price for RVP at 24m would suggest that Arsenal wanted to let people know how much they got for the player - it was a good price for the selling club and they rightly wanted to let their fans know that.
Wages on the other hand tend to be kept quiet - after all, it is only between the player and the club he is signing for. So it isn't really in the interests of either party to reveal the figure. As a result, the real figure is much harder to find out and I suspect is why The Time and the BBC don't always quote a figure yet the tabloids are happy to quote any figure they choose.
posted on 6/9/12
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 5 minutes ago
You can if you have a subscription.
Like you do, lol
---------------------------------
I don't personally, but we have one at work.
posted on 6/9/12
"has the price for RVP at 24m would suggest that Arsenal wanted to let people know how much they got for the player - it was a good price for the selling club and they rightly wanted to let their fans know that. "
Erm wrong. This is the official statement on the RVP exit on the AFC site
http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/van-persie-completes-manchester-united-move
And I am certain it is stated as undisclosed on the Man U site?
So where has this 24m come from?
posted on 6/9/12
"So what do you believe then? The Daily Mail? The Mirror? The Sun?"
None of them. My news comes pretty much exclusively from the BBC website, radio and TV. Gave up on newspapers about 20 years ago when I realised they're all full of ****. All of them.
"Why you think that it is arrogant I have no idea."
I don't, I think you're arrogant due to the tone of your posts. You seem to assume everyone else is an idiot.
posted on 6/9/12
comment by Gonzo (U15606)
posted 3 minutes ago
"has the price for RVP at 24m would suggest that Arsenal wanted to let people know how much they got for the player - it was a good price for the selling club and they rightly wanted to let their fans know that. "
Erm wrong. This is the official statement on the RVP exit on the AFC site
http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/van-persie-completes-manchester-united-move
And I am certain it is stated as undisclosed on the Man U site?
So where has this 24m come from?
-------------------------------------
The 24m has come from every report I have seen. Do you not think it is funny that they all have the same figure?
For me, that indicates that it has come from one source - which I suspect would be Arsenal. Just because they haven't reported the figure on their site doesn't mean that someone at the club wasn't instructed to let the figure be known the press in the hope that it would go some way to appeasing the fans. It really was a good price for Arsenal.
posted on 6/9/12
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 7 minutes ago
"So what do you believe then? The Daily Mail? The Mirror? The Sun?"
None of them. My news comes pretty much exclusively from the BBC website, radio and TV. Gave up on newspapers about 20 years ago when I realised they're all full of ****. All of them.
"Why you think that it is arrogant I have no idea."
I don't, I think you're arrogant due to the tone of your posts. You seem to assume everyone else is an idiot.
-------------------------------------------
Not sure what makes you think that. All I have done is try to explain my thought process and how I form my opinions - as you have just done.
"You seem to assume everyone else is an idiot."
Are you not doing some assuming of your own right there?
posted on 6/9/12
Elvis,
Thank you. So you have contradicted yourself. Its ok to listen to the reports about transfer fees but not wages?
As I stated above, Articles stating 250k, but if we for arguments sake take the lowest off every single article (not even the average) but the lowest you are still left with 195k for RVP and 200k for Rooney per week.
Page 4 of 7
6 | 7