Levy wanted £17.6m for Pavlyuchenko

gibbs131 · Sep 3, 2009

TOTTENHAM Hotspur FC's approach in the crazy-world of the 2009 football transfer market can only be described as unique.
Take Roman Pavlyuchenko. Spurs signed the 27-year-old Russian striker amid much pomp last season for an eye-watering £13.8m.
According to that academic font of knowledge Wikipedia, the big target man scored a whopping five goals in 30 appearances and was knocked down the Lane pecking order by Jermain Defoe, Robbie Keane and Peter Crouch.
Rumours that Defoe scored more times off the pitch than the big Russian managed on it have been firmly denied.
Amazingly Pavlyuchenko's dodgy Premier League form didn't stop former club Spartak Moscow from wanting to sign him back.
Until Spurs told them they wanted £17.6m for the striker. Yes, you've read that right.
A cool £4m profit for a player who scored five goals in 30 games.
Spartak boss Valery Karpin told the Daily Star: "We offered £9m for his immediate transfer.
"Or they could get £11.5m through a loan deal - we would pay £1m right away and the rest after a year's time.
"But Tottenham rejected our proposals.We were told that the price for Pavlyuchenko was £17.6m. For us it would be absurd to pay that."
Pretty understandable really.
You can't help but wonder what it'd be like to live in Planet White Hart Lane just for one day.
Perhaps not - hang around too long and you'll probably be auctioned off - for far more than your worth. A Yorkie bar and a Dr Pepper for moi then...

http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/ladslounge/2009/09/tottenham-hotspur-fc-unveil-al.html

ds · Sep 3, 2009

£9 million is equally as absurd as £17.6 million, to be fair

3Dnata · Sep 3, 2009

Daily Star.
Even with quotes it's still the Daily Star.

mil1lion · Sep 3, 2009

So another way of saying we dont want to sell him? Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

sidford · Sep 3, 2009

sounds like spin from moscow. spartak could well be just using this as spin for their fans to swallow. I cant believe we would ask that much for him. spartaks people coming out with this allows them next time fans give out about not buying anyone or selling their top players they can use this story to show their not a selling club.

i just dont buy its true and think its all spin from spartak for their fans to swallow

Cicada · Sep 3, 2009

:roll: i believe that... honestly

kcmei · Sep 3, 2009

i think levy is just messing around with the russian clubs

alamo · Sep 3, 2009

Even if it is true it's only haggling.

We obviously would have accepted an offer that would have recouped our money (if we were serious about letting him leave), but Levy likes to drive a hard bargain so is bound to start from an unrealistic total and so end at a middle-ground that suits us.

tommo84 · Sep 3, 2009

Redknapp wanted to keep him as he feels we need 4 strikers, so we insisted on a price that would enable us to adequately replace him.

Simples.

Raxscallion · Sep 3, 2009

mil1lion said:
So another way of saying we dont want to sell him? Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

Absolutely. If we think he'll come good and want to keep him, we're going to put a high valuation on him. If someone wants to offer silly money, we'll let him go and use the cash to secure a replacement.

In many ways, the valuation we put on a player reflects how much it would cost us to replace them, not what we think of their recent form.

danielneeds · Sep 3, 2009

Couldn't it be we asked for the same amount of euros that we paid for him, but due to the weak pound that has gone up from £13.8m to £17.6m?

EDIT: Yeah I have just done my sums, and if you calulate the deal in euros from the £1 - 1.4EUR from last year to what it is now, we were just asking for our money back.

fazza · Sep 3, 2009

Whats wrong with wanting an obseen amount of money for a player, Toulouse wanted £30 million for Sissoko, now thats obseen.

I have no problem with it, we did well with the Berbatov deal in the end money wise :lol:

Spurs_Q8 · Sep 3, 2009

Pavlyuchenko fair price should be £10m this summer, as the same as last summer !

once you get additional £3.8m for him, can't see it wrong asking further £3.8m from what we paid for him £13.8 ( which they believed that fair price in that day ) .. this mean our asking price £17.6m.

Yes it is not fair, but we don't need to sell, we need 4 striker and it is too late in the transfer window which mean we can't grantee signing a replacement, as clubs not prepared to sell and they could demand unrealistic price as well.

MilkyBarYid · Sep 3, 2009

Exactly, I'm sure Villa didn't quote us 10m for Young.

tommo84 · Sep 3, 2009

Some clubs think of their players as stock in their shop. Therefore, you pay what they are worth. We, however, do not operate like that. To us, players are a commodity used to generate more wealth for the club - essentially like capital assets. Asking us to sell a player is more like asking the shop owner if you can buy his security system, or the attractive girl behind the counter who attracts a certain type of customer.

Therefore our method of valuing players is somewhat different from clubs from other leagues, where they see player sales as their most lucrative revenue stream. Sadly, this is too complicated for sports journalists to understand so they tend to side with the Russians.

Cozzie · Sep 3, 2009

It's the Daily Star, only the Sun is a less reputable paper.

Buuuuut, assuming its true, fair play. Harry didn't want to sell him, so why should we give him away, if someone wants to pay £17mil for him, then at least we have plenty of muula for the Xmas bash.

Pinto · Sep 3, 2009

alamo said:
Even if it is true it's only haggling.

We obviously would have accepted an offer that would have recouped our money (if we were serious about letting him leave), but Levy likes to drive a hard bargain so is bound to start from an unrealistic total and so end at a middle-ground that suits us.

Exactly what I was thinking, you wouldn't start at 13 million as then your position to negotiate would be screwed. Do they understand anything in Moscow?

milkman · Sep 3, 2009

tommo84 said:
Redknapp wanted to keep him as he feels we need 4 strikers, so we insisted on a price that would enable us to adequately replace him.

Simples.

Well said. :clap:

milkman · Sep 3, 2009

Cozzie said:
It's the Daily Star, only the Sun is a less reputable paper.

Buuuuut, assuming its true, fair play. Harry didn't want to sell him, so why should we give him away, if someone wants to pay £17mil for him, then at least we have plenty of muula for the Xmas bash.

It was in SSN too.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11675_5535097,00.html

Bobishism · Sep 3, 2009

Definitely worth more than Bent.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Levy wanted £17.6m for Pavlyuchenko

Banned

daniel san

Well-Known Member

This is the place to be

Well-Known Member

Lisan Al Gaib

Well-Known Member

Don't worry be happy

Proud to be loud

Banned

Kick-Ass

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Formerly known as skb3

Proud to be loud

Large Member

Active Member

Banned

Banned

*****istrator

Similar threads