According to almost every 'official' source under the sun, Liverpool received £30m from Real Madrid for the services of Xabi Alonso. A more than fair fee if you ask me considering Alonso's quality, but is it really true?
That Liverpool received £30m for Alonso is pretty much accepted amongst Liverpool fans. How could it not be, with almost every newspaper/media source quoting the figure at the time of his sale, including The Independent, The Telegraph, The BBC, and the Liverpool Echo.
Even though I believe Alonso is more than worth that amount, I always thought it was (probably) slightly exaggerated. Well, as I will illustrate, Alonso's sale fee was NOT £30m. The latest Liverpool FC club accounts reveal the following:
As you can see, the total fees received by the club for Alonso, Andrea Dossena and Andrei Voronin was £29.7m. Looking at this in the context of the alleged £30m sale fee for Alonso, the figures do not compute. According to the club's official website, Liverpool received a combined total of 6.25m Euros for Dossena and Voronin:
Since this is the official LFC site (owned 100% by LFC), the figures will be accurate. So, let's break it down:
* €6.25m converted into pounds = £5.4m
* £29.7m - £5.4m = £24.3
So, it appears that Alonso's *actual* sale fee was £24.3m, NOT £30m.
These are official, irrefutable figures direct from the club, so they obviously hold more weight than newspaper reports.
As always with stats related articles, the purpose of this article is to provide clarity and accuracy. From this point forward, no one can now accurately state that Liverpool received £30m for Xabi Alonso.
EDIT: A note about further fees payable
I should have included this in the original post (as I knew people would try and make this excuse), but I just want to address the possibility that the fee paid for Alonso is only a 'first installment':
* There is no evidence anywhere that Alonso's fee was an installment plan, and/or contained performance related bonuses.
* Just because other players (like Aquilani) have such a deal, doesn't mean Alonso did.
* Real Madrid are not short of money (!) - given the fact they spent more than £200m in the last summer transfer window - including a reported £80m on Ronaldo! - why would they need to pay for the comparatively cheap Alonso in installments?! Come on, let's get real for a minute! As I've proved, £24.3m WAS received for Alonso. Certain commentors in extreme denial seem to think think that Madrid were so cash strapped that they paid the £24.3m upfront but asked to pay the other £6m in installments?! My head is exploding at how unrealistic that sounds!
* The note about Alonso's fee was in the 'Post Balance Sheet Events' section, i.e. the sale was concluded after the 31 July deadline. LFC's practice (which is consistent across all account reports for the last 10 years) is to include a note in that section IF there are further fees payable/receivable. Here is an example from the 2008 report and the same of Robbie Keane:
As you can see, it is clearly stated that the:
"The club has sold Steve Finnan and Robbie Keane for total guaranteed fees of £12.8m. This amount will increase significantly as further conditions are fulfilled".
The Alonso section ALSO states 'total guaranteed fees', yet unlike the Keane section above, it does NOT contain a note about further fees payable.
Such notes need to be included so shareholders/Auditors reading the report have an accurate picture of the club's finances.
AGAIN, THERE IS NO SUCH NOTE IN THE CURRENT REPORT FOR ALONSO'S FEE.
Thus, there are no further payments due to Liverpool for that transfer.
People can stick their heads in the sand and come up with all sorts of excuses, but these are the facts.
Even though the fee was £24m and not £30m, on a purely monetary basis, it's still a great piece of business by Rafa Benitez! I didn't want Alonso to go but at least we made a huge profit. I didn't post this article to attack Benitez (!), I posted it to clarify the facts, and ensure that accurate information is out there.
Jaimie Kanwar
That Liverpool received £30m for Alonso is pretty much accepted amongst Liverpool fans. How could it not be, with almost every newspaper/media source quoting the figure at the time of his sale, including The Independent, The Telegraph, The BBC, and the Liverpool Echo.
Even though I believe Alonso is more than worth that amount, I always thought it was (probably) slightly exaggerated. Well, as I will illustrate, Alonso's sale fee was NOT £30m. The latest Liverpool FC club accounts reveal the following:
As you can see, the total fees received by the club for Alonso, Andrea Dossena and Andrei Voronin was £29.7m. Looking at this in the context of the alleged £30m sale fee for Alonso, the figures do not compute. According to the club's official website, Liverpool received a combined total of 6.25m Euros for Dossena and Voronin:
Since this is the official LFC site (owned 100% by LFC), the figures will be accurate. So, let's break it down:
* €6.25m converted into pounds = £5.4m
* £29.7m - £5.4m = £24.3
So, it appears that Alonso's *actual* sale fee was £24.3m, NOT £30m.
These are official, irrefutable figures direct from the club, so they obviously hold more weight than newspaper reports.
As always with stats related articles, the purpose of this article is to provide clarity and accuracy. From this point forward, no one can now accurately state that Liverpool received £30m for Xabi Alonso.
EDIT: A note about further fees payable
I should have included this in the original post (as I knew people would try and make this excuse), but I just want to address the possibility that the fee paid for Alonso is only a 'first installment':
* There is no evidence anywhere that Alonso's fee was an installment plan, and/or contained performance related bonuses.
* Just because other players (like Aquilani) have such a deal, doesn't mean Alonso did.
* Real Madrid are not short of money (!) - given the fact they spent more than £200m in the last summer transfer window - including a reported £80m on Ronaldo! - why would they need to pay for the comparatively cheap Alonso in installments?! Come on, let's get real for a minute! As I've proved, £24.3m WAS received for Alonso. Certain commentors in extreme denial seem to think think that Madrid were so cash strapped that they paid the £24.3m upfront but asked to pay the other £6m in installments?! My head is exploding at how unrealistic that sounds!
* The note about Alonso's fee was in the 'Post Balance Sheet Events' section, i.e. the sale was concluded after the 31 July deadline. LFC's practice (which is consistent across all account reports for the last 10 years) is to include a note in that section IF there are further fees payable/receivable. Here is an example from the 2008 report and the same of Robbie Keane:
As you can see, it is clearly stated that the:
"The club has sold Steve Finnan and Robbie Keane for total guaranteed fees of £12.8m. This amount will increase significantly as further conditions are fulfilled".
The Alonso section ALSO states 'total guaranteed fees', yet unlike the Keane section above, it does NOT contain a note about further fees payable.
Such notes need to be included so shareholders/Auditors reading the report have an accurate picture of the club's finances.
AGAIN, THERE IS NO SUCH NOTE IN THE CURRENT REPORT FOR ALONSO'S FEE.
Thus, there are no further payments due to Liverpool for that transfer.
People can stick their heads in the sand and come up with all sorts of excuses, but these are the facts.
Even though the fee was £24m and not £30m, on a purely monetary basis, it's still a great piece of business by Rafa Benitez! I didn't want Alonso to go but at least we made a huge profit. I didn't post this article to attack Benitez (!), I posted it to clarify the facts, and ensure that accurate information is out there.
Jaimie Kanwar
Was lead to believe at the time we actually paid £2n for Nunez , either way Alonso was some great business .....
ReplyDeleteCould easily be ...
Nunez £2m
Garcia £5-6m
Alonso £5-8m ....
i blame the Euro been Quoted as £ in the UK at the same rate ...
Jaimie, you've already done the research, and could put this argument to bed in an instant. The only reason not to provide further examples could only be that there aren't any, surely?
ReplyDeleteErrr, any chance I can get an explanation as to why a whole thread that had my coment in it has been deleted??
ReplyDeleteJaimie made a big point of slagging off journalists reporting Alonso's transfer fee as £30m when the deal was done.
I suggested that (rather than wait 12 months until the accounts came out) he posted the fees of everyone LFC bought & sold this summer.
I'm willing to bet £1000 that without the aid of hindsight, Jaimie won't be very accurate.
My point is... I really don't see what Jaimie is trying to prove with this article.
OK, the reported fee at the time may have been wrong, but if he thinks it is so easy to get it right contemporarily then he has this blog available to post each transfer fee as it happens and we can all go back in 12 months and see how he got on.
No. I can't be bothered to keep justifying myself. The keane example proved my point. Why should I waste my time any further just to appease people who can't accept facts? I know the examples exist. That's good enough for me. I have better things to do than waste my time on this. You draw whatever inferences you like. Makes no difference to me.
ReplyDeleteSent using BlackBerry® from Orange
Your comment has not been deleted. It just moved to a different page. I'm not 'slagging' off journalists at all - I am clarifying facts. I don't know what other point you're making, but whatever it is, it seems pretty refundant.
ReplyDeleteSent using BlackBerry® from Orange
My point was clear from the comment: "<span>I really don't see what Jaimie is trying to prove with this article."</span>
ReplyDeleteJournalists at the time say Alonso was sold for £30m.... Jaimie waits 12 months until the accounts are published and says it was only £24m.... so what??
By definition, the only thing you are saying is journalists got it wrong, which I would class as slagging them off.
So my wager still stands for you to have a go this summer and see how you get on.
If you can't see what I was trying to 'prove' then I suggest you improve your comprehension skills.
ReplyDelete1. Alonso's sale fee exaggerated in the media.
2. I attempt to clarify the correct figure.
It's not rocket science.
When you clarify something that was earlier reported to be wrong, it is not 'slagging off' the original reporters. That's your unnecessary negative slant. By your logic, anything that is reported incorrectly should be left uncorrected because to do so would slagging off the original journalist. What nonsense.
And re last summer's transfer fees - first of all, I don't report tranfer fee stories as such; if I did though, I would only report accurate info - I would not guess/copy other news sources. In other words, I would only trust:
1. LFC press office
2. Personal sources inside the club.
That's it.
For each individual transfer fee, I would contact the LFC press office and ask them what the fee was. If they were unwilling to reveal it, I'd report that, or report the fee was 'undisclosed'.
Re other transfers: Aqulilani's fee was known as fact at the time (20m Euros) because Roma posted a breakdown of the fee on their official website.
http://www.asroma.it/UserFiles/988.pdf
With that information, there is no excuse not to report the correct figure.
Kyrgiakos posted his transfer fee on his personal website (http://www.kyrgiakos.gr/) at the time of the transfer.
Re Johnson, I would've reported 'undisclosed'.
With all due respect, if you can't see what I was trying to 'prove' then I suggest you improve your comprehension skills.
ReplyDelete1. Alonso's sale fee exaggerated in the media.
2. I attempt to clarify the correct figure.
It's not rocket science.
When you clarify something that was earlier reported to be wrong, it is not 'slagging off' the original reporters. That's your unnecessary negative slant. By your logic, anything that is reported incorrectly should be left uncorrected because to do so would slagging off the original journalist. What nonsense.
And re last summer's transfer fees - first of all, I don't report tranfer fee stories as such; if I did though, I would only report accurate info - I would not guess/copy other news sources. In other words, I would only trust:
1. LFC press office
2. Personal sources inside the club.
3. Official club documents (i.e. accounts)
That's it.
For each individual transfer fee, I would contact the LFC press office and ask them what the fee was. If they were unwilling to reveal it, I'd report that, or report the fee was 'undisclosed'.
Re other transfers: Aqulilani's fee was known as fact at the time (20m Euros) because Roma posted a breakdown of the fee on their official website.
http://www.asroma.it/UserFiles/988.pdf
With that information, there is no excuse not to report the correct figure.
Kyrgiakos posted his transfer fee on his personal website (http://www.kyrgiakos.gr/) at the time of the transfer.
Re Johnson, I would've reported 'undisclosed'.
All very noble.
ReplyDeleteI think you will find, however, that fans are quite keen to be informed about the transfer fee at the time.
If papers just said 'undisclosed', 'undisclosed', 'long-term contract', it would not be especially interesting.
If you cannot understand why newspapers have to make a rough, educated guesses (when often the clubs will not disclose the fee) then I think you are a naive.
So in this case, they 'guesstimated' at £30m and you have now 'proved' it to be £24m... well done!
And I stand by my original claim... by definition, if you set out to correct someone and show their innacuracy, you obviously ARE saying they got it wrong, which I think can be fairly described as 'slagging them off'.
And as I said, just for fun... try to have a go yourself at reporting transfer fees this summer and see how well you do.
I don't care about expectations - I care about reporting the truth. And if that means reporting 'undisclosed' until the truth is factually known then so be it. Who said I didn't understand why newspapers make (un)educated guesses?! I see that - doesn't mean i have to do the same, or just accept what they say.
ReplyDeleteI think you just quit while you're ahead with increasingly ridiculous claim that correcting someone is slagging them off. That's liefe. Things get corrected. Get over it. Anyone who takes a legitimate correction personally needs to grow up. Information is king, but the throne is empty unless the information is *corect*.
I will be correcting media inaccuracies for the forseeable future, and if you see that as 'slagging off the media' then, quite frankly, I couldn't care less.
I don't care about expectations - I care about reporting the truth. And if that means reporting 'undisclosed' until the truth is factually known then so be it. Who says I don't understand why newspapers make (un)educated guesses?! I see that - doesn't mean i have to do the same, or just accept what they say.
ReplyDeleteI think you should just quit while you're ahead with the increasingly ridiculous claim that correcting someone is slagging them off. That's life. Things get corrected. Get over it. Anyone who takes a legitimate correction personally needs to grow up. Information is king, but the throne is empty unless the information is *correct*.
I will be correcting media inaccuracies for the forseeable future, and if you see that as 'slagging off' the media then, quite frankly, I couldn't care less.
You clearly *don't* understand why newspapers report educated guesses about transfer fees at the time.
ReplyDeleteIf you did, then you wouldn't act all high and mighty correcting them a full 12 months later.
Taking candy from a baby is very easy... there's no need to go round shouting about it.
Incidentally, print newspaper journalists don't have an 'Edit' button they can instantly press when someone points out any errors.
Luckily for you, there is one for you to use (increasingly frequently) whenever someone highlights a mistake you've made.
Also, where does the sentence: '<span>Anyone who takes a legitimate correction personally needs to grow up' fit in with your own statement about derogatory comments being deleted?
</span>
Back from my enforced hiatus for providing critical realism as to motives and opinions of the site owner. Anyway, Mr Kanwar, I've often heard that the full outlay for Glen Johnson was not £18M as widely reported but closer to £8M due to monies owed on the Peter Crouch. As we can see the fact that we received £24.3M for Alonso may have the unintentional effect of painting Rafa's transfer acumen in a bad light. So for the sake of balance, or better yet clarity, it would be interesting to assess the methods Rafa used to bring in the England fullback despite competition from Chelsea for a fraction of the outlay his value suggests. All in the sake of critical realism of course.
ReplyDeleteSo Desy,
ReplyDelete1. Who sold Crouch to Portsmouth?
2. How much was the Johnson deal worth?
3. Who did Crouch belong to at the time he was sold?
You are really being ridiculous to say that Johnson only cost 8mil.
Do us a favour Desy and provide us with the PROOF that Johnson only cost 8mil.
"It does bring it down to 10m if you only include the Alonso sale. There are still 2 months of the current accounting window to go - in that time, we'll sign more players, and that will also need to be included, which will take the net spend back up to 15m probably," Jamie “Some people say I have spent £280m,” said Benitez. “But we have spent £220m on players and generated £160m in player sales. That is the equivalent of a £60m net spend over six years: in other words, £10m spent per year." Rafa
ReplyDeleteyes some figures as always are up for debate and i was pleased to see Jamie's figure of £10m .Personally i think we need a lot more to be fighting for the premier league and more to be staying the top 4 and shows imo how well Rafa has done taking everything on board over the last few seasons.Still think with the squad available we should have still got a top 4 finish , but expect us to bounce back next season if we at least keep our best players and have a net spend in the next transfer window of £10-15m.
RC - The figures in the accounts contradict Benitez! Check them for yourself - he has spent 266m (up to 31 July 2009).
ReplyDeleteRe the 10m - as I said, there will definitely be transfer activity before 31 July this year that will have an impact on the 6-year net spend total.
I admire your optimism, and I hope you're right. i just don't think it will turn out that way.
Fair enough , i was just matching up Rafa's £10m figure up with yours even though July 10 still 2 months to go.
ReplyDelete100% sure we will bounce back if we keep our best players and as ive said have a net spend this transfer window of £10-15m .Hopefully more as i think G+H will invest in the transfer market to keep the club in the top 4 to keep it attractive to potential buyers and if these buyers can over a few seasons give us a net spend of £30m it imo will see us win the title and definite genuine challengers in 3-4 years under Rafa.
Bouncing back in 2003-2004 with Valencia to win La liga shows he can do it imo .
Going to be a very interesting summer .....
RC
ReplyDeleteWhy do you only look at the net spend? It doesnt matter how Benitez got the money to spend on players.
Lets look at the total amount of money as quoted by you in 2 amounts.
"Some people say 280mil" That equals to 46.67mil per season over six seasons. That is the total amount money which came of the LFC account.
"But we have spent £220m" Equals to 36.67 per season over six seasons which came of the LFC account.
So Benitez has "generated £160m in player sales" but who did that money belong to? Mickey Mouse? Who spent that money? Darth Vader? What ever money Benitez recouped added on top of what was given or whatever the case may be, belonged to the club and Benitez spent every single penny.
Subtracting the total amount of Money which belonged to the LFC which Benitez spent from the amount of money generated from selling players to give you net spend is a very good way of buying Benitez more time to make us look like mid table team. That is what we will be next season should Rafa still be at the Helm.
Total spend v Net spend has a huge bearing and wages the club's give to its players on how well all the clubs do in the premier league and yes there will always be exceptions to the rule.
ReplyDeleteIf our next spend and wages outlay per season was increased and that was due to say Crouch Bellamy Alonso still been with us and other better players been got at certain times in the transfer windows ie . Alves etc and not settling for 3rd and 4Th choice players .
We would be in much better shape imo
3rd or 4th choice players?
ReplyDeleteExplain why Aquilani was bought who was injured and hardly played last season and not a player that could have made a immidiate impact?
Also, why was Arbeloa sold and replaced with Johnson at about 5 times the price? Now you are saying that we had to settle for 3rd or 4th choice players?
If Rafa says that he spent 220mil over six years = 36.67mil per season and you are saying that we had to settle for 3rd or 4th choice players? If the money was spent more wisely over six seasons then we wouldbnt have been sitting with 3rd or 4th choice players.
Remember RC, you have said and I quote “But we have spent £220m on players" which came from Rafas mouth. Shouldnt we have a team worth 220mil then?
Pennant to name 1 ...
ReplyDeleteRafa made a mistake on Aquilani in the short term as expected him fit by October by the medical advice he was given but in the long term i think he is fantastic signing at £18m
No not with Glen but i think the money owed by Pompey on Crouch up the Price and the fact chelsea were wiling to match the £17-18m price tag.
All debatable but all Managers have made mistakes in the transfer window and i still think we have a very good squad but needs more quality in debt ..
Our squad is worth more than £220m ...
So if our squad is worth more than 220mil then shouldnt we have quality in depth. We are sitting with Degen, Arelio, Ngog, Lucas (has improved but is not good enough) Insua (still young but is he better than Risse?) Maxi (Is he better than Pennant?)
ReplyDeleteI have named 5 players all in different positions who would not have a chance in hell of getting into the Manu starting eleven and they shouldnt be at our club and it doesnt matter if Degen was for free.
Aquilani fantastic @ 18mil? For being a sick note? Wonder what other player/players that were not injured at the time could have improved our season instead of having to rely on Lucas?
Another idea, why not sell Kuyt (He is a hard worker but we need a winger who can get behind the oppisitions defense). Yet Rafa will stick with a player who runs up and down the pitch like a headless chicken.
Did Pompey keep OUR money that was owing from the Crouch deal?
If you go to a car dealer and see somethig for 20000 and you have a car worth 7000 and ask them to sell it for you as you only have 13000 available, are you paying 13000 for the car? No you are paying 20000. The Johnson deal worked exactly like that.
Crouch went to Pompey, pompey owed us money and we handed over the difference for Johnson. We still payed the full amount for Johnson. And if Chelsea wre willing to match "17-18" then I guess we paid "17-18mil". So tell me then, if Portsmouth didnt owe us any money, how much would we have payed for Johnson?
Max - Completely agree with your points. You just know one of the pro-Benitez brigade will come back at some point with net spend argument: 'Actually, our squad is not worth more than 220m; it's worth about 80-90m, because that's our net spend'.
ReplyDelete*shoots self*
The whole net spend argument is so ridiculous. Example: team X spends 250m on signings. It recoups 230m over the same period. According to the net -spend argument, the squad is worth 20m! Only 20m has actually been spent.
Not disagreeing we about the value of the squad but isn't the other top sides worth the same and the main 2 winning the tile worth a lot more .We have had only 1 season that we haven't made the champions league and there was a lot to take on board with our 2 best players missing large chunks of the season .
ReplyDelete"We are sitting with Degen, Arelio, Ngog, Lucas (has improved but is not good enough) Insua (still young but is he better than Risse?) Maxi (Is he better than Pennant?) "There's a list of players that cost about £8-9m for 5 players , we need imo to be spending more , as for Maxi he is a much better player than pennant imo ....No i dont think Insua is better than Rise but not bad for £1.5m , still young and will improve i o , but i wouldn't have him in my starting 11. I wont change my belief on Aquilani as i think he will be a fantastic signing in the long run , but in the short term it hasn't been a success .
Imo kuyt has been a decent signing and i applaud his work rate and his goal and assists return from the wings , if we had that on the left in 2008-2009 imo we would have won the league.Didn't say we didn't pay £17-18m on Glen , but with the £7m we were owed by Pompey , i think it played a part in us not looking elsewhere at that price .... every club knew the financial situation Pompey were in and imo fair to say no club was guaranteed they would get any money owed to them by Pompey if they went into admin at the time...
Jaimie, how much longer will it take for the IRWT brigade to realize that the Spaniard is not good enough to take LFC forward and never will be?
ReplyDeleteRC quotes "which will take the net spend back up to 15m probably," then says “Some people say I have spent £280m,” said Benitez. “But we have spent £220m"
RC, you are a genius!!!
No mate .... im saying with Jamie's figure we have net spend of around £10m with the Alonso money been taking into account after the figure up until July 2009 of around £14m .. but with 2 months left it until July 2010 it could be higher or not.
ReplyDeleteSo Rafa saying 10m net spend is a fair comment imo.
Not saying the spent figure is correct ..
*Comment deleted*
ReplyDeleteOr maybe just moved to a different page!!!
I think you are missing the point RC.
ReplyDeleteWhy sell Risse who was going through a bad patch but was by far our best LB then bring in +- 7mil Dosenna (Not many Italians have made it in England) and also recruit Insua who aint any better than Dosenna. Another player to mention is Warnock who is making a name for himself at Villa only because he has been given what he wanted. First team football. Dosenna & Insua or Risse & Warnock?
Pennant was our only natural right winger, and in my opinion could have made it but always played second fiddle. He had all the qualities in pace and a killer cross. Comes down to man management. Same with Bellamy, Keane and others...
If Aquilani is going to be a fantastic signing in the long run, I wonder where Lucas is going to fit in (who is Rafas blue eyed boy). Keep on dreaming about Aquilani being a succesfull signing... Two holding midfielders again for us next season. The days are only looking brighter as they go on!!!
Did we really need a RB. There was Darby & Kelly from our youth system. Even Carra could have filled the gap. Why did we not take the money spent on Johnson and buy Bent or Kenwyn Jones? I am sure we could have found a decent Striker for +-11mil? Pompey have had to pay back all debt owing to other clubs. We could have then taken the +-7mil owing by Pompey and bought another player.
Funny how you mention if we could have had someone on the left in 2008-2009. Does Reira ring a bell? Go have a look at his stats eveytime he has played and eveytime he hasnt. You will find that we have have won more games and lost less games everytime he wallked out onto the field for about the last 15-20 games he featured in. He played alot of games during 2008-2009. Now that he has spoken his mind towards Rafa which many other players have done, he has been treated like an outcast. Using the excuse of needing someone on the left last season to win the league is a complete joke.
Are the 2 players you refer to that we missed in chunks this season Stevie and Nando? Didnt we also miss them in large chuncks during 2008-2009?
Oh boy oh boy oh boy...
Real paid 30m, fact. Liverpool received just under 25m. Sum of 5.3m went to player agent, management and player himself as in all transfers of an established top league player
ReplyDelete