TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

ferrarilover wrote: It doesn't matter if it's £500, we got him for free. We're happy to keep him and pay him, if we weren't, we wouldn't have allowed the activation of his extension. If someone else fancies him, they can pay us for him, and we recoup some or all of the money we paid him last season. If we don't sign him on, he wanders off for nothing and we never see any benefit at all for the salary he's had off us.

In fairness to the bloke, he didn't fail a trial with us, he failed to agree personal terms. I suspect the self same thing would happen if we got Ronaldo in for a fortnight.

Matt.

It's called good money after bad. You are clueless.

jonnyfive wrote: It's called good money after bad. You are clueless.

No he's not, not completely.. :~D

How much have we paid him since January to not play at all? How much have we committed to pay him over the next 12 months not knowing how much he will be able to play? For a side with a small budget it would be absolutely crazy to extend his contract and then immediately transfer list him in the hope of getting a transfer fee for him, when his transfer value is pretty much, if not exactly, zero.

He might turn out to be a good player but for us to have extended his contract makes absolutely no sense.

jonnyfive wrote: It's called good money after bad. You are clueless.

Or it's a decent investment which the club are clearly happy to make. It's not like we singed him then he failed to get in the side on merit, he tripped over a rabbit hole and turned an ankle. He was considered good enough for L2, we're now in the Conference. You're not going to win this one (so you're stuck on nought, still, like a retard), the club can't possibly lose here, because they're happy to keep him and they're equally happy to take a fee for him and let him go.

Why are people like you so desperate for the club to be as stupid as you are? Does it give you an erection to post nonsense on the internet about how shit at everything Torquay United are? I suspect that it gives you an erection to watch small boys being sexually abused by dirty old men, so it really wouldn't surprise me.

Matt.

Gulliball wrote:How much have we paid him since January to not play at all? How much have we committed to pay him over the next 12 months not knowing how much he will be able to play? For a side with a small budget it would be absolutely crazy to extend his contract and then immediately transfer list him in the hope of getting a transfer fee for him, when his transfer value is pretty much, if not exactly, zero.

He might turn out to be a good player but for us to have extended his contract makes absolutely no sense.

We're not "hoping" to get a fee for him, we're chancing our arm. If someone comes in and wants him, they can pay for him. If not, he can stay.

I've got a car. I like my car, I'm perfectly happy with it. However, if I was offered the right money for it, I'd sell it and buy something new. If I'm not offered anything for it, then I'll keep it. Yeah, I'm on a chance that the engine will fall out next time I drive it, but then, I'm on that chance with any car.

Just be cool. We either have a decent enough player (we all fancied him when he came here before, or are we now conveniently amending the record on that one?) or we have a small addition to the transfer kitty for which we haven't budgeted.

Matt.

So basically the exact same situation as Krystian Pearce, who interestingly was not transfer listed. Probably because transfer listing a player you wouldn't mind keeping isn't a great strategy.

Cooper was available on a free transfer 12 months ago (and didn't get many suitors, hence why he trialed here in July rather than signing), and was also available on a free transfer 6 months ago.

He has no value in the transfer market and we haven't given him a new deal to make money from him.

Any ideas when our release list will be out. I know the board had the budget meeting in Wednesday but surley CH already had a good idea of who he was going to offer a new deal too or not.

Gulliball wrote:So basically the exact same situation as Krystian Pearce, who interestingly was not transfer listed. Probably because transfer listing a player you wouldn't mind keeping isn't a great strategy.

Cooper was available on a free transfer 12 months ago (and didn't get many suitors, hence why he trialed here in July rather than signing), and was also available on a free transfer 6 months ago.

He has no value in the transfer market and we haven't given him a new deal to make money from him.

Maybe it's because you're Scottish? Maybe it's because I'm not explaining it well enough? Because if missing the bloody point was an Olympic sport...

It's feck all like Krystian Pearce. We actively want to keep Pearce, we aren't listing him because we want as much money for him as possible when he does inevitably go.

It doesn't matter that Cooper is unlikely to attract any suitors, what matters is that suitors must pay if they want him. If we could have got £10,000 for him out of contract or £100,000 in contract, we wouldn't have signed him on.
99% of thefts are opportunistic. If I'm walking down the road and someone has left their car window open with a roll of 50s on the passenger seat, I'll reach in and nick it. If the window is rolled up, I won't, because even the effort to break the window is too much to make it worth my while.

I recently insured my car. They were offering free courtesy car upgrade. Because it was free, I had it. If it had been £3, I wouldn't have bothered. However, if it had been £6, there's no way I'd have said, "shame that's not £3, or I'd have had it". It's not the difference in value, it's the difference between paying something and paying nothing. It's the unique position of a £0 price tag. Free shit is easy, it's totally risk free on both sides.

I'm really not sure I can explain it again. You either understand or you don't.

Matt.

EddUK12 wrote:on the flip side he could be outstanding for the next six months and a club offers him a deal in january for the summer and they dont have to pay fee for him (as his contact is up) and he will still get paid by tufc untill then and he could not feature again from january next year

Are you suggesting he'd refuse to play?

Matt.

ferrarilover wrote: Maybe it's because you're Scottish? Maybe it's because I'm not explaining it well enough? Because if missing the bloody point was an Olympic sport...

It's feck all like Krystian Pearce. We actively want to keep Pearce, we aren't listing him because we want as much money for him as possible when he does inevitably go.

It doesn't matter that Cooper is unlikely to attract any suitors, what matters is that suitors must pay if they want him. If we could have got £10,000 for him out of contract or £100,000 in contract, we wouldn't have signed him on.
99% of thefts are opportunistic. If I'm walking down the road and someone has left their car window open with a roll of 50s on the passenger seat, I'll reach in and nick it. If the window is rolled up, I won't, because even the effort to break the window is too much to make it worth my while.

I recently insured my car. They were offering free courtesy car upgrade. Because it was free, I had it. If it had been £3, I wouldn't have bothered. However, if it had been £6, there's no way I'd have said, "shame that's not £3, or I'd have had it". It's not the difference in value, it's the difference between paying something and paying nothing. It's the unique position of a £0 price tag. Free sh*t is easy, it's totally risk free on both sides.

I'm really not sure I can explain it again. You either understand or you don't.

Matt.

is chris actually scottish?

You've misunderstood how contracts work. The fee wouldn't need to cover his salary, no one can be "not 100%" for 5 months. This is not something about which you should be concerned.

Matt.

ferrarilover wrote:You've misunderstood how contracts work. The fee wouldn't need to cover his salary, no one can be "not 100%" for 5 months. This is not something about which you should be concerned.
Matt.

I've not been 100% for three years or more...

He could, but he can't refuse to play having signed a PCA with someone else.

He was a free transfer, wages are a separate issue. If I give you a car for free, it doesn't cease to be a free car once you stick some unleaded in it.

Matt.

I drive a diesel. You two seem intent on knackering it.

But you buy a car knowing that it's going to need insuring, fuelling and taxing. Free transfer is free because it's an avoidable cost which has been avoided. Salary etc are unavoidable costs, so it's misleading to count them against a player's cost.

Professional players don't cry off playing for half a season because their mind is elsewhere. Certainly not at our level anyway. That's like worrying about getting struck by lightning, it could happen, but it won't, so don't worry about it.

Matt.