Rasmus Højlund | Signed for United

Status
Not open for further replies.
VP89 said:
It's not a funny line to use, it's a very well intended line. If you're saying its unfair because he's only played one season, how on earth can you not understand that THIS is why he's not worth 70m EUR? The same size itself is too small to go buy unless he's absolutely smashing it and he's doing it in a league that's hard to register those numbers, or which he is neither.
Click to expand...

Look at the markets prices. You quote Licha's price which is downright weird given he is a defender. Strikers are absurdly expensive. Kolo is 100m + apparently and he has had 1 good season. Kane is probably upwards of at least 130 for us and he is 30 and has only one year left on his contract. Osimhen has had a good season in Napoli but other than that his goal tally has been pretty average. He is 150 mil.
The strikers market is insane and prices are inflated.
So 50 + 20 mil in addons is not an insane price for a talent like Højlund.
 
CG1010 said:
If you are hell bent on proving that United is overpaying for Hojlund (without a final fees), why don't you do this more systematically and comprehensively. Here are some resources for you:

https://football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/mr/mr47/en/

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...QQFnoECCkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1iKBriLD3f0xiivN76rrYi

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/joes.12552

TLDR: football inflation of over 100% in last 10 years. Various scholars from premier universities have failed to construct "simple" models to find easy justification of player valuations. Conclusion in research is more complicated game theory models using bargaining theory, signalling etc., are needed to understand why football valuations differ.

Best of luck.
Click to expand...
Posting links followed by best of luck is unnecessarily condescending. Values are subjective, water is wet, we know this. But we also know clubs rarely pay through their nose for potential unless the potential is beyond reasonable doubt seen to be absolute massive and likely accomplished - which in Hojlund case the sample is too small to identify.

Cassidy said:
None are strikers. The fact there is a lack of CFs in the market means the price for CFs is elevated, not to mention that CFs have always cost more than defenders
Click to expand...

Lyng said:
Look at the markets prices. You quote Licha's price which is downright weird given he is a defender. Strikers are absurdly expensive. Kolo is 100m + apparently and he has had 1 good season. Kane is probably upwards of at least 130 for us and he is 30 and has only one year left on his contract. Osimhen has had a good season in Napoli but other than that his goal tally has been pretty average. He is 150 mil.
The strikers market is insane and prices are inflated.
So 50 + 20 mil in addons is not an insane price for a talent like Højlund.
Click to expand...

Vlahovic is more established, Kolos actual negotiated price we don't know (whereas Hojlund we've discussed for weeks and Atalanta seemingly have gone down to a bottom level of 70m). Also Goncalo Ramos has twice the experience.

Im not saying Hojlund isn't a player with top potential, or that he will be a flop for certain but he's certainly not worth 70m EUR. Hes had one good season and his goals per game is less than Martials. There are tons and tons of posts bordering sucking him off and I'm sure 2% ish actually watched him in Serie A. Im dumbfounded how people can assume otherwise. Could he be great? I hope so. Has he shown enough to be a huge potential striker? Not yet. He hasn't featured that much in his career and his scoring ratio is decent at best. We have more productive strikers in our own ranks for example.

If you think hel be bought for less then that's fine but we've sat at the table for almost a month or more now and Atalanta aren't budging below 70m EUR. You also have to ask yourself at what point do you call it quits if they won't play ball.
 
VP89 said:
Vlahovic is more established, Kolos actual negotiated price we don't know (whereas Hojlund we've discussed for weeks and Atalanta seemingly have gone down to a bottom level of 70m). Also Goncalo Ramos has twice the experience.

Im not saying Hojlund isn't a player with top potential, or that he will be a flop for certain but he's certainly not worth 70m EUR. Im dumbfounded how people can assume otherwise.

If you think hel be bought for less then that's fine but we've sat at the table for almost a month or more now and Atalanta aren't budging below 70m EUR. You also have to ask yourself at what point do you call it quits if they won't play ball.
Click to expand...

Vlahovic is older but his average goals per season tally is below average. If we could get him for 35 sure. But if its the same price as Rasmus then I would pick potential over established very average every day of the week.
Ramos I would like as well but do you honestly think Benfica would let him go for less than Atalantas Højlund price?

I am not certain we have sat at the table for a month. I think there is some merit to the rumours that we focus on one deal at a time. And about the price we get wildly different statements from british and italian media. Personally I think the actual price is 50 + 20 in addons and thats a fair price in the current market.
 
VP89 said:
Posting links followed by best of luck is unnecessarily condescending. Values are subjective, water is wet, we know this. But we also know clubs rarely pay through their nose for potential unless the potential is beyond reasonable doubt seen to be absolute massive and likely accomplished - which in Hojlund case the sample is too small to identify.





Vlahovic is more established, Kolos actual negotiated price we don't know (whereas Hojlund we've discussed for weeks and Atalanta seemingly have gone down to a bottom level of 70m). Also Goncalo Ramos has twice the experience.

Im not saying Hojlund isn't a player with top potential, or that he will be a flop for certain but he's certainly not worth 70m EUR. Hes had one good season and his goals per game is less than Martials. There are tons and tons of posts bordering sucking him off and I'm sure 2% ish actually watched him in Serie A. Im dumbfounded how people can assume otherwise. Could he be great? I hope so. Has he shown enough to be a huge potential striker? Not yet. He hasn't featured that much in his career and his scoring ratio is decent at best. We have more productive strikers in our own ranks for example.

If you think hel be bought for less then that's fine but we've sat at the table for almost a month or more now and Atalanta aren't budging below 70m EUR. You also have to ask yourself at what point do you call it quits if they won't play ball.
Click to expand...

Sorry I came across as condenscending. I am trying to make the point across that the business of judging fair valuation at the time of transfer is a fools errand for people whose day job is not this. It's very easily to call something reasonable priced after several years is much easier.

It seems you understand that values are subjective. But keep harping on this point "clubs rarely pay through the nose for potential" without doing a proper study. For all your examples of transfers with relatively cheap prices which were successful, there are others which werent. And then there are examples of more expensive transfers "for potential", of which I gave a few for United. You literally have no basis for this assertion at all.
 
I'm mostly excited by him from all 3 transfers we have made. I think he will be a hit here. If we don't buy him, one of Juve/Inter will buy him immediately as they also need strikers.

Compared to Vlahovic as example, I'd take Rasmus all day long. And Vlahovic price is thought to be higher than Rasmus.
 
CG1010 said:
Sorry I came across as condenscending. I am trying to make the point across that the business of judging fair valuation at the time of transfer is a fools errand for people whose day job is not this. It's very easily to call something reasonable priced after several years is much easier.

It seems you understand that values are subjective. But keep harping on this point "clubs rarely pay through the nose for potential" without doing a proper study. For all your examples of transfers with relatively cheap prices which were successful, there are others which werent. And then there are examples of more expensive transfers "for potential", of which I gave a few for United. You literally have no basis for this assertion at all.
Click to expand...
You cannot claim that it's normal to pay 70m fee for potential and deem it good business more often than not.

There are far more examples of potential being bought for less and being bigger hits. Be it Son, Salah levels, or Alvarez, Caceido, even Jesus levels or otherwsie.

Your study shows that values are subjective but what is not subjective is 70m EUR is a feckoff fee for a kid who hasn't really proven himself, has played in a lesser season and has only done one season in his career.
 
VP89 said:
You cannot claim that it's normal to pay 70m fee for potential and deem it good business more often than not.

There are far more examples of potential being bought for less and being bigger hits. Be it Son, Salah levels, or Alvarez, Caceido, even Jesus levels or otherwsie.

Your study shows that values are subjective but what is not subjective is 70m EUR is a feckoff fee for a kid who hasn't really proven himself, has played in a lesser season and has only done one season in his career.
Click to expand...

If Hojlund turns out to be a world beater, 70m would be a bargain. What's the probability of that? No two footballing professionals would agree on that, so it's really ETH's call.

Not even accounting for the fact tht the price is likely to be lower than 70m and based on past experience, likely to include several success based factors. Which in case the transfer is dud, won't get fulfilled.
 
VP89 said:
Posting links followed by best of luck is unnecessarily condescending. Values are subjective, water is wet, we know this. But we also know clubs rarely pay through their nose for potential unless the potential is beyond reasonable doubt seen to be absolute massive and likely accomplished - which in Hojlund case the sample is too small to identify.





Vlahovic is more established, Kolos actual negotiated price we don't know (whereas Hojlund we've discussed for weeks and Atalanta seemingly have gone down to a bottom level of 70m). Also Goncalo Ramos has twice the experience.

Im not saying Hojlund isn't a player with top potential, or that he will be a flop for certain but he's certainly not worth 70m EUR. Hes had one good season and his goals per game is less than Martials. There are tons and tons of posts bordering sucking him off and I'm sure 2% ish actually watched him in Serie A. Im dumbfounded how people can assume otherwise. Could he be great? I hope so. Has he shown enough to be a huge potential striker? Not yet. He hasn't featured that much in his career and his scoring ratio is decent at best. We have more productive strikers in our own ranks for example.

If you think hel be bought for less then that's fine but we've sat at the table for almost a month or more now and Atalanta aren't budging below 70m EUR. You also have to ask yourself at what point do you call it quits if they won't play ball.
Click to expand...

According to who? Only UK sources said anything about wanting 100m, this was never what was said from Italy. 60m euros as a starting fee has always been the number quoted from anywhere outside of the UK.
Vlahovics price is based off him not showing form post injury by the way (both for club and country), he's a big risk due to this.
 
CG1010 said:
If Hojlund turns out to be a world beater, 70m would be a bargain. What's the probability of that? No two footballing professionals would agree on that, so it's really ETH's call.

Not even accounting for the fact tht the price is likely to be lower than 70m and based on past experience, likely to include several success based factors. Which in case the transfer is dud, won't get fulfilled.
Click to expand...
The realistic price is heresay unless we have proper sources suggesting what Atalantas true appetite is. My concern is with Mount and onana they said a compromise will be met. With hojlund they simply state Atalanta are asking for far too much and it's been that way for weeks.

Yes if he turns out to be a world beater it's a bargain. The same can be said about every transfer, but sadly very few are world beaters.

Cassidy said:
According to who? Only UK sources said anything about wanting 100m, this was never what was said from Italy. 60m euros as a starting fee has always been the number quoted from anywhere outside of the UK.
Vlahovics price is based off him not showing form post injury by the way (both for club and country), he's a big risk due to this.
Click to expand...
Romano said that discussions have been ongoing and Atalanta are saying no to players plus cash. They have a floor of 70m EUR according to him.
 
CG1010 said:
I would rather focus on the player and what they bring on the pitch than worry incessantly about fees.
Click to expand...
Tbh this used to be my usual stand when it comes to our transfers. Not my money anyway.

But it's a bit different now imo because it seems we're pretty broke atm and with the hanging takeover it's very unlikely the Glazers would allow us to borrow some more cash to finance the deal. Atm I'm worried more about we'd be priced out of the deal than us overpaying.

Imo if Atalanta keep insisting €60m cash upfront it's quite likely we'd walk away. Unless ETH thinks this is a must and we manage to sell a couple players to get some cash. Let's hope we could meet somewhere in the middle like €40-45m + some add ons. I don't mind the add ons even if it's another €40m because if we have to pay that one day then money well spent.

Tbh I didn't really rate the lad before looking at his reported height. He seems to have developed increadibly physically in the last two years. And he's still only 20 yo. From around 185 cm to 191 cm with a good pace and acceleration. It's actually quite rare that you'd find a striker who is big, tall, strong and stilll fast. Tbh I'm ready to pay €20m more for that alone. Problem is we don't really look like we'd have the money atm.
 
Hojlund won’t be coming in to be our main striker. If he’s the only signing he’ll be backup to Rashford unless the game suits him starting. We’ve got plenty of cover for the left wing and Amad back in the team so if Rashford is to play mostly through the middle for now while Hojlund settles in then it’s not an awful situation. We basically had that scenario last year expect with Weghorst and I know who I’d prefer to play between him and Hojlund.

Also where the price is concerned, the rumoured price is a package worth up to 70mil. We can negotiate that to our favour with specific add one for things like scoring 20+ goals. If we knew he was able to do that then I’m sure we’d happily pay 70 mil now.
It’s not ideal but with the current market and the club sale the way it is currently, it’s better then what we had last year.
 
Strelok said:
Tbh this used to be my usual stand when it comes to our transfers. Not my money anyway.

But it's a bit different now imo because it seems we're pretty broke atm and with the hanging takeover it's very unlikely the Glazers would allow us to borrow some more cash to finance the deal. Atm I'm worried more about we'd be priced out of the deal than us overpaying.

Imo if Atalanta keep insisting €60m cash upfront it's quite likely we'd walk away. Unless ETH thinks this is a must and we manage to sell a couple players to get some cash. Let's hope we could meet somewhere in the middle like €40-45m + some add ons. I don't mind the add ons even if it's another €40m because if we have to pay that one day then money well spent.

Tbh I didn't really rate the lad before looking at his reported height. He seems to have developed increadibly physically in the last two years. And he's still only 20 yo. From around 185 cm to 191 cm with a good pace and acceleration. It's actually quite rare that you'd find a striker who is big, tall, strong and stilll fast. Tbh I'm ready to pay €20m more for that alone. Problem is we don't really look like we'd have the money atm.
Click to expand...
Why are you using euros? You’re only worrying yourself by making the number unnecessarily larger
 
Not so sure about him. Sure has potential but in the Austrian league he didn't stand out like Mane or Haaland did. Doubt he'd be our first choice numer 9 leading our line, as I don't think he's good enough for that yet.
 
CG1010 said:
You can't cherry pick either. Lots of factors affect market prices and football fans are totally out of depth in trying to analyze that. I would rather focus on the player and what they bring on the pitch than worry incessantly about fees.
Click to expand...
Forgot to mention the bold bit is a major reason why we are in such a mess with FFP. Together with sales of course.

Fees definitely matter.
 
Real Name said:
Might as well sack them all and appoint few of redcafe posters.
Click to expand...
You can argue the result wouldn't be much worse.

But parking your exaggerative and reply aside, it's been briefed that we ideally wanted an experienced CF with Hojlund. Which means scouts themselves reckon he's probably not ready.
 
Atalanta will take us to the cleaners and rightly so. They drive a hard bargain and Højlund has to be the most overhyped young striker in the world right now.

Even if Højlund has the potential to be a great striker, which I doubt, his current level is severely lacking. He has some obvious deficiencies in his technical ability.

I'll gladly eat my words, but, from I've seen so far, I'm not his biggest fan, especially at the quoted prices.
 
Kostov said:
Maybe, and maybe they don't have a clue, like the majority of times in these last 10 years.
Click to expand...
Scouts have done a great job over the years, the problem is the club wasn’t following through.
Now it seems we are
 
Rake said:
Atalanta will take us to the cleaners and rightly so. They drive a hard bargain and Højlund has to be the most overhyped young striker in the world right now.

Even if Højlund has the potential to be a great striker, which I doubt, his current level is severely lacking. He has some obvious deficiencies in his technical ability.

I'll gladly eat my words, but, from I've seen so far, I'm not his biggest fan, especially at the quoted prices.
Click to expand...
If Hojlund is the most overhyped young striker in the world and has such massive deficiencies why are ETH and the recruitment team so focused on him? Genuinely. You surely don't think that the club are saying let's recruit the worst young striker in the world to make us a terrible team for years to come surely nobody thinks this is the strategy.
 
If its 70 mill euros its laughably overpriced. Even 50 feels ridiculous. However, if this is the guy the scouts and manager agree on, then he will be worth double the outlay in a short time.

The unquantifiable part of the transfer is he is a United fan. Might mean that bit more.
 
Rake said:
Atalanta will take us to the cleaners and rightly so. They drive a hard bargain and Højlund has to be the most overhyped young striker in the world right now.

Even if Højlund has the potential to be a great striker, which I doubt, his current level is severely lacking. He has some obvious deficiencies in his technical ability.

I'll gladly eat my words, but, from I've seen so far, I'm not his biggest fan, especially at the quoted prices.
Click to expand...
Why are your standards higher than paid professionals? :wenger:
 
VP89 said:
The realistic price is heresay unless we have proper sources suggesting what Atalantas true appetite is. My concern is with Mount and onana they said a compromise will be met. With hojlund they simply state Atalanta are asking for far too much and it's been that way for weeks.

Yes if he turns out to be a world beater it's a bargain. The same can be said about every transfer, but sadly very few are world beaters.


Romano said that discussions have been ongoing and Atalanta are saying no to players plus cash. They have a floor of 70m EUR according to him.
Click to expand...
Floor are we just making things up now?
 
VP89 said:
The realistic price is heresay unless we have proper sources suggesting what Atalantas true appetite is. My concern is with Mount and onana they said a compromise will be met. With hojlund they simply state Atalanta are asking for far too much and it's been that way for weeks.

Yes if he turns out to be a world beater it's a bargain. The same can be said about every transfer, but sadly very few are world beaters.


Romano said that discussions have been ongoing and Atalanta are saying no to players plus cash. They have a floor of 70m EUR according to him.
Click to expand...
At least wait a few days and see if we can negotiate the price down. It may be true we’ve been negotiating with Atalanta for a while but it’s definitely not been our main focus till now. Let’s see what happens in the next few days. If we can’t bring the price down from 70m euros, I imagine more posters would be on your side and the club itself will walk away.

By the way, what would be the absolute maximum price we should spend on Hojlund in your opinion
 
I can't get remotely excited about Hojlund because I'm 99% sure we're not meeting Atalanta demands.
Honestly I think we're working on something else in the background and it's more likely to happen then getting Hojlund for 70-80 million.
 
Rake said:
Atalanta will take us to the cleaners and rightly so. They drive a hard bargain and Højlund has to be the most overhyped young striker in the world right now.

Even if Højlund has the potential to be a great striker, which I doubt, his current level is severely lacking. He has some obvious deficiencies in his technical ability.

I'll gladly eat my words, but, from I've seen so far, I'm not his biggest fan, especially at the quoted prices.
Click to expand...
Seen much of him since your first post in this thread was June first?
 
Borys said:
I can't get remotely excited about Hojlund because I'm 99% sure we're not meeting Atalanta demands.
Honestly I think we're working on something else in the background and it's more likely to happen then getting Hojlund for 70-80 million.
Click to expand...
The mental gymnastics here is fascinating
 
How is this lad overhyped? They might be overpricing him, thats different, but he's not exactly some much spoken about hyped talent in world football. No one was talking about him before we were linked.

Bit like Antony last summer, just feels like this will happen to me, hopefully we don't overpay to that obscene level.
 
Judas said:
How is this lad overhyped? They might be overpricing him, thats different, but he's not exactly some much spoken about hyped talent in world football. No one was talking about him before we were linked.

Bit like Antony last summer, just feels like this will happen to me, hopefully we don't overpay to that obscene level.
Click to expand...

We're going to overpay for him. Thats almost guaranteed.
 
VP89 said:
You can argue the result wouldn't be much worse.

But parking your exaggerative and reply aside, it's been briefed that we ideally wanted an experienced CF with Hojlund. Which means scouts themselves reckon he's probably not ready.
Click to expand...
I just dont get it, we're interested in a up and coming young player who was probably monitored by our scouts.
Scouts dont set up the price but again I read about scouts not doing their job.

We go for an obvious choice - scouts dont do their job.
We go for a young unbrushed player - there are probably cheaper options our useless scouts would find.

Not only that you have posters here doubting he'll reach his potential as if they can tell from the vast amount of his games they've seen.
 
DevilRed said:
Vitor Roque cost 40m euros.
Click to expand...

He transferred from a weaker league in South America to Europe, his first major transfer. Hoijland is further along the path than him, he’s proven he can do it to some degree in a major European league. These two aren’t like for like when it comes to transfers. Profile, age etc yes. Suitability for a major European league plus transfer history, no. This is what we have to consider. The fact that Atalanta took the first risk and paid big money adds to the fee here. Not saying it’s right or wrong, it’s just the facts of the situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.