Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Deniz Undav







Questions

Habitual User
Oct 18, 2006
25,486
Worthing
I can't really understand all the disagreement on this thread. This is VERY good news if it comes off.



It could mean a conveyor belt of tried and tested players, all watched closely, all with match fitness, all with game time, and all deemed PL-ready for our squad, all eager to increase their wages substantially.

How will the Belgium fans feel about all this ?
 






Dick Swiveller

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2011
9,520
Players, agents and minority shareholders dont want this. Players and agents normally earn between 10-20% (FIFA are going to restrict it to 10% soon but right now that is how it is) of the transfer fee. If Brighton wants to move the player for free, the agent (and the player as they are usually listening to their agents) would say no. There are some regulations in the PL how much you can pay agents otherwise so the way to work around it is transfer fees.

And how would minority shareholders in USG feel if Tony Bloom decides to move one valuable asset from one company owned by TB to another company owned by TB? I'm no expert on financial law but that sounds shady to me. You set up two companies, create value in one where you have multiple shareholders and then just move all the value to another company... as I said not sure if that is illegal but it sounds easily as shady as "paying himself".

Unless you have the agent in your pocket, a la Wolves. Seems like most people are happy with this arrangement as a whole - just bear in mind we lose the moral high ground when owners sponsor their club massively above market rate, sell the ground to themselves, pay a player's mum as coach or buy clubs all over the world to farm players.

TLDR - I don't believe people should be able to own more than one club. Doesn't mean it isn't a good move for the club on the pitch.
 




Eeyore

Colonel Hee-Haw of Queen's Park
NSC Patron
Apr 5, 2014
25,839
Looks a classy player. Tony Bloom has got a good deal out of Tony Bloom here.
 




Whitechapel

Famous Last Words
Jul 19, 2014
4,404
Not in Whitechapel
Is he still there? How’s he doing?

We released him in January 2020, he went back to Holland to play for Go Ahead Eagles for the rest of the season before they released him in the summer. He went to Den Bosch in February ‘21 and has done okay there since - he’s got 3 goals and 6 assists this season in 20 games for a pretty rubbish team.

I actually remember being really excited when we signed him, I think he’d had a season where he’d go over 30 goals and assists and he looked a real talent, obviously didn’t quite work out that way.
 




Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,839
Crawley
We released him in January 2020, he went back to Holland to play for Go Ahead Eagles for the rest of the season before they released him in the summer. He went to Den Bosch in February ‘21 and has done okay there since - he’s got 3 goals and 6 assists this season in 20 games for a pretty rubbish team.

I actually remember being really excited when we signed him, I think he’d had a season where he’d go over 30 goals and assists and he looked a real talent, obviously didn’t quite work out that way.

He had a really nasty injury, whilst on loan elsewhere before the USG loan, they cut the season long loan short after using him twice in the first half of the season, and we released him.
 


Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,251
Players, agents and minority shareholders dont want this. Players and agents normally earn between 10-20% (FIFA are going to restrict it to 10% soon but right now that is how it is) of the transfer fee. If Brighton wants to move the player for free, the agent (and the player as they are usually listening to their agents) would say no. There are some regulations in the PL how much you can pay agents otherwise so the way to work around it is transfer fees.

And how would minority shareholders in USG feel if Tony Bloom decides to move one valuable asset from one company owned by TB to another company owned by TB? I'm no expert on financial law but that sounds shady to me. You set up two companies, create value in one where you have multiple shareholders and then just move all the value to another company... as I said not sure if that is illegal but it sounds easily as shady as "paying himself".

How much do you think the minority shares in USG are worth now, compared to 3 years ago?
 


Perkino

Well-known member
Dec 11, 2009
6,051
A fabulous arrangement that allows us to develop some players and gain them points for a work permit. USG also benefit from having better players in their squad, my only suprise is we haven't sent them 3/4 players each season.

I hope both clubs continue to grow in their levels of success and ability

If Undav is considered to be at the same level or potential as Nunez/Gonzalez then it is worth pursuing.
 








b.w.2.

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2004
5,189
How will the Belgium fans feel about all this ?

Grateful for all the talent we have loaned them and the resulting success


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 




Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,839
Crawley
Unless you have the agent in your pocket, a la Wolves. Seems like most people are happy with this arrangement as a whole - just bear in mind we lose the moral high ground when owners sponsor their club massively above market rate, sell the ground to themselves, pay a player's mum as coach or buy clubs all over the world to farm players.

TLDR - I don't believe people should be able to own more than one club. Doesn't mean it isn't a good move for the club on the pitch.

It doesn't appear that Blooms ownership is bad for either club, or either the Belgian League or Premier League.
It isn't the same as financial doping, with ridiculous sponsorship deals from the owners company, or the wealthier club loans a squad of players the other could not otherwise afford (no longer possible). The main benefit seems to be that there is a level of trust between the two clubs, and as such it is easier to do business with each other.

In comparison to other Belgian club owners, Bloom and his partner seem genuinely interested in the club succeeding in it's own right. There is a Korean guy that bought a club in the 2nd Division, and filled every non HG spot in the squad with a Korean player that had not quite made the grade as a pro in Korea, and made a talent show type TV program for Korean TV. Monaco own a club, which they just fill with their youth development players. Agents have bought clubs, just to bring African talent to and obtain European citizenship, and get round FIFA rules on agents owning economic rights over players.
 


Whitechapel

Famous Last Words
Jul 19, 2014
4,404
Not in Whitechapel
Grateful for all the talent we have loaned them and the resulting success


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I’m sure they’re ecstatic that the 7 games of Alex Cochrane, 2 games of Ahannach and the 7 minutes of Kozlowski and the impact they’ve had on their success ???
 


Blue Valkyrie

Not seen such Bravery!
Sep 1, 2012
32,165
Valhalla
So Undav gets his big PL pay rise now, and goes back to his current team for half a season.

Nice deal for him.
 


b.w.2.

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2004
5,189
Yeah I’m sure they’re ecstatic that the 7 games of Alex Cochrane, 2 games of Ahannach and the 7 minutes of Kozlowski and the impact they’ve had on their success ???

Convenient ignoring of other loan!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 






Dick Swiveller

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2011
9,520
It doesn't appear that Blooms ownership is bad for either club, or either the Belgian League or Premier League.
It isn't the same as financial doping, with ridiculous sponsorship deals from the owners company, or the wealthier club loans a squad of players the other could not otherwise afford (no longer possible). The main benefit seems to be that there is a level of trust between the two clubs, and as such it is easier to do business with each other.

In comparison to other Belgian club owners, Bloom and his partner seem genuinely interested in the club succeeding in it's own right. There is a Korean guy that bought a club in the 2nd Division, and filled every non HG spot in the squad with a Korean player that had not quite made the grade as a pro in Korea, and made a talent show type TV program for Korean TV. Monaco own a club, which they just fill with their youth development players. Agents have bought clubs, just to bring African talent to and obtain European citizenship, and get round FIFA rules on agents owning economic rights over players.

I get that but just because we seem to have an ethical chairman, doesn't mean others do. That is the whole crux of my point.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here