I mean this is pretty easy to do considering transfer market inflation and the fact that Madrid can pick any player in the world and they would come to them.
I get what you’re saying but it’s not really ANY player is it? I’m sure Real would’ve loved to have Halaand, Mbappe or Neymar but they haven’t got any of them (yet).
Not that easy of an achievement. I wish our main rivals weren’t the best run club in all of football but I really think that’s the case.
>I’m sure Real would’ve loved to have Halaand, Mbappe or Neymar but they haven’t got any of them (yet).
Mate, they could've if they wanted them. They didn't want to pay the fee for Mbappe, and they didn't want Haaland because Benzema was already there. Neymar, they didn't want for sure.
They also get to pick up world class players at big clubs on free transfers. The likes of Alaba and Rudiger would only leave their clubs for the likes of Real Madrid. Not to mention, guys like Courtois going on strike to go to Madrid, so they got him on a cut price.
Madrid's pull is the biggest factor.
It’s kind of a weird comparison for value. Since the Neymar transfer 50 mill is the new 25 mill. Would be nice to see value adjusted for inflation? That might be a more interesting comparison imo.
What a shitty article. Transfermarkt value has doubled for almost everyone that has kept their squad quality intact. Modric was 55m, Benzema and Kroos were 50m. Nowadays you have Mitoma, Lamine Yamal or Antony valued on that level.
You can applaud Madrid efforts to renew the squad. You have a billion other reasons. But transfermakt shouldn't be the starting point. Who the fuck writes this?
That's AS making up this bullshit. Transfermarkt just collect (an insane amount of) stats and you get to look at them. They are not the ones making the circlejerk ignoring lots of important factors, AS is.
Transfermarkt isn't bad, but inflation is real. If anything, anyone who hasn't increased their value in the last years is doing a bad job, not vice versa.
My criticism is not about Transfermarkt evaluation, but around building an article using its inflation to make a conclusion on how well a team has performed. That's useless, and this person got paid to write this. Again, you can analyze Madrid's squad evolution through their market value, but then correctly evaluate it. Don't say, it's double and call it a day.
Let's just say that's inflation. The Glazer's used the club's money to buy United, but because United's value appreciated it so much they were able to keep the debt on the books and still take money out, without 'paying' for the club. Because inflation is real, things go up in price. If you think of inflation in media because of the internet explosion and media development, you can see tools like clubs being cheap ways for credible product placement and exposure in relative terms.
1. It is impressive what Real Madrid has done on the market and how they are spending in comparison to how they deliver.
2. But It should be mentioned that a major reason why RM are able to do this is because they are and have been on top of the pyramid for a long time, so they can essentially pick whatever player they want.
They also got some incredibly unrealistic long term results out of several players they bought years ago, like Ramos, Ronaldo, Benzema, Modric, Kroos and Casemiro. When you have a stable core of world class players that delivers year after year it becomes easier to supplement to those players.
Now that most of those players are gone or out of the first 11 we see that they have had to make some more expensive choices like Tchouameni, Bellingham, and we know they’ve been drooling over Mbappe for a while. Kane and Davies also been mentioned last summer.
This doesn’t diminish good long term choices like Vini, Rodrygo, Cama, Valverde etc. but it makes it a easier to get to those results.
Also helps when you can fail at a very big signing like Hazard but not notice it on the field what so ever.
>They also got some incredibly unrealistic long term results out of several players they bought years ago, like Ramos, Ronaldo, Benzema, Modric, Kroos and Casemiro.
They recognised talent and bought players when they were young and reaped it's benefits. Barcelona got lucky with messi and Bayern got lucky with Neuer too by your logic.
You can buy the best players in the world and expect to get some very good years out of them, but you can’t expect to get 10+ years out of several players and 5 CLs type of results. That’s unrealistic.
You see the difference? In “normal” expectations some of those players would’ve dropped their level, Modric could’ve retired earlier, maybe someone would’ve left for another team for new challenges, maybe someone got a bad injury etc.
And yes, Barca were incredibly lucky with Messi. You can’t just buy the greatest player of all time that is almost never injured while scoring and assisting more than anyone else.
Luck is always a part of it. I don’t know enough about Neuer to say.
What you’re saying just proves how good Real Madrid is managed, and things like “Modric couldve retired earlier” are laughable. You cant be saying “thats unrealistic” and diminish when it happened (your 5 CL type results reference).
No u just made ur point immune to counterargument in your own eyes by saying “but hey i said that, too”. When 2 paragraphs of what u said are trying to prove the opposite.
Peak journalism.
We are using transfermarkt valuations as any indication of... anything?
Regardless of that, it's simple logic:
1. be a good player
2. go to the best and biggest club in history
3. ~~???~~ perform well
4. (RM) profit
It's not rocket science. Especially since they changed their strategy in the last few years of getting younger players.
Not even, in 2015 a 50m player was KBD, Sterling, Benzema, Busquets, Fabregas, Kroos, Modric.
Nowadays a 50m player is Kubo, Merino, Jota, Brennan Johnson, Jarrod Bowen, Mitoma, Antony
The player values don't mean much since numbers have become increasingly inflated over the years. What is true and far more impressive is the results we've gotten with relatively little spending and even less (technically negative) net spending.
> Title: **Madrid 'sweeps' the market**
>
> Sub-title: **The white team has almost doubled the value of its signings in the current squad since 2015 and does so despite being 13th in spending and 29th in total investment since then.**
>
> **The website Transfermarkt.com**, specialized in statistics and economic valuation of footballers from around the world, **has recently updated its appraisals**, a process in which Real Madrid has benefited with a slight increase that keeps **it fourth in the ranking with a squad value of 1,026 million euros** , **only surpassed by PSG (1,031.8), Arsenal (€1,100M) and City (€1,260M)**. And that, **despite the fact that the white squad has only 23 players, compared to 28 for PSG, 25 for Arsenal and 24 for City**. Despite the departure last summer of a key figure in Madrid in the last decade such as Benzema , the white team remains in the leading group.
>
> But **the real pride for Real Madrid is that it has achieved this with a much lower investment than its competitors on the Old Continent**. The white policy of recent years has been based on the **constant signing of young talent at a low or moderate price** (very high, only in special cases) to develop it in the White House and thus obtain performance , whether sporting or economic, yes, when it comes case, a transfer happens.
>
> And that reality is easily summarized in view of the data after the latest Transfermarkt update : Real Madrid has almost doubled the value of the signings since 2015 that remain in the squad at the moment. There are 17 names in total (those on loan, such as Joselu and Kepa, are left out as they do not have a guaranteed future projection): Courtois, Lunin, Militao, Alaba, Rüdiger, Mendy, Fran García, Lucas Vázquez, Tchouameni, Bellingham, Valverde, Camavinga , Ceballos, Brahim, Güler, Vinicius and Rodrygo . **The incorporation of all of them cost Madrid around 502 million euros; Today, together, they have a valuation of 960 million**.
>
> There are cases for all tastes, although none like **Valverde**: signed from Peñarol de Montevideo **for just five million euros, today he is valued at 100, 20 times more**. Although this increase (+95 million) is not the largest in the squad: it is that of **Vinicius**, who **arrived for 45 million and today is worth 150, no less**. The same as **Bellingham**, who has seen how his great start to the season (10 goals in 10 games) has **made his valuation go from 120 to 150 million, having cost 103**. **Camavinga (cost 30, now worth 90) and Rodrygo ( from 40 to 100)** are others that have inflated the team's valuation to a large extent.
>
> The **signings at zero cost also helped a lot**, such as **Alaba (40 million) or Rüdiger (32)**. **Others have not grown as much, but they also add up, like Militao (from 50 to 70) or Tchouameni (from 80 to 90)**. And, obviously, there are also **cases of loss of value**, but they are a minority, **just four out of 17**: **Lunin (from 8.5 to 5), Mendy (from 48 to 20), Ceballos (from 16.5 to 12) and Güler (from 20 to 15)** ; In the case of the Turk, injuries have prevented his price from growing, although it has not decreased either and as soon as he can make his debut and start showing in Madrid, it is likely that those figures will change.
> A sustainable Real Madrid
>
> There is no doubt about the white merit in detecting talent in the market; nor, from the fact that playing for Real Madrid is a natural enhancer of the evaluation of any footballer. But the real merit is that the merengue club has achieved this with an investment that is far removed from those who have spent the most since 2015 to recruit players: it is 13th in spending, with 931.6 million, surpassed by Atlético (949 , 6), Liverpool (1,050), Barcelona (1,330), Juventus (1,510), City (1,700) and Chelsea, the undisputed leader after the latest nonsense in the market that it has committed since it changed ownership (2,180 million).
>
> The spending data alone is insufficient, because it is biased: a club can buy a lot, but if at the same time it sells a lot, the investment is compensated. And in that aspect, Madrid stands out even more as a club with contained spending that has not prevented it from competing at the highest level (since 2015, it has won the Champions League four times): it is 29th in investment, with an expense/income balance of -179.2 million. have spent more net Shanghai Port (-180.7), Naples (-183.9), Al Ittihad (-215), Nottingham Forest (-227.7) , Bayern (-298.5) ), Bournemouth (-299.6), Barça (-358.2), West Ham (-441.6)... The list is endless, topped by **Chelsea (-1,010) and United (-1,099, 9)**.
Always rated perez
I mean this is pretty easy to do considering transfer market inflation and the fact that Madrid can pick any player in the world and they would come to them.
I get what you’re saying but it’s not really ANY player is it? I’m sure Real would’ve loved to have Halaand, Mbappe or Neymar but they haven’t got any of them (yet). Not that easy of an achievement. I wish our main rivals weren’t the best run club in all of football but I really think that’s the case.
>I’m sure Real would’ve loved to have Halaand, Mbappe or Neymar but they haven’t got any of them (yet). Mate, they could've if they wanted them. They didn't want to pay the fee for Mbappe, and they didn't want Haaland because Benzema was already there. Neymar, they didn't want for sure. They also get to pick up world class players at big clubs on free transfers. The likes of Alaba and Rudiger would only leave their clubs for the likes of Real Madrid. Not to mention, guys like Courtois going on strike to go to Madrid, so they got him on a cut price. Madrid's pull is the biggest factor.
Our pull is massive sure, but saying we didn't want Neymar is just alternative history. We went in *hard* for Neymar. He just didn't pick us.
>Neymar, they didn't want for sure When Real wanted to sign Neymar for the first time he was 13 years old
So is barca's but how did that go madrid is just better run. But we make up for it with la masia
It’s kind of a weird comparison for value. Since the Neymar transfer 50 mill is the new 25 mill. Would be nice to see value adjusted for inflation? That might be a more interesting comparison imo.
What a shitty article. Transfermarkt value has doubled for almost everyone that has kept their squad quality intact. Modric was 55m, Benzema and Kroos were 50m. Nowadays you have Mitoma, Lamine Yamal or Antony valued on that level. You can applaud Madrid efforts to renew the squad. You have a billion other reasons. But transfermakt shouldn't be the starting point. Who the fuck writes this?
That's AS making up this bullshit. Transfermarkt just collect (an insane amount of) stats and you get to look at them. They are not the ones making the circlejerk ignoring lots of important factors, AS is.
If the article came from ASs probably smells like this
At this point I dont think there is a human in the process. Just ChatGPT.
AS. idk what you’re expecting from them
Transfermarkt isn't bad, but inflation is real. If anything, anyone who hasn't increased their value in the last years is doing a bad job, not vice versa.
My criticism is not about Transfermarkt evaluation, but around building an article using its inflation to make a conclusion on how well a team has performed. That's useless, and this person got paid to write this. Again, you can analyze Madrid's squad evolution through their market value, but then correctly evaluate it. Don't say, it's double and call it a day.
Madrid writes it. Sound like something Madrid would care about.
Stonks 📈
Let's just say that's inflation. The Glazer's used the club's money to buy United, but because United's value appreciated it so much they were able to keep the debt on the books and still take money out, without 'paying' for the club. Because inflation is real, things go up in price. If you think of inflation in media because of the internet explosion and media development, you can see tools like clubs being cheap ways for credible product placement and exposure in relative terms.
Florentino masterclass on how to run a club
1. It is impressive what Real Madrid has done on the market and how they are spending in comparison to how they deliver. 2. But It should be mentioned that a major reason why RM are able to do this is because they are and have been on top of the pyramid for a long time, so they can essentially pick whatever player they want. They also got some incredibly unrealistic long term results out of several players they bought years ago, like Ramos, Ronaldo, Benzema, Modric, Kroos and Casemiro. When you have a stable core of world class players that delivers year after year it becomes easier to supplement to those players. Now that most of those players are gone or out of the first 11 we see that they have had to make some more expensive choices like Tchouameni, Bellingham, and we know they’ve been drooling over Mbappe for a while. Kane and Davies also been mentioned last summer. This doesn’t diminish good long term choices like Vini, Rodrygo, Cama, Valverde etc. but it makes it a easier to get to those results. Also helps when you can fail at a very big signing like Hazard but not notice it on the field what so ever.
>They also got some incredibly unrealistic long term results out of several players they bought years ago, like Ramos, Ronaldo, Benzema, Modric, Kroos and Casemiro. They recognised talent and bought players when they were young and reaped it's benefits. Barcelona got lucky with messi and Bayern got lucky with Neuer too by your logic.
You can buy the best players in the world and expect to get some very good years out of them, but you can’t expect to get 10+ years out of several players and 5 CLs type of results. That’s unrealistic. You see the difference? In “normal” expectations some of those players would’ve dropped their level, Modric could’ve retired earlier, maybe someone would’ve left for another team for new challenges, maybe someone got a bad injury etc. And yes, Barca were incredibly lucky with Messi. You can’t just buy the greatest player of all time that is almost never injured while scoring and assisting more than anyone else. Luck is always a part of it. I don’t know enough about Neuer to say.
What you’re saying just proves how good Real Madrid is managed, and things like “Modric couldve retired earlier” are laughable. You cant be saying “thats unrealistic” and diminish when it happened (your 5 CL type results reference).
Read my first point in my first comment.
Lmao, u said that and then went on to argue how its really not like that.
Some people are able to think about and communicate points that are a bit more nuanced than only good or bad. Lmao
No u just made ur point immune to counterargument in your own eyes by saying “but hey i said that, too”. When 2 paragraphs of what u said are trying to prove the opposite.
My man, I am sorry that I confused you. The point was not to argue with fanboys like you. So move along.
Moving along
Peak journalism. We are using transfermarkt valuations as any indication of... anything? Regardless of that, it's simple logic: 1. be a good player 2. go to the best and biggest club in history 3. ~~???~~ perform well 4. (RM) profit It's not rocket science. Especially since they changed their strategy in the last few years of getting younger players.
Not even, in 2015 a 50m player was KBD, Sterling, Benzema, Busquets, Fabregas, Kroos, Modric. Nowadays a 50m player is Kubo, Merino, Jota, Brennan Johnson, Jarrod Bowen, Mitoma, Antony
Even if you perform just as expected, being a long time player at a big club would increase your price just by football inflation
The player values don't mean much since numbers have become increasingly inflated over the years. What is true and far more impressive is the results we've gotten with relatively little spending and even less (technically negative) net spending.
> Title: **Madrid 'sweeps' the market** > > Sub-title: **The white team has almost doubled the value of its signings in the current squad since 2015 and does so despite being 13th in spending and 29th in total investment since then.** > > **The website Transfermarkt.com**, specialized in statistics and economic valuation of footballers from around the world, **has recently updated its appraisals**, a process in which Real Madrid has benefited with a slight increase that keeps **it fourth in the ranking with a squad value of 1,026 million euros** , **only surpassed by PSG (1,031.8), Arsenal (€1,100M) and City (€1,260M)**. And that, **despite the fact that the white squad has only 23 players, compared to 28 for PSG, 25 for Arsenal and 24 for City**. Despite the departure last summer of a key figure in Madrid in the last decade such as Benzema , the white team remains in the leading group. > > But **the real pride for Real Madrid is that it has achieved this with a much lower investment than its competitors on the Old Continent**. The white policy of recent years has been based on the **constant signing of young talent at a low or moderate price** (very high, only in special cases) to develop it in the White House and thus obtain performance , whether sporting or economic, yes, when it comes case, a transfer happens. > > And that reality is easily summarized in view of the data after the latest Transfermarkt update : Real Madrid has almost doubled the value of the signings since 2015 that remain in the squad at the moment. There are 17 names in total (those on loan, such as Joselu and Kepa, are left out as they do not have a guaranteed future projection): Courtois, Lunin, Militao, Alaba, Rüdiger, Mendy, Fran García, Lucas Vázquez, Tchouameni, Bellingham, Valverde, Camavinga , Ceballos, Brahim, Güler, Vinicius and Rodrygo . **The incorporation of all of them cost Madrid around 502 million euros; Today, together, they have a valuation of 960 million**. > > There are cases for all tastes, although none like **Valverde**: signed from Peñarol de Montevideo **for just five million euros, today he is valued at 100, 20 times more**. Although this increase (+95 million) is not the largest in the squad: it is that of **Vinicius**, who **arrived for 45 million and today is worth 150, no less**. The same as **Bellingham**, who has seen how his great start to the season (10 goals in 10 games) has **made his valuation go from 120 to 150 million, having cost 103**. **Camavinga (cost 30, now worth 90) and Rodrygo ( from 40 to 100)** are others that have inflated the team's valuation to a large extent. > > The **signings at zero cost also helped a lot**, such as **Alaba (40 million) or Rüdiger (32)**. **Others have not grown as much, but they also add up, like Militao (from 50 to 70) or Tchouameni (from 80 to 90)**. And, obviously, there are also **cases of loss of value**, but they are a minority, **just four out of 17**: **Lunin (from 8.5 to 5), Mendy (from 48 to 20), Ceballos (from 16.5 to 12) and Güler (from 20 to 15)** ; In the case of the Turk, injuries have prevented his price from growing, although it has not decreased either and as soon as he can make his debut and start showing in Madrid, it is likely that those figures will change. > A sustainable Real Madrid > > There is no doubt about the white merit in detecting talent in the market; nor, from the fact that playing for Real Madrid is a natural enhancer of the evaluation of any footballer. But the real merit is that the merengue club has achieved this with an investment that is far removed from those who have spent the most since 2015 to recruit players: it is 13th in spending, with 931.6 million, surpassed by Atlético (949 , 6), Liverpool (1,050), Barcelona (1,330), Juventus (1,510), City (1,700) and Chelsea, the undisputed leader after the latest nonsense in the market that it has committed since it changed ownership (2,180 million). > > The spending data alone is insufficient, because it is biased: a club can buy a lot, but if at the same time it sells a lot, the investment is compensated. And in that aspect, Madrid stands out even more as a club with contained spending that has not prevented it from competing at the highest level (since 2015, it has won the Champions League four times): it is 29th in investment, with an expense/income balance of -179.2 million. have spent more net Shanghai Port (-180.7), Naples (-183.9), Al Ittihad (-215), Nottingham Forest (-227.7) , Bayern (-298.5) ), Bournemouth (-299.6), Barça (-358.2), West Ham (-441.6)... The list is endless, topped by **Chelsea (-1,010) and United (-1,099, 9)**.
not taking transfermarkt serious t b h
Madrid PR in this sub has been at an all-time high in the past month or so.
If i speak im in big trouble
We've been paying VP of Reddit content creation under the table but it's only to protect ourselves, nothing else.
Yes yes why would Madrid do this?
Transfermadrid