Unlike your arguments/reasoning. All you have done is copy someone else's statement about me stating opinions as facts. As if that was a fact indeed.
If I state a 'fact' which turns out not to be the case then all it takes is someone to turn round and put me right. For example deep in the mists of time I thought it was Krasner's lot who sold Kewell, when it was pointed out to me that it was the professor's work. You replied to a post where I was simply confirming your opinion/stance, what's the matter - worried that it sounds a bit dodgy all of a sudden? I will give you a fact here, again, and you tell me if it is wrong.. If there is more than 1 person interested in acquiring a scarce resource (ie a football player they think they need) then those interested parties will be conscious of losing out to the others, and therefore offer either 1. Their best price (which may not be good enough). 2. The asking price 3. Higher than the other people Fact number two. If there is only 1 person interested in buying that scarce resource, and they know the seller has to get rid then they might 1. Still offer their best price 2. Still offer the asking price 3. Attempt to take advantage and offer a lower price they would otherwise do. Fulham and Sunderland apparently want Healy. They wanted him before Bates made any comment. Do you think they will BOTH offer less now, risking losing out to the other side for the sake of £500k or so? You clearly think they both will. I dont think they will. You couldnt grasp the ebay analogy, how about selling a house? If you really want the house and are the only person interested you might be inclined to offer a cheeky low offer. If you know there were other people about to offer would you risk it or would you go in with a serious offer immediately? Plus we also have the fact it is Bates we are talking about here, if he thinks either (or both) Fulham and Sunderland are taking the piss he will simply not deal with them. That's my opinion. If there are any qualified economics experts on the list I would be happy to be put straight.. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nigel Holcroft Sent: 06 June 2007 23:19 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LU] Wage deferrals - Healy + who? Most of your arguments on the topics you get involved in, here are based purely in opinion not reason, but you state them as facts... You simply challenge others by merely repeating your own opinion in contradiction...to whatever the other person says and then you throw in the odd misquotation to support your opinion while misrepresenting the other person's view. Now you are even deeming your opinion to be, oh so right that you feel confident to answer your own questions...and even get those answers wrong... Now what was it you were saying about an idiot knowing? I rest my case. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Humphries Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 1:44 PM To: 'Nigel Holcroft'; [email protected] Subject: Re: [LU] Wage deferrals - Healy + who? Please point out the contradiction. And to summarise, your logic is that even if there is more than 1 potential buyer, if the selling club wants to sell a player the price will therefore be lower than if they didnt want to sell the player. You are also saying that Bates (of all people) would allow a buying club to pay less than market value for a player. Ie take the piss. One question, what will the price be (for Healy or whoever) if Fulham are prepared to pay #2m and Sunderland #2m? By your reasoning < #2m yes? Rhetorical question.. you dont work in sales or purchasing do you? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:leedslist- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nigel Holcroft > Sent: 06 June 2007 18:33 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LU] Wage deferrals - Healy + who? > > It took you all that time just to come up with your usual bunch of > contradiction and misquotes? > > At least you came to the right conclusion, in mid tirade and you could > have saved us all time by ending at that point, in explanation of your > opinion... > > I refer you to line eight, below and herby accept your one piece of > reasoned logic as to why I and others seem not to know or relate to > your opinions. > > As for the rest, we'll see just what price we get, in comparison to > other market activity on international strikers... > - > ----Original Message----- > From: Mark Humphries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 4:04 AM > To: 'Nigel Holcroft'; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [LU] Wage deferrals - Healy + who? > > Jesus man, are you saying some people list items on ebay not really > wanting to sell them? > > Let me reiterate, if you have two bidders for an item they will bid > against each other up to their limit, regardless of the whys and > wherefores of the seller's position. > > The 'intrinsic value' of Healy as a footballer is his goalscoring > ability, the reason(s) Leeds want/have to sell him are irrelevant to > that 'value'. > As every idiot knows, Healy was going to be sold anyway, so the 'we > might not sell him' argument was never there. > > So, basically, your argument that Bates saying he refused to defer his > wages has ANY impact on his eventual sale price, as there are at least > 2 interested parties, is totally irrelevant. It is also total > nonsense in terms of pure economics, you know, supply and demand and > all that jazz. > > The actual price we sell him for involves many factors, Bates stating > he isn't going to play for Leeds again aint one of them. > > Oh and the thing about 'backdoor' offers, what on earth makes you > think that if that was going to happen it wouldn't happen anyway? See > the Kewell transfer for more info. > > And as a footnote to this Bates has also since been on record stating > his sympathy for Healy and that he could never have been expected to > play international football then league 1 football. Maybe he said > that in the same interview as he mentioned the deferral issue and > maybe the original article I referred to chose to 'cleverly' edit his > comments to make it look like an attack on Healy? > > I don't really know and don't really care, but I do know that it will > have zero impact on Healy's price. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nigel > Holcroft > Sent: 05 June 2007 18:01 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LU] Wage deferrals - Healy + who? > > > > Where your opinions are concerned, I've come to expect very little in > the way of reason.. > > And as for your, "ebay" analogy...I suggest you follow your own advice. > You'll find that there are many items of a similar nature being bid on > at any given time. Many fetch widely varying prices while engaging the > same group of bidders and why? because their intrinsic value is based > on many factors not the least of which is there ease of availability > and whether the owner wants rid (as you put it) versus someone who > does not need to sell but is open to offers at the right price of > above.. > > Bates' actions also opens the backdoor to player/agent negotiations to > only agree to a certain club's offer regardless of who offers the > highest bid.. > > Whatever loyalty, or sympathy Healey may have had toward our plight > (not common, in today's football I'll grant you) is now out of the > window and he has been given every reason to actively help screw us > over if the opportunity arises. > > By the way, are you Bates in disguise? > > > > From: Mark Humphries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:24 AM > To: 'Nigel Holcroft'; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [LU] Wage deferrals - Healy + who? > > Duh! How much more reasoning do you need than if there are 2 competing > buyers then it doesn't matter a toss if the current owner wants rid. > > If that doesn't make sense to you can I suggest you check out this > marvellous website > > www.ebay.co.uk > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list > administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions > of contributors. > Leedslist mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist > Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list > administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions > of contributors. > Leedslist mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist > Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
