Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: ravenrover on April 14, 2025, 07:13:17 pm
-
If anyone is interested
-
Bloody hell, look at Fleetwood and Port Vale.
-
Bloody hell, look at Fleetwood and Port Vale.
Gillingham as well
-
Ours must be more than schofields entire budget
-
They're like trade unionists but for football. Rinsing every last drop until it's dead :silly: while sat by the pool of their holiday home
-
Bloody hell, look at Fleetwood and Port Vale.
Gillingham as well
Carlisle have a substantial amount too and look where they are in the table.
-
Carlisle haven’t spent well
-
Carlisle haven’t spent well
According to some fans, neither have we.
However my point was about the agent fees as per the OP.
-
Can we surmise the agents fees are directly proportional to overall spend/budget or is it not as simple as that?
Genuine question.
-
I wonder who or what is bankrolling Fleetwood. It isn’t their attendances.
-
Leeds spent £18.8 million in agents fees. Fookin menkal
-
I just don't get how these fees have become astronomical.
Does any of it go to the players like a signing on fee?
Seems like a billion pound industry.
-
Simplest rule change imo. The agent works for the player so the player should pay the agent not the club. The clubs offering lump sums to agents is a conflict of interest isn’t it. Get your client a good club or send him to a club on the rocks for a nice personal pay out.
No surprise Port Vale are up there didn’t Moore have a few friendly agents that sorted all his signings out for him.
-
What's the difference to any other job? Recruitment Agents get fees in most industries and these seem fairly representative given the high turnover etc.
-
What's the difference to any other job? Recruitment Agents get fees in most industries and these seem fairly representative given the high turnover etc.
It’s a completely different model! I work for a tech company and we try to avoid using recruiters because of the cost and we have an in-house talent team. Sometimes, though, if we’re struggling we’ll use an agency. They will provide us with a list of candidates who they know are suitable for the role, and the first part of the process is effectively taken care of because we can rely on the recruiter to have discussed motivations and suitability. So that’s two services they’re providing - sourcing and screening.
A football agent does neither of those. Data on footballers and their availability is far, far more widely available than a Product Manager or a Software Engineer so you’re not relying on an agent to find you candidates. The role of the football agent is to get the best deal for their client and themselves (and in most cases, not in that order). A recruitment agent in industry might be involved in salary negotiation for their candidate but that’s as far as the similarities go.
-
What's the difference to any other job? Recruitment Agents get fees in most industries and these seem fairly representative given the high turnover etc.
I agree. I think on the whole agents are fine.
-
I can't help thinking football agents are parasitic.
-
I can't help thinking football agents are parasitic.
There will certainly be some bad ones. Most are doing a fair job representing their client.
-
Such a minefield where there's obviously opportunities for corruption and conflicts of interests when there's huge amounts of money to be made on the backs of the elite level of professional footballers who will always be in demand and perhaps less clear for the average footballer knowing where their best interests really are. The legislation around player ownership is being tested in the courts where of course the elite want freedom of movement, whilst the lower end may want security of contract. Third party ownership might be more commonplace where players are effectively loaned or leased to clubs by agents/agencies etc.
You then have to wonder how clubs who invest in young players, protect their assets and at what point can a player sign up to an agent who will then play a huge part in said players destiny. Should the agency be paying compensation to the clubs in lieu of their development up to that point? Who pays for ongoing medical bills and takes overall responsibility for the players welfare?
Players can't have it both ways and neither should the agents. It brings into question the whole system of ownership, terms of contracts which may conflict with normal employment law.
It's a hard question to answer whether those fees are justified and who's interests are truly being served.
-
Fleecedwood Town