Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Town Spend £241,969 on Agents
Tuesday, 3rd Apr 2018 23:55

Town spent £241,969 on agents and intermediaries between February 2017 and the end of this January’s transfer window, the second least in the Championship.

Of the other clubs in the division only Bolton, £223,432, paid out less than the Blues.

FIFA regulations require the FA to publish clubs’ spending on intermediaries each April. In the same period last year Town spent £303,978.

Photo: Action Images

Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.

Fabianski added 00:22 - Apr 4
This sums up the financial constraints that we have been operating under for pretty much the whole of MM's time here. A simple comparison, I know, but if agents fees can be equated to ambition, then we are struggling to match Burton! God help the next bright young manager through the door. How long will they be able to perform miracles in this league with such paper thin resources?

yungblue added 00:25 - Apr 4
I think this is good. We've probably made two of a shrewdest ever signings, Waghorn & Garner. I don't have the desire to go and chuck 10/20'milliom at the club, we've done it before and like so many others. It hasn't paid of, and hasn't guaranteed promotion.

blue75 added 03:09 - Apr 4
This is good it means we're not allowing so much money as villa to be taken out of the game. Not every player needs an agent I know Chambers didn't used to use one as the PFA give players representational part of their membership.

blue75 added 03:09 - Apr 4
This is good it means we're not allowing so much money as villa to be taken out of the game. Not every player needs an agent I know Chambers didn't used to use one as the PFA give players representational part of their membership.

Charlie_pl_baxter added 07:09 - Apr 4
Some of these teams are spending more on agents fees than we are on players

Popeye added 07:11 - Apr 4
Sunderland spent over £4 million and are bottom of the league, so agents fees don't necessarily equate to success. Paul Pogba's agent allegedly earnt £41 million from the deal with Man Utd which is ridiculous.

spanishblue added 07:16 - Apr 4
Yes Popeye Sunderlands agents appear to be good at getting rubbish a new club Wolves seem to have got value for money Reading also appear to have not much value per £,

DurhamTownFan added 07:44 - Apr 4
Not sure how I feel about this. Yes, agents can be looked at as leeches, but they usually provide their players with important legal advice and financial. A player directly negotiating with a club could cause problems. But then again-what a waste of money!

On the other hand, if we get a reputation for paying peanuts, might goodnplayers be diverted away from coming to us by their agents? You could say ‘well we then don't want them' but you can't change how football works.


ArnieM added 07:53 - Apr 4
“Well done”, Ipswich Town FC.
Agents are the scourge of the game and are nothing but leeches.

tractorboybig added 07:58 - Apr 4
well done a move in the right direction but I suspect the motive was not moral.

Cambonbleu added 07:59 - Apr 4
This is a good thing. Less of our transfer budget going to agents and more into wages and fees.

It's not like we didn't do any transfer deals, so it also indicates a strong negotiating stance i.e no we won't pay your agents fee along with a desire for a player to come here any play - even if they have to pay their own agent

Also highlights just how badly and desperately Birmingham spent money in the summer and in January


BotesdaleBlue added 08:06 - Apr 4
Positive news. It's good to see town near the top (bottom) of the table for once.

OwainG1992 added 08:08 - Apr 4
This I'm quite proud of to be fair.

BlueBlood90 added 08:49 - Apr 4
I'm pleased at this. Agents are a cancer of the game. Just greedy middle men who constantly want their players to move so they earn a bit of cash themselves. However, it probably does show how limited the transfer budget has been for McCarthy to try and get good players in.

GAZ1234 added 08:55 - Apr 4
I don't see why the club pays agent fees, if a player wants an agent to act on his behalf, then he should pay for the service themselves!

brassy added 09:05 - Apr 4
the thought of cloughy being told what to pay by an agent that's a laugh.

wokingblue added 09:14 - Apr 4
Marcus Evans' whole business empire is about being a middle man and charging fees on transactions so clearly he knows a thing or two about avoiding them as well!! Good work I say.

Blue_Meanie added 09:14 - Apr 4
Humm.... always been MM out, but when you look at these figures it does make you think.

Was the style of play adopted MM's chosen way or was he restricted by the quality of players he was able to bring in. We all scream about 3 average holding midfield players and the need for a creative CM playmaker ; but what does that cost?
Look what they spent up the A140, 10 times what we spent on agents surely equates in theory to substantially better players yet they're below us in the league.
We will never know what MM could have done with greater funds at his disposal.
My fear is that unless the next manager is given some sort of war chest by Evans we could be in a worse positioning 12 months time than what we find ourselves in now.
Just a thought,.... don't want to put a downer on what should be a brighter future but seeing these figures in black and white did make me think what if?

ITFCsince67 added 09:26 - Apr 4
All that money being wasted and going out of the game.

BillyBaxterwasbest added 10:40 - Apr 4
Pity we have just let the best manager of resources go, the new man will have to be able to pick those good ones we have had in the past, no chance MM was the master of something for nothing. ME will not open purse strings now!

RoyalAscotBlue added 10:56 - Apr 4
Lies, dammned lies, and statistics.

The fact that Town didn't throw money away on agents should be applauded.

However, it does not prove anything with regard to what MM would have achieved IF he had spent more money on players. It does not even prove whether or not he COULD have done so?

Money spent by other clubs has always been a very convenient excuse for MM throughout his time as our manager. Throughout his entire career as a manager he has only ever set his teams up to play one way though, regardless of money... The wrong way, as far as I'm concerned.

dirtydingusmagee added 11:06 - Apr 4
Agents [another term for sharks] are parasitic , they are ruining football. So the fact we have spent less than other teams on agents dosnt equate to failure .They cause more problems than they solve.

woohoo added 13:36 - Apr 4
No surprise really about the amount Town paid to agents - we've known all along that ME has kept the purse-strings tight.
Fully agree that agents are not good for the game - they appear to operate in (for them) a win-win environment. No comeback if 'their' player fails to perform. Can't blame them though, if it's legal and clubs are prepared to pay 'em.


alfromcol added 13:47 - Apr 4
Shows the intelligence of most footballers that they can't find a job and negotiate terms and conditions without handing over a chunk of money to a leech.

yorkshireblue added 13:52 - Apr 4
That Wolves figure seems very low considering their relationship with Mendes

You need to login in order to post your comments

Blogs 295 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls

About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024