fbalmeida wrote:It's naturally an overpay because of the compounded circumstances:
A team being the 2nd buyer.
A team getting exactly what it wanted, when it wanted it, from a team that had it and wanted to keep having it.
Extremely wealthy owners and financiers.
Who is to say exactly what his correct value is?
But regarding what happens on the pitch, I have little doubt that Enzo will be one of the best top tier midfield traffic directors of his generation.
Valuation in sport is standard and performance-driven. That correct value question is treated as some nebulous unknown by most fans because they lack the basic quant skills to do it much less have the awareness of which public data sources to draw from. Also football is not art NFT's. Whether or not you have a quant or finance background, at the end everyone can tell when a flop is a flop.
You also missed my point and got weirdly defensive considering you have nothing to do with Benfica's success. Abramovic's Chelsea had one of the best if not the best scouting and sourcing systems in Europe, and would have bid for Enzo 6 months ago for 70M less if they were looking for mids. So my point is that Chelsea has regressed a lot in its business operations. There are often scenarios where such transfers are truly win-wins and mitigate risk for both Euro clubs, but that's for players who stay at the first Euro club till they assimilate in Europe or get secondary nationality not guys who are bought for flips within 1 year. My bias will always be towards resellers like Benfica, Dortmund, etc because those clubs tend to buy and use players more intelligently than these cashed up English clubs.
Ironically yesterday Tebas, the La liga president I generally think is horrible at commercialization and governance, addressed this issue correctly by pointing out that new EPL investors brought 3.5B into the league recently but that 3B of that has already gone to wasted spend.
