DAN CARTER

[k1]

DA - I do agree with your arguments about logistics, practicality etc. However, there could be an argument made about the "investment quality" of bringing in a world-famous player, even at great short-term cost. Bringing in a player like Carter could lead to a significant number of people becoming lifelong fans, especially kids who may go to the odd game here and there but then choose to attend games week in week out (even after the player's departure).

This obviously isn't something that can be predicted, and it wouldn't be on the balance sheet, but there is a potential investment effect. I recall when Tigers signed Stransky. I was a young boy and there was a great deal of playground excitement about the signing and a group of us started going down quite regularly to watch him. We still go now.

I know this may be a bit of a tenous argument, but bringing in big-name players can help to raise the profile of the club and this can remain in effect long after the player has gone*


*Although it obviously helps if it's a club like Tigers, who we would have probably watched whether Stransky ever played here or not. But he did give us the "push"

[Iain]

So you should pay £400,000 for a player for six months as it might make a few people fans for life but you couldn't see this on the balance sheet?


Interesting....

[Dave Angel]

OK, look at it this way:


Dan Carter - £400,000 salary for 6 months


Martin Johnson (in his playing days) - £200,000 salary (approx) for 12 months.



Would Dan Carter really be worth FOUR Martin Johnsons?!?

[maskedsquid]

Would Dan Carter really be worth FOUR Martin Johnsons?!?

If they all had to play at fly-half then yes he would...

[Tigerbear]

Makes you wonder what French clubs woud pay for Johnno if he were at the peak of his career today and looking for a move.