Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
AndyCanary

Holts Agent is in the press again Lee Payne'intheass!

Recommended Posts

He''ll be playing for NCFC at the start of the season, all will be forgotten by christmas time [:)]  I''m an optimist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It makes me laugh when people say Grant Holt earns 15k a week at Norwich or 4k-10k a week at Sheffield Weds/Notts Forest.

Do people forget about the 50% tax and 10% of the wages often paid to the agent?

Holt doesnt earn as much as you think. It''s possible he takes home 6.5-7.5k a week. If he was on 4k a week at Shef Weds then he probably cleared 2k a week. (I''d be shocked if Shef Weds or Forest paid him more than that as they were in league 1!)

These figures are not enough to set you up for life, especially if you have 3 kids. People must be seriously deluded if they think Holt is minted. I can totally understand why he wants to maximise his earning potential at 31. You would probably do exactly the same if you were in his position so lay off him!

Holt is not being greedy, he is being sensible. Why risk hoping to get a job as a pundit after he retires when it isn''t guarenteed? Hundreds of players retire every year but only a few become pundits. What will he do when his money runs out? Become a tyre fitter again at 45?

Lets say he clears 7k a week, and saves 5.5k. That''s roughly 250k a year. Remember he''s only been on that contract for year. So as a guess he may have only saved 500k during his career so far, and that,is being generous! That''s not enough to set his family up for life.

And signing on fees? Since when has Holt been sold for big money? lol

Give him a break

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Alejandra"]He''ll be playing for NCFC at the start of the season, all will be forgotten by christmas time [:)]  I''m an optimist[/quote]and then the january window opens.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Josh"]It makes me laugh when people say Grant Holt earns 15k a week at Norwich or 4k-10k a week at Sheffield Weds/Notts Forest.

Do people forget about the 50% tax and 10% of the wages often paid to the agent? [/quote]based on these figures then.... IF (and i say If.. we dont know) Hol is on 15k a week and gets spanked 50% tax.. that means he is on 7.5k  a week.... add 10% on top of that to the agent (who makes £750) then we could assume Holt was on 6750 a week.33750 a month (more than quite a few posters get in a year! me included!) this works out to £405,000 a year after tax...nearly half a million quid..... why the F**k does Holt have ANY kind of complaint at all?! he should shut up and get on with it ungreatful sod! id do it for half that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Ruddygore"]Can''t believe that there are people denying that it was stated that Holts primary reason for putting in a transfer request as stated by Holt''s agent right back at the beginning of this whole thing was because he claimed to have been promised a "discussion" on an extension to his contract following the end of the season. ![/quote]

 

Well, there''s a very good reason why some of us are making a denial of that sort, RG....simply because a statement to that effect has never been made . I, for one, am perfectly prepared to accept that what you say may be a factor, but one or two people on this, and other threads have made it sound that it''s the undeniable gospel truth. And in any case, we are getting into semantics here as when does a "discussion promise" become the promise of a new contract ? So all the "deniers" are doing is to avoid making judgements when very few of the facts are actually in the public domain.

 

The fact is that no-one has put forward any firm reason as yet for Holt''s decision. The nearest we have had from the man himself was a thinly veiled statement that it "is not to do with money ". So, until there are more firm facts known, it''s best if we all do not make definitive statements, surely ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote "jas the barclay king"

"It based on these figures then.... IF (and i say If.. we dont know) Hol is on 15k a week and gets spanked 50% tax.. that means he is on 7.5k  a week.... add 10% on top of that to the agent (who makes £750) then we could assume Holt was on 6750 a week. 33750 a month (more than quite a few posters get in a year! me included!) this works out to £405,000 a year after tax...nearly half a million quid.....

why the F**k does Holt have ANY kind of complaint at all?! he should shut up and get on with it ungreatful sod! id do it for half that!"

How is 405k "nearly" half a million quid? It''s roughly 20% short! Have you deliberately ignored my estimates of what he might save from that 405k? And considerrd that he might not have saved enough to support his family for life? Or are you just trying to glorify these figures to try and support your point?

And why is Holt "ungrateful"? He doesn''t owe us anything! We wouldn''t be in the Premiership without him. He has a highly specialised skill for which he could be earning double what he is currently getting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]No, he''s in holiday in Vegas.[/quote]

 

Said in the EEN he was in Florida but back this weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"]

[quote user="Ruddygore"]Can''t believe that there are people denying that it was stated that Holts primary reason for putting in a transfer request as stated by Holt''s agent right back at the beginning of this whole thing was because he claimed to have been promised a "discussion" on an extension to his contract following the end of the season. ![/quote]

 

Well, there''s a very good reason why some of us are making a denial of that sort, RG....simply because a statement to that effect has never been made . I, for one, am perfectly prepared to accept that what you say may be a factor, but one or two people on this, and other threads have made it sound that it''s the undeniable gospel truth. And in any case, we are getting into semantics here as when does a "discussion promise" become the promise of a new contract ? So all the "deniers" are doing is to avoid making judgements when very few of the facts are actually in the public domain.

 

The fact is that no-one has put forward any firm reason as yet for Holt''s decision. The nearest we have had from the man himself was a thinly veiled statement that it "is not to do with money ". So, until there are more firm facts known, it''s best if we all do not make definitive statements, surely ?

[/quote]I don''t think you''d be saying this if it wasn''t what you believed but on the other hand I hadn''t thought that I''d dreamed up the comments. They were discussed on this forum and also following an article published in the EDP, by The Premier League Owl site and also on Hotamania. Whilst I don''t use Twatter and don''t know if Holt''s original remarks can be reproduced it was reported in the Mirror and other rags approximately 22 days ago that those were his remarks.http://thepremierleagueowl.com/backing-norwichs-ceo-over-the-grant-holt-issue/http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city-fc/norwich_city_chief_executive_david_mcnally_grant_holt_is_not_for_sale_1_1396488"Surely McNally and Holt should sit down and talk this out between the two of them. Come on, you are both big boys - it''s a discussion about a one year contract extension that''s all !!These agents are nothing but a pain in the provebial if you ask me. I don''t see that they really add any value - on the contrary...." - Dubai Canaryhttp://www.holtamania.com/2012/06/07/the-paul-lambert-years-part-three/Apologies I can''t do links.Further, no, a discussion isn''t a promise but a promise to have a discussion is still a promise lol. When it doesn''t take place you have every right to take it as broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, that''s perfectly OK, RG. as far as it goes. As I said, I''m not denying that the whole contract thing MAY be a factor, but, I repeat, there has been up till now no official statement to that effect from any party.  Dubai Canary is no doubt a man of the highest repute, but an official spokesperson he aint ! No you are not dreaming up anything, and have every right to read into them as you wish, but equally, I prefer to see official wording before I regard anything as sacrosanct. You quite understandably regard Twatter as an unhelpful distraction in all of this...I wish the flippin'' thing had never been invented. It''s a bl**dy nuisance.

 

The only offficial statement fromthe Holt people has been to remark that its not about money, which as I said in my last posting , has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="cityangel"]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]No, he''s in holiday in Vegas.[/quote]

 

Said in the EEN he was in Florida but back this weekend.

[/quote]

 

That would explain it. He certainly has some Key decisions to make.[:P]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I only repeat Dubai Canary''s comments because they were similar to many along the same lines EPPS, added to the reported comments made by Holt on Twatter to that effect perhaps in the absence of these ''Official" communications it maybe that i had taken this as gospel fact. It''s more plausible then the speculation of Holts massive avarice - and doubly more than NO communication at all.

My bugbear is that even with all that has gone on that the club hasn''t moved more decisively and reassuringly. I don''t know how many goals David McNasty is good for but at this rate we''ll need him suited and booted on the centre line 1st thing next season at this rate!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"]

[quote user="Kingston Yellow"]the understanding that if Holt had a good first season in the Prem he would be offered an extension. Whilst it was Holt''s agent who made this claim, the club have not denied it so assume there''s some truth to it.[/quote]

 

Sorry, but I do not think you can make that assumption at all. You are putting two and two together and getting seven !  It''s far more likely that the club do not wish to get involved in a megaphone diplomacy, tit for tat ,war of words with Holt and his agent . And I''d support them fully in that strategy, as once that sort of thing starts, invariably things start getting out of hand, and the claims get sillier and sillier.

[/quote]

Did you seriously just say the club does not wish to get involved in

megaphone diplomacy?

 

So do you consider McNally''s 12-tweet monologue the day after Holt''s

transfer request diplomatic? It was nothing but a blatant attempt to put his

side of the story before the fans before Holt did. That''s not diplomacy.  And it wasn’t until several days later that

Holt''s agent went on Radio Norfolk and claimed that Holt had received an

undertaking the previous seasons to extend his contract if he did well in the

Prem. [NB - I''m not criticising McNally for resorting to twitter but you need

to be consistent.]

 

The point you seem to be missing is that there has been a statement made

about Holt having received an undertaking to extend his contract. It just

happens to be from a source that you''ve decided to discredit, presumably

because it wasn''t issued by McNally on NCFC headed paper. As far as I’m

concerned, until the club deny that they made an undertaking to Holt, I''ll

assume that that claim has some credence.

And when you say the "I''m not

denying that the whole contract thing MAY be a factor" it would be

pretty ridiculous to argue anything else - considering that less than 2 weeks

before he handed in his transfer request, Holt was standing on pitch at Carrow

Road being interviewed talking about how much he was looking forward to playing

in Yellow and Green next season. Not the words of a man who had any intention

of leaving.

I''m not claiming that Holt''s got this right – I simply find it incredible

that so many so called fans are so quick to judge and condemn a player who has

dragged this club back to the big time, without knowing all the facts - particularly

when I suspect that most people would do something similar when faced with a comparable

situation in their own profession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He helped to keep us up and deserves an improved contract as do the rest of the squad that we intend to keep. It does not have to be a lot but at least a sign of appreciation after a fantastic season.  He will be a massive loss to us if he goes IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Kingston Yellow"][quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"]

[quote user="Kingston Yellow"]the understanding that if Holt had a good first season in the Prem he would be offered an extension. Whilst it was Holt''s agent who made this claim, the club have not denied it so assume there''s some truth to it.[/quote]

 

Sorry, but I do not think you can make that assumption at all. You are putting two and two together and getting seven !  It''s far more likely that the club do not wish to get involved in a megaphone diplomacy, tit for tat ,war of words with Holt and his agent . And I''d support them fully in that strategy, as once that sort of thing starts, invariably things start getting out of hand, and the claims get sillier and sillier.

[/quote]

Did you seriously just say the club does not wish to get involved in megaphone diplomacy?

 

So do you consider McNally''s 12-tweet monologue the day after Holt''s transfer request diplomatic? It was nothing but a blatant attempt to put his side of the story before the fans before Holt did. That''s not diplomacy.  And it wasn’t until several days later that Holt''s agent went on Radio Norfolk and claimed that Holt had received an undertaking the previous seasons to extend his contract if he did well in the Prem. [NB - I''m not criticising McNally for resorting to twitter but you need to be consistent.]

 

The point you seem to be missing is that there has been a statement made about Holt having received an undertaking to extend his contract. It just happens to be from a source that you''ve decided to discredit, presumably because it wasn''t issued by McNally on NCFC headed paper. As far as I’m concerned, until the club deny that they made an undertaking to Holt, I''ll assume that that claim has some credence.

And when you say the "I''m not denying that the whole contract thing MAY be a factor" it would be pretty ridiculous to argue anything else - considering that less than 2 weeks before he handed in his transfer request, Holt was standing on pitch at Carrow Road being interviewed talking about how much he was looking forward to playing in Yellow and Green next season. Not the words of a man who had any intention of leaving.

I''m not claiming that Holt''s got this right – I simply find it incredible that so many so called fans are so quick to judge and condemn a player who has dragged this club back to the big time, without knowing all the facts - particularly when I suspect that most people would do something similar when faced with a comparable situation in their own profession.

[/quote]

Well said, and in my view Lambert and his team should also have been offered improved contracts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Yellowbeagle"]It''s always amazing how ''looking after my family'' arguments comes out to justify greedy footballers and this isnt a shot at Grant Holt they all wheel out that self justifying statement. How much money does one family need to live a comfortable life? But then i guess that private jet to get them to school on time safely wont buy itself.[/quote]

 

Depends on how big the Olympic style swimming pool is going to be and whether or not you really want that 11th bedroom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How relevant are these arguments though. The whole dispute centres around the length of the contract it would seem. Rather than an actual wage dispute?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Alejandra"]He''ll be playing for NCFC at the start of the season, all will be forgotten by christmas time [:)] 

I''m an optimist
[/quote]

and then the january window opens.....
[/quote]

and his price goes up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote user="paul moy"quote user="Kingston Yellow"quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"

quote user="Kingston Yellow"]the understanding that if Holt had a good first season in the Prem he would be offered an extension. Whilst it was Holt''s agent who made this claim, the club have not denied it so assume there''s some truth to it.quote

 

Sorry, but I do not think you can make that assumption at all. You are putting two and two together and getting seven !  It''s far more likely that the club do not wish to get involved in a megaphone diplomacy, tit for tat ,war of words with Holt and his agent . And I''d support them fully in that strategy, as once that sort of thing starts, invariably things start getting out of hand, and the claims get sillier and sillier.

quote

Did you seriously just say the club does not wish to get involved in megaphone diplomacy?

 

So do you consider McNally''s 12-tweet monologue the day after Holt''s transfer request diplomatic? It was nothing but a blatant attempt to put his side of the story before the fans before Holt did. That''s not diplomacy.  And it wasn’t until several days later that Holt''s agent went on Radio Norfolk and claimed that Holt had received an undertaking the previous seasons to extend his contract if he did well in the Prem. [NB - I''m not criticising McNally for resorting to twitter but you need to be consistent.]

 

The point you seem to be missing is that there has been a statement made about Holt having received an undertaking to extend his contract. It just happens to be from a source that you''ve decided to discredit, presumably because it wasn''t issued by McNally on NCFC headed paper. As far as I’m concerned, until the club deny that they made an undertaking to Holt, I''ll assume that that claim has some credence.

And when you say the "I''m not denying that the whole contract thing MAY be a factor" it would be pretty ridiculous to argue anything else - considering that less than 2 weeks before he handed in his transfer request, Holt was standing on pitch at Carrow Road being interviewed talking about how much he was looking forward to playing in Yellow and Green next season. Not the words of a man who had any intention of leaving.

I''m not claiming that Holt''s got this right – I simply find it incredible that so many so called fans are so quick to judge and condemn a player who has dragged this club back to the big time, without knowing all the facts - particularly when I suspect that most people would do something similar when faced with a comparable situation in their own profession.

quote

Well said, and in my view Lambert and his team should also have been offered improved contracts.  

quote

 

I thought Lee Payne had said that Norwich would discuss contracts, which isn''t a definate offer to extend. Payne did say that is was Norwich who came to Holt towards the end of the Championship season, and gave him improved terms, and I feel that Holt thought ''the Club love me, I am on a pedestal here and can do no wrong, I will ask (less than a year later) for another , improved, contract''. (That is not a direct quote btw) :(

Also you can look to offer improved contracts (on the Club''s terms) to people, but it doesn''t mean they will take the Club up on them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="djdalej"]He''s just a man looking after his family''s interest as we all are. Yes, he gets paid more than most of us can dream about, but thats football. If we all got the chance to double our wages, would we turn it down because we like the accolade our job gets us, No, we pay for our children and our future. So please let us offer Grant the contract he deserves. If he leaves I will be gutted, but as a father I will understand. I will thank him for what he has done and wish him good luck for the future.But life at NCFC will go on with or without him.NCFC forever!![/quote]I still love Grant Holt too. But I do not agree with you on two points1) "Looking after his family''s interest"? No - if he was looking for a pay rise of £20k a year to £25k, THAT would be looking after his family interests. Grant Holt''s family are not going to be destitute without him receiving a pay rise. I hate this concept that everyone (not just footballers) needs to be constantly looking towards getting a bigger pay packet. It''s a big problem for our society, not just football! Using family interests as a reason is just a way of using heart-string-tugging language to justify what is essentially still greed. I do not criticise Grant Holt if he wants more money, but lets not wrap this up in fluffy language as if he is doing something particularly honourable by trying to get more money. He''s not.2) Grant Holt does not automatically deserve more money just because he''s all of our favourite player. There has to be an upper limit to what we pay him - no club will just agree to whatever a player asks for, and that''s the way it should be. Grant Holt''s agent (not GH himself - we don''t know what he thinks really) said that the reason this all started was because he approached McNally for more money and McNally said that other player''s contracts needed to be sorted first. Absolutely right! There were other players whose contracts were expiring for example - OF COURSE these players should take priority when Grant Holt has a contract in place for the next 2 years anyway! Was McNally supposed to put Drury''s future on hold, for example, just because Lee Payne is whinging about wanting more money? Of course not! Lee Payne is an opportunistic little so-and-so. If he asks for too much money, McNally will of course say no. It sounds like he did ask for too much and McNally''s response that Grant Holt was "too old" was perhaps a bit brutal, but entirely true. McNally was stating the truth (pretty obvious to everyone) that Grant Holt''s value IS less because of his age. The same for every player - as they get older, their value diminishes as they are more susceptible to injury and tiredness, cannot play as many games (Grant can now, but how about in 2 years?) and has no sell-on value. Lee Payne is stupid if he can''t see that.All that said, I am completely with you when you say that life at Norwich will go on with or without Grant Holt, and the club is bigger than one player. Maybe someone should tell Lee Payne that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, life will go on without Grant Holt, but I fear it will be in the Championship. Charlton fans said life would go on without Curbishley etc etc......

Be careful what you wish for !!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting read in the guardian here http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2006/sep/21/sport.comment4

''Sadly, some agents give us all a bad name''

Lee Payne
Player-turned-agent whose stable includes Ben Foster, Paddy Kenny and Stephen Ireland

I''m very conscious of how football agents are being perceived right now. My little girl''s at school and her friends sometimes ask her what her dad does for a living. After the last few days I almost feel like telling her to say anything but a football agent.

My playing career was finished through injury but I have been with Luton, Barnet, Newcastle, Reading and I had six years in Holland. My dad was a non-League manager and, when I stand opposite a chief executive and we talk business, I feel like I''ve earned the right to be there. But I look at some agents and I wonder what right they have to be involved. These people have no football background, they were probably selling double glazing last year.

The problem is that everyone gets tarred with the same brush. I just want to get the message across that there are plenty of honourable agents out there.

I''ve been in this business for 10 years and I keep a clean ship. I''m far from alone. I''ve dealt with Sam Allardyce and he was very professional. There was never a question of him wanting to be "looked after". I''ve done deals with Harry Redknapp, too - I helped take Svetoslav Todorov to West Ham and then Portsmouth - and, again, he was a joy to work with. There was never a question of a bung. But sadly, some agents give us all a bad name.

"But sadly, some agents give us all a bad name" I think Payne is certainly one of those agents.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haha, that''s a very interesting and ironic article! Does make me suspicious that perhaps Spammers have already agreed a contract with Holt, hence why when we offered him a new one he wasn''t interested!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has to be a compromise. He wants the security of a third year, while we do not want to be saddled by a highly paid but less efficient durig that year.

 

Solution:

Offer two yerars as at the moment PLUS a third year with redcued terms but large performance bonuses, so if he delivers the goods, fine, but if it is beyond him by then we are liable for a slightly reduced wage bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That article is from 2006  how did you stumble upon that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To quote West Ham (£140m in debt at the last count) and Portsmouth who are both basket cases as examples of his involvement, was perhaps not his wisest choice.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...