Market value of the whole squad for European clubs.

Market Value

Market value of the whole squad for European clubs. Figures from Transfermarkt.

BARCELONA = 579.000.000 €

REAL MADRID = 542.000.000 €

MANCHESTER CITY = 467.000.000 €

MANCHESTER UNITED = 417.000.000 €

CHELSEA = 381.000.000 €

BAYERN MUNICH = 359.950.000 €

ARSENAL = 310.250.000 €

TOTTENHAM = 269.500.000 €

AC MILAN = 266.300.000 €

JUVENTUS = 248.700.000 €

INTER = 246.900.000 €

LIVERPOOL = 235.000.000 €

PORTO = 210.000.000 €

PARIS SAINT-GERMAIN = 206.600.000 €

NAPOLI = 194.200.000 €

VALENCIA = 180.000.000 €

DORTMUND = 179.750.000 €

ATHLETICO MADRID = 173.000.000 €

BENFICA = 162.800.000 €

ROMA = 160.275.000 €

LYON = 152.200.000 €

EVERTON = 150.500.000 €

ZENIT ST. PETERSBURG = 144.400.000 €

VILLARREAL = 142.600.000 €

MARSEILLE = 140.650.000 €

SHALKE = 140.450.000 €

SHAKHTAR DONETSK = 139.450.000 €

CSKA MOSCOW = 137.800.000 €

LEVERKUSEN = 137.000.000 €

SPORTING LISBON = 136.100.000 €

NEWCASTLE = 134.500.000 €

FENERBAHCE = 128.050.000 €

ATHLETICO BILBAO = 128.000.000 €

ASTON VILLA = 125.750.000 €

FIORENTINA = 124.525.000 €

GALATASARAY = 122.300.000 €

SEVILLA = 120.200.000 €

LILLE = 119.750.000 €

MALAGA = 117.500.000 €

BESIKTAS = 117.200.000 €

UDINESE = 115.800.000 €

SUNDERLAND = 114.250.000 €

DYNAMO KIEV = 104.200.000 €

GENOA = 101.100.000 €

WOLFSBURG = 99.300.000 €

FULHAM = 98.250.000 €

STUTTGART = 97.900.000 €

AJAX = 97.350.000 €

STADE RENNES = 95.550.000 €

LAZIO = 95.075.000 €

---

Cut off = 95 millon €

Post below if you want me to add any more clubs to this list. However, I did search almost every European league. Any club not on here has a squad worth less than 95m €.

Wow. Barcelona is almost worth four Bayer Leverkusens. In view of that a 1:3 is not so bad at all

rwo power wrote:Wow. Barcelona is almost worth four Bayer Leverkusens. In view of that a 1:3 is not so bad at all

:lol!:

Barca is worth over 2x Milan, yet we managed a 5-4 aggregate from our group stage matches.

What this chart proves is that money can buy you titles, but that it does not necessarily mean that your squad is better than a squad below it on the money list. Eg. very few would argue that Everton has a better squad than Lazio, yet Everton's squad is worth about 55m € more than Lazio.

Man City more than 2 times Napoli.

Another fun stat: 1 Messi is more worth than 1 Wolfsburg. XD
(And that despite Magath's buying spree)

Transfermarkt

Another stat, this time truly tragic: For 1 Barca you can buy 128 RWOs! (that's no typo)

By market value you mean how much the players cost the club?

Because to me 'market value' of a team means how much the players would sell for if they were to be sold. Or in other words how much that squad is currently worth, which in this instance is not a fair representation of that.

The transfermakt market value is indeed what the players are worth if sold. They calculate a value from last transfer fees over the performance and standing and interest of (big) clubs to length of contract there.

El Chelsea Fuerte wrote:By market value you mean how much the players cost the club?

Because to me 'market value' of a team means how much the players would sell for if they were to be sold. Or in other words how much that squad is currently worth, which in this instance is not a fair representation of that.

Yes, I think you are right. Transfermarkt estimates the value based on what the player will sell for, not what were paid for him.

rwo power wrote:The transfermakt market value is indeed what the players are worth if sold. They calculate a value from last transfer fees over the performance and standing and interest of (big) clubs to length of contract there.

Well that's a pretty poor way to go about it then because if you're telling me Chelsea's squad is the fifth most valuable in the whole world...well then you have problems.

This type of analyzes is ridiculous anyways because it's all based on guesses and estimates. There's no way you can get anything close to something concrete because you can't use facts.

rwo power wrote:The transfermakt market value is indeed what the players are worth if sold. They calculate a value from last transfer fees over the performance and standing and interest of (big) clubs to length of contract there.

They're guesses. Nothing more.

McClean, James 1.500.000 €

RedOranje wrote:

rwo power wrote:The transfermakt market value is indeed what the players are worth if sold. They calculate a value from last transfer fees over the performance and standing and interest of (big) clubs to length of contract there.

They're guesses. Nothing more.

Educated guesses. They don't just make this stuff up. Admittedly some figures are very dodgy though. Eg. Essien = 33m € !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Torres is Chelsea's most valuable at 35m €. Mata is 34m €.

CL round of 16:

BARCELONA = 579.000.000 € vs LEVERKUSEN = 137.000.000 €

REAL MADRID = 542.000.000 € vs CSKA MOSCOW = 137.800.000 €

AC MILAN = 266.300.000 € vs ARSENAL = 310.250.000 €

CHELSEA = 381.000.000 € vs NAPOLI = 194.200.000 €

LYON = 152.200.000 € vs APOEL = 14.950.000 €

BAYERN MUNICH = 359.950.000 € vs BASEL 48.300.000 €

MARSEILLE = 140.650.000 € vs INTER = 246.900.000 €

ZENIT ST. PETERSBURG = 144.400.000 € vs BENFICA = 162.800.000 €


Teams in bold are the squads worth less.

Teams in bold and underlined not on the +95m list.

Stoke City-92.750.000 €

Forza Rossoneri wrote:Educated guesses. They don't just make this stuff up. Admittedly some figures are very dodgy though. Eg. Essien = 33m € !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Torres is Chelsea's most valuable at 35m €. Mata is 34m €.

Educated guesses, you say?

Apart from Torres being supposedly our most valuable player, I don't think any team will be willing to splash £30m for Torres.

All these values are based more or less on how much these players cost when they initially came, which is why Chelsea is so high up the list. Most of those guys that Chelsea bought for a big sum are over 30 and/or in decline now. Not even worth £20m.

El Chelsea Fuerte wrote:

Forza Rossoneri wrote:Educated guesses. They don't just make this stuff up. Admittedly some figures are very dodgy though. Eg. Essien = 33m € !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Torres is Chelsea's most valuable at 35m €. Mata is 34m €.

Educated guesses, you say?

Apart from Torres being supposedly our most valuable player, I don't think any team will be willing to splash £30m for Torres.

All these values are based more or less on how much these players cost when they initially came, which is why Chelsea is so high up the list. Most of those guys that Chelsea bought for a big sum are over 30 and in decline now. Not even worth £20m.

Not defending them, that's a horrible estimation, just saying that they didn't pull that figure out of thin air. If Chelsea plaid 50m for him, their algorithms probably can't deduct any more than 20m over a year to keep up with how crap he is playing.

Forza Rossoneri wrote:

El Chelsea Fuerte wrote:

Forza Rossoneri wrote:Educated guesses. They don't just make this stuff up. Admittedly some figures are very dodgy though. Eg. Essien = 33m € !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Torres is Chelsea's most valuable at 35m €. Mata is 34m €.

Educated guesses, you say?

Apart from Torres being supposedly our most valuable player, I don't think any team will be willing to splash £30m for Torres.

All these values are based more or less on how much these players cost when they initially came, which is why Chelsea is so high up the list. Most of those guys that Chelsea bought for a big sum are over 30 and in decline now. Not even worth £20m.

Not defending them, that's a horrible estimation, just saying that they didn't pull that figure out of thin air. If Chelsea plaid 50m for him, their algorithms probably can't deduct any more than 20m over a year to keep up with how crap he is playing.

Hence the list is a waste.

El Chelsea Fuerte wrote:

Forza Rossoneri wrote:

El Chelsea Fuerte wrote:

Forza Rossoneri wrote:Educated guesses. They don't just make this stuff up. Admittedly some figures are very dodgy though. Eg. Essien = 33m € !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Torres is Chelsea's most valuable at 35m €. Mata is 34m €.

Educated guesses, you say?

Apart from Torres being supposedly our most valuable player, I don't think any team will be willing to splash £30m for Torres.

All these values are based more or less on how much these players cost when they initially came, which is why Chelsea is so high up the list. Most of those guys that Chelsea bought for a big sum are over 30 and in decline now. Not even worth £20m.

Not defending them, that's a horrible estimation, just saying that they didn't pull that figure out of thin air. If Chelsea plaid 50m for him, their algorithms probably can't deduct any more than 20m over a year to keep up with how crap he is playing.

Hence the list is a waste.

Only for players bought at hugely inflated prices. Otherwise it provides a good general idea of squad value.

algorithms my ass lol, they list pablo at 12 mil euros

anyway the entire concept of "market value" before the actual sale is bullshit, read a book on economics...

che wrote:algorithms my ass lol, they list pablo at 12 mil euros

anyway the entire concept of "market value" before the actual sale is bullshit, read a book on economics...

That's why they also factor in bids that are made for the players, exit clauses and even what fees are usually paid per league (this English players often have a way higher market value than similar BL players etc).

Interestingly the transfermarkt market values are taken as basis by several sports magazines (print & TV) by now, so you can imagine that via this they might even influence the market value (due to the usual economic processes).

rwo power wrote:
That's why they also factor in bids that are made for the players, exit clauses and even what fees are usually paid per league (this English players often have a way higher market value than similar BL players etc).

no they don't, they pull numbers out of their asses

if they factored in bids and contract length lass freaking diarra wouldn't be rated at 15 million... same with release clauses, banega recently signed a contract that increased both buyout and contract length and his "market value" didn't move a single cent

transfermarkt is good for finding out which players are about to run out of contract, that's about it

che wrote:no they don't, they pull numbers out of their asses

if they factored in bids and contract length lass freaking diarra wouldn't be rated at 15 million... same with release clauses, banega recently signed a contract that increased both buyout and contract length and his "market value" didn't move a single cent

Well, I actually have followed quite some of the market value revaluation discussions and they tend to be long and hard fought with quite a heap of arguments pro and against any changes. It usually takes several weeks until a proper consensus is found, so you can't expect fast adjustments. To say "they pull numbers out of their asses" is not exactly true. Moreover, transfermarkt.de is the main site, so the market value for Bundesliga players takes precedence of course and these are usually discussed before any others.

well yeah that makes sense, if they take bundesliga valuations seriously... but some of the numbers for la liga players are beyond ridiculous, i can't even being to imagine the thought process behind some of these values

I'd say things for other leagues but the Bundesliga are far more guesswork. It will probably change if the site gets more members that are closer involved in the other leagues and thus can react faster and with more input from the sources there. After all, the market evaluations live from the amateur experts of the leagues and what they gather from press conferences, club websites and publications in internet and on paper. If there would be more people taking part in the discussions that closely follow the markets in the other leagues but the BL, the market values there would be more accurate, too.