The Daly Cherrygraph

Where Galvin lands will tell the tale. My bet is the Bulldogs. What has mucked up DCE is that Manly offered him 750K per season for 2 years so the Rorters can’t register a contract for less than that. So it’s likely that managing the cap is an issue for them.
Here you go @Thewestisbest - in the other thread someone posted a grab about the NRL valuing DCE at $400k, which you seemed to agree with, because you quoted it as an example of why Galvin's market value is what the Tiger's offered him.

What say you now then? According to the above, his market value is actually $750k because that's what Manly offered him.
 
Here you go @Thewestisbest - in the other thread someone posted a grab about the NRL valuing DCE at $400k, which you seemed to agree with, because you quoted it as an example of why Galvin's market value is what the Tiger's offered him.

What say you now then? According to the above, his market value is actually $750k because that's what Manly offered him.


The way I understand it if we signed DCE for $700,000 because of the long serving rules there is a $300,000 discount.
If any other club signs him for $700,000 than that's what he is valued at, other clubs can't claim he has signed for $400,000
I don't think they can claim under $700,000 as that what the NRL value him at.
 
The way I understand it if we signed DCE for $700,000 because of the long serving rules there is a $300,000 discount.
If any other club signs him for $700,000 than that's what he is valued at, other clubs can't claim he has signed for $400,000
I don't think they can claim under $700,000 as that what the NRL value him at.
This is on the NRL site so can be checked but from memory a long serving NRL player can still get the discount, his seasons don't all have to be at the same club.
On the other hand it's only 300k per club, not per player (again from memory).
 
The way I understand it if we signed DCE for $700,000 because of the long serving rules there is a $300,000 discount.
If any other club signs him for $700,000 than that's what he is valued at, other clubs can't claim he has signed for $400,000
I don't think they can claim under $700,000 as that what the NRL value him at.
You'll find that that long service salary cap discount doesn't apply solely to DCE, it applies to the total salary cap of the club and probably already used by the club to upgrade another player
 
This is on the NRL site so can be checked but from memory a long serving NRL player can still get the discount, his seasons don't all have to be at the same club.
On the other hand it's only 300k per club, not per player (again from memory).
I was under the impression that his service would have to be with just one club
 
I was under the impression that his service would have to be with just one club

Veteran and Developed Player Allowance​


Veteran and Developed Player Allowance for eligible players who were either developed by the club prior to becoming NRL players and/or have been a Top 30 player for at least 8 years at the club or have been a Top 30 player for at least 10 years across the game.

 
The way I understand it if we signed DCE for $700,000 because of the long serving rules there is a $300,000 discount.
If any other club signs him for $700,000 than that's what he is valued at, other clubs can't claim he has signed for $400,000
I don't think they can claim under $700,000 as that what the NRL value him at.
So is it possible that Manly offered him that 2 year $750K deal to fu*k him over elsewhere so that they (as in rorters) can't sign him on some bullsh*t $300-400K deal with all the rorting 3rd party deals behind it ?? If so it's a master stroke.
 
Here you go @Thewestisbest - in the other thread someone posted a grab about the NRL valuing DCE at $400k, which you seemed to agree with, because you quoted it as an example of why Galvin's market value is what the Tiger's offered him.

What say you now then? According to the above, his market value is actually $750k because that's what Manly offered him.
No. I said fair market value was a rule supposedly policed by the NRL
Let's see who he signs with and for how much. That will be very telling. I also said the NRL were not usually impartial when applying the rule. Glen Stewart is the example I used. The article shows that there is a fair market value placed on players by the NRL. You asked for evidence of the rule, no?

I hope this helps your confusion
 
No. I said fair market value was a rule supposedly policed by the NRL
Let's see who he signs with and for how much. That will be very telling. I also said the NRL were not usually impartial when applying the rule. Glen Stewart is the example I used. The article shows that there is a fair market value placed on players by the NRL. You asked for evidence of the rule, no?

I hope this helps your confusion
I'm not confused biff, I'm simply asking you to explain exactly how it works, since you're all over the place telling us all how it works, & taking others who disagree with you task.

It's plain you DKS about the NRL's market value process.
 
I could be wrong but the $400K base cap limit for DCE that Danny Weidler speculated would apply to Manly or any other club that signs him I'm sure doesn't relate to the Long Service Allowance (or not all of it).
Reading his article the $400K was based on comparing DCE's future contract value to the recent NRL valuing of Ben Hunt (at 35yrs) at $650K. A bit tricky depreciating a player's value because they'll be 37 next year yet are still 'marquee' enough to be captaining their State.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

2020 Ladder

Team P W D L PD Pts
1 Bulldogs 10 9 0 1 110 20
2 Warriors 10 8 0 2 5 18
3 Raiders 11 8 0 3 64 16
4 Storm 10 6 0 4 135 14
5 Sharks 11 7 0 4 70 14
6 Sea Eagles 10 5 0 5 38 12
7 Rabbitohs 11 6 0 5 -52 12
8 Cowboys 10 4 1 5 -32 11
9 Broncos 11 5 0 6 42 10
10 Dragons 10 4 0 6 -11 10
11 Roosters 10 4 0 6 -46 10
12 Tigers 11 5 0 6 -54 10
13 Panthers 10 3 1 6 -2 9
14 Dolphins 11 4 0 7 6 8
15 Knights 10 3 0 7 -74 8
16 Eels 10 3 0 7 -99 8
17 Titans 10 3 0 7 -100 8
Back
Top Bottom