But do you seriously think that makes it 'fuck all money'? Do you think Levy sees it that way? Would we want anyone in charge of an asset we care about to think like that?
If Levy makes a mistake with Harry (*), Gift, or any other potential incomings or outgoings, then it will be an error of judgment, it won't be because he thinks £30m is 'fuck all really', no one should think of such huge sums of money like that. Perhaps you didn't really mean that, perhaps what you meant was '£30m for
x is worth a punt as it could have a great upside both football-wise and consequently financially', which of course can be true of any potential signing, and is why we do indeed sign players on that basis (several of them in recent years and very recently - though of course you can't sign all of them!). Hence whilst for me it remains a very stupid thing to say that €30m is 'fuck all really', perhaps that's not really what you meant.
(*) I've no idea what would be a
mistake with regard to Harry - I can see both sides. Some people seem to be suggesting that it's £100m or zero, but that's pretty disingenuous. Harry immediately makes any team better, including us. 'Better' normally means more chance of success (not guaranteed of course, but more chance). Levy will presumably be weighing up the increased likelihood of increased revenue as a result of increased success as a result of keeping Harry, along with the (albeit slim) possibility of him signing a new contract), versus the £100m we could have now (or in various instalments). Surely that's what business is all about, particularly when it comes to investing in new assets (or disposing of existing ones) - finding a balance of (perceived) risk and (potential) reward that suits your appetite.