User talk:CapitaoPorrada

Welcome!
Hello, CapitaoPorrada, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Matthew_hk  t  c  11:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Hulk
Hello, I'm Matthew hk. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Matthew_hk  t  c  11:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Dude, read in-line citation. It is 40 million euro. Bring your own citation to challenge me.



Hi Matthew,

A few days ago I edited the Hulk (footballer) page and changed the transfer fee from €40M to a higher value. (I can't remember what I changed it to, but it should be €47M). The reason I find that €40M is incorrect is because that just represents the amount Porto was paid for the transfer and Porto only had 85% of Hulk's rights, the remaining 15% belong to an investment fund of some sort.

Here is a source that corroborates what I am saying: http://web3.cmvm.pt/sdi2004/emitentes/docs/FR41313.pdf

This is the official document that FC Porto has to submit to the Portuguese Securities Market Commission. I apologize that it's in Portuguese but it clearly states that the €40M euros are only what Porto was entitled to, the 85% that they owned. It stands to reason that Zenit paid €47M for Hulk's transfer but Porto only received 85% of that amount.

The vast amount of online references to these numbers are in Portuguese though. I hope this helps.

Cheers!

Antonio — Preceding unsigned comment added by CapitaoPorrada (talk • contribs) 14:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * It is not a math question. Porto always announced the total fee they received INCLUDING THOSE WOULD RE-DISTRIBUTED TO THIRD PARTIES, just likes Falcao case, in fact Porto did not own 100% but 90% something, as announced in its detailed financial report. Matthew_hk   t  c  15:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Moreover 40M over 0.85 still not equal to 55M Matthew_hk   t  c  15:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * You're right, 40M isn't 85% of 60M. But the question here is not how much Porto received for Hulk's transfer but how much it cost Zenit. And if Porto only received 40M then it cost Zenit 47M, the 40M only refers to 85% of the cost of the transfer. Maintaining that Hulk's transfer was only 40M is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CapitaoPorrada (talk • contribs) 16:07, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Still you did not understand. Porto had announced the fee was 40 million and it would re-distributed 15% to third parties, not by Zenit paid additional fee to some parties they unknown. Dig out the source you alleged, this is the only rule in wikipedia, no original research and all fact should be verifiable by external source. Matthew_hk  t  c  16:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

"9 million will go to the fund which owned 15 percent of its sporting rights (6 million are to brokerage commission of 10 percent, 3 million will go to the solidarity fund), the remaining 2 million are withdrawn to pay bonuses to Hulk and the agent."

Source: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pt&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Frelvado.sapo.pt%2Fmercado%2Ftransferencias%2Foficial-hulk-troca-fc-porto-por-zenit-438351

And that's how you go from 60M total cost to Zenit to 40M that Porto receives. Hulk cost 60M but Porto doesn't receive 85% of the remaining 9 million (6 million brokerage commissions @ 10% and 3 million commission to the solidarity fund). The club doesn't receive a percentage of an agent's commission, never has, never will.

This idea that Hulk only cost 40M is predicated on the very simplistic view of how much the other club (in this case Porto) received. Sure, Porto only got 40M but Zenit had to pay 60M to get the deal done. Please change the wiki entry. It is incorrect. (Or at least specify that in the transfer Porto received 40M for 85% of the transfer fee minus commissions).

CapitaoPorrada (talk) 16:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to know what your source is that claims that Porto is responsible for paying those extra 15%. I provided you with an official document that Porto has to submit to the Securities Commission stating that they only received 40M and that they owned 85% of the rights to Hulk.

Here is a source where Hulk's manager basically breaks down the deal: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pt&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Frelvado.sapo.pt%2Fmercado%2Ftransferencias%2Foficial-hulk-troca-fc-porto-por-zenit-438351

Here is another source corroborating the above: http://www.publico.pt/noticia/zenit-confirma-hulk-por-cinco-anos-1561561

I don't know how many sources do you need. The fact is that Hulk only gave Porto a 40M return, he cost much more than that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CapitaoPorrada (talk • contribs) 16:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Just read it please:
 * http://www.fcporto.pt/IncFCP/PDF/Investor_Relations/RelatoriosContas/RCConsolidado1T12.pdf


 * For the €40 million, Porto had already included €2,040,000 agent fee and the 15% was included in the ''valor líquido

contabilístico do passe à data da alienação'' of €16.402.000. Moreover, as the quarterly was unaudited Porto may add more detail in annual report.


 * As I mentioned before, the transfer fee Porto announced, were always the total fee. Just like Álvaro Pereira, Porto announced the fee was 10 Million and including to  Cluj (20%) e Avendi (5%) ; Falcao 40 million including da proporção no valor de venda do passe detido pela Natland Financieringsmaatschappij B.V. no montante   Matthew_hk   t  c  17:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

You are wrong. There is nothing in the Relatório de Contas that says that the 40M includes the 15% third party ownership. Either you can't read Portuguese or you are being stubborn and obtuse. Those 16M and change have nothing to do with those 15%. Those 16M and change are how much Hulk cost Porto, so the profit Porto received from buying 85% was 23M and change. The 40M Zenit paid for the 85% minus the 16M and change Porto spent buying Hulk. It's really not that difficult. You are just stubborn.

Please change the wiki entry. You don't own the truth.

CapitaoPorrada (talk) 17:43, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * If you can hack FIFA transfer matching system, you will had a good citation. Either media make up the story of Teodoro Fonseca, or the agent is lying. To refute my opinion, please wait for full audited financial annual report of 2012–13 season, which would be published on October to November 2013. Moreover, i dig out a official Zenit source: "Maxim Mitrofanov: "We`re going to pay 40 million for Hulk" The information about Hulk`s contract that several media outlets published recently is not true. It`s not out of the question that these false news reports were published in the interest of agents who can use them to cover their positions, and ask for artificially high sums, thereby explaining to managers of other Russian clubs why one or another player couldn't be purchased
 * I would believe the agent is lying than Zenit is lying. Matthew_hk   t  c  17:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hulk
You still haven´t proved that Porto paid the remaining 15% from the 40M they received. I´m still waiting.

CapitaoPorrada (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

October 2017
Hello, I'm GorillaWarfare. I noticed that in this edit to Halley's Comet, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:47, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Alert
Again, like I said in the edit summary, join the discussion on the talk page in a constructive fashion; don't continue to revert, which'll just get you blocked. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

The tweets were racist. She even supported white genocide. Do we really need to discuss this?


 * If that's what you think you should take it to the article talk page, that's what the editing restriction says to do. Jdcomix (talk) 12:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Fine, have it your way. The wiki page might say derogatory but you are not fooling anyone. The tweets are quite clear. You can't change reality, no matter how stringent you are to ideological totalitarian methodologies. You just bully people until you get your way.


 * I'm not trying to bully you into doing anything, I just don't want you to get blocked for violating discretionary sanctions (which are universally applied to everyone who edits her article, by the way). Jdcomix (talk) 12:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I didn't know we needed Committee approval for something so glaringly obvious. But I guess that's how it works down at the Politburo.


 * **sigh** it's to prevent people from edit warring, not intended to censor people, and that's coming from someone who opposed the full protection. Jdcomix (talk) 12:46, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Well, I guess it's tough moderating two wiki users with opposing ideas. I just noticed that I wasn't talking to the person that reversed my edits but with someone else that didn't want to see me blocked. Thanks (honestly).