Quite simple really, and not something that remains blurry:
You're holding that there's no such a fixed price - and you're implying further that there could not be such a thing, as it's essentially a relative concept. I say no, it is not.
In detail - you say (if I read you correctly) that even "given targets at specific price points" you can't determine that figure (as it's essentially relating to a scope or range; like a house). But that's just trying to avoid the question: is there a number? or more generally: is there a precise answer? (which the "realistic" stance holds there is; the post modern one holds there isn't, as "all truth are perspective determined", or relative in other words).
I say - no. There is one. If they say "he has 70 mill to spend", the fact that this is a maximum number (like for your house) does not mean it is not realistically determined, or specific: simply the details relate to the maximum circumstances, or maximum particulars. Say: if Messi and Ronaldo are available - we spend 70 mill (that is what I was alluding to in the definition: "if level x appears"). And so on in descending scales, till "how much money you have available to get Grenier, or Sanogo", etc. Each quality level is a particular that has it's realistic equivalent in the "money to spend" column (and it won't help you to try to deny that, as "there couldn't be such a thing as an exact evaluation in advance", or some such objection).
The point is - whether it's 70 for Ronaldo and Messi, or 15 for a DM of AW's choice - there is a number. And that is not ever going to be revealed, not because it doesn't exist, but because it would be a counter productive policy to reveal the number for the club officials, as it would bind them to something they don't need to be tied to. And they don't need to just because no one outside the club has (even in principle) access to the information that would enable them to determine what that figure is.
I'm getting a bit tired of this, Burnsy. Please tell me you understand. đ
