Summer transfer thread, AvB window wrap up pg 1527

[braineclipse]

The comment from them does not end all speculation - it's was a reference to the numerous tweets insinuating we've practically signed him, when in reality his club have indicated they're are not interesting in selling him cheap - hence the reference to his buy-out clause. I ask again - do you think the reported 18-20 (even 15 in some instances) would be enough to prise him away? Have a look at our Modric situation for example

Obviously just guesswork on my part, but a fee not too far off what Chelsea paid for Oscar seems likely to me, a bit less seems likely. 20-22m range perhaps.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

To be honest, what you think matters little in this particular instance - perhaps spend some time re-searching the and you will see how wrong you actually are.

But besides that - Internacional are NOT interested in selling the player (compare to us, for example in informing a suitable offer would see Modric go) but even if they were - his buy-out clause is always a point of consideration, as much as you are attempting to suggest otherwise.

Aside from your clear attempt to antagonise me, what exactly makes YOU the expert? To such a degree you can decree my view is absolutely wrong?

I can only think about things logically.

I own my house, reasonably its worth £300k. The law of the land dictates I must have a buy out clause, over which I have no option but to sell my house if it is met. I choose to set the buy out at £1m. Thats not because thats what the house is worth, its nothing to do with market value. Its what premium I want to receive if I am powerless to stop it being taken from me.

If I choose to sell up and move on, do you suppose I will be looking for £1m for my house? Or am I more likely to look for market value and be happy with around £300k?

I see no difference between that and being a chairman of a football club, setting an prohibitively high valuation of an asset I own in the event I am powerless to stop it being taken from me. Or being a chairman of a football club willing to sell an asset...

And even if his buy-out clause was non-existent - do you genuinely believe we could sign Brazil's starting striker and a rising international star for 18-20m considering what is being paid around for his far lesser 'known' team-mates?

I havent a clue is the honest answer. I dont pretend to know Brazilian clubs and their politics well enough to judge. What I do know is that in football much stranger things have happened.

I also know we as a club have been playing a long game with both Inter and Leandro, its quite possible we are onto a winner (in terms of getting the man).

 

[Daisuk]

So, this Oribe Peralta, plays for Santos Laguna - was on fire yesterday, good movement, good shot, great header. Shouldn't be too expensive. Wouldn't hurt to give it a punt? Edit; Oh, he's 28, thought he was younger. Oh, well, maybe even cheaper then.

 

[ArcspacE]

The above logic assumes 2 scenarios which aren't true to this partucalr context, - Internacional's market value being 1/3 of this buy-out clause and Internacional willing to sell AND willing to sell for that much.

Sorry - but what exactly are you arguing here?

- that buy-out clauses are randomly derrived figures for insurance puprose who bear no significance to the player's value, contract length or similar market conditions?
- that buy-out clases bear no relevance to player's transfer fees/values and are roughly 3 times his market 'value'
- that Internacional are powereless to stop us buying their player, eventhough he still has 4 (four) years on his contract, they have already rejected an earlier bid from us and indicated they will not be letting him go on the cheap (much like we have done with Modric)
- that we would convince them to sell for 15m a player who is easily worth (imv) nearly double that


EDIT: and while on 'logic' - their latest sound-bite should indicate, imv - that our latest? offer has been rather low and we need to (considerably) up our bid. Of course paying 47m is not the aim here, that would be preposterous, even for a massive club

 

[suffolkspur]

AVB clearly want our midfielders to be athletic, with both Jenas and Livermore playing a lot so far.
M'Vila interest wouldnt surprise me. There's more to M'Vila than just defensive play,
he' often put into the limited dm category as most big and black midfielders are, but M'Vila is much more of an all rounder and a complete midfielder.
There are defensive midfielders who do that role better than him, and obviously playmakers that do better than him in that field,
but there arent many who combine the two roles as good as M'Vila.

Thats fair enough then, as i say i didn't know much about him as a player and if he was just a DM i couldnt understand spending that much on him. Rennes chairman has claimed that he has a concrete offer in for him from someone in England so i guess we will see if its us or not. You know anything about his supposed attitude problems?

 

[elyid]

Have a look here, mate

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11675/7978915/Damiao-will-not-come-cheap

Thanks. Though my point was that these stories are not directly from the source so it's possible there is a misunderstanding (in this case Sky Sports just copied an article from the original Portugese publication that reported this)

Has anyone actually heard the quote?

At the end of they day we are taking the word of the Portuguese reporter as gospel - whereas there could be a chance the currency is wrong.

Either way, one ring is def true, if we were keen on Signing him then we prob should have a year or two ago while he was less in the spotlight.

 

[milo]

What exactly is rude about my post - please point it our and I will gladly retract my comment and apologise?

Do I have to accept what posters say they think eventhough some of the suggestions are considerably off the mark?

The first sentence of your post is incredibly condescending and confrontational.

To be honest, what you think matters little in this particular instance - perhaps spend some time re-searching the and you will see how wrong you actually are.

It is your opinion against someone else's, what you say is not fact, so maybe a less confrontational approach would be more appropriate.

You don't have to accept what other posters say but you do have to treat them with respect.

 

[Rossi22]

The £47m buyout clause means nothing. I'm not saying we'll sign him but if we do then I imagine it'll be around the £20m mark.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

The above logic assumes 2 scenarios which aren't true to this partucalr context, - Internacional's market value being 1/3 of this buy-out clause and Internacional willing to sell AND willing to sell for that much.

My example had made up numbers, read nothing more into it than the buy clause was way higher than the market value.

The fact that you focused on that suggests you may have missed the point I was trying to make.

- that buy-out clauses are randomly derrived figures for insurance puprose who bear no significance to the player's value, contract length or similar market conditions?

Thats exactly what Im saying. Its is a purposefully high - read unrealistic - valuation of a player. The club HAS to have the buy out, its doesnt HAVE to be reasonable though.

- that buy-out clases bear no relevance to player's transfer fees/values and are roughly 3 times his market 'value'

As pointed out, the made up example I gave was purely that - "made up" its not a mathematical formula.

- that Internacional are powereless to stop us buying their player, eventhough he still has 4 (four) years on his contract, they have already rejected an earlier bid from us and indicated they will not be letting him go on the cheap (much like we have done with Modric)

If I understand the idea of buy outs correctly then IF the valuation is met then Inter are indeed powerless to stop someone buying their player. Funnily enough this is exactly the reason I believe the buy out clause is set ridiculously high

- that we would convince them to sell for 15m a player who is easily worth (imv) nearly double that

In your view he is "easily" worth double that. Your view, not fact. I havent seen enough of the player to judge what I THINK his value is. Fact is neither of our opinions on this matter mean jack sh!t, only those who have a say in how much to sell him for counts. And who knows what they think?

EDIT: and while on 'logic' - their latest sound-bite should indicate, imv - that our latest? offer has been rather low and we need to (considerably) up our bid. Of course paying 47m is not the aim here, that would be preposterous, even for a massive club

So what you are saying is that our reported bid is low and they are sounding off to suggest we pay more? Or in other words, exactly what I posted a page back?

When clubs spout off about these buy out values I think its usually the case they are telling any interested parties "Dont lowball us"

And also that they may not hold us to the release clause value you hold so dear?

I also think if a club is interested in selling a player they will have a more reasonable expectation of what he is worth/what they can achieve for him, that is nothing to do with buyout clauses.

So what you are arguing then, is that you agree with me :lol:

 

[ArcspacE]

You don't have to accept what other posters say but you do have to treat them with respect.

I take my first sentence back - I simply don't believe absolutist points and opinions are gospel and should be taken as such, so pointing out or questioning something as wrong should be a 'right' on this forum, imv

 

[markysimmo]

Emirates Marketing Project sign Jack Rodwell...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Emirates Marketing Project sign Jack Rodwell...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really? Seems like an odd one to me

 

[jts1882]

In Spain the buy-out clause is required by law or at least was a few years ago (I assume it still is). Spanish clubs set the numbers very high, often well above the record transfer fee, to protect themselves from being forced to sell, as Nayim describes. The club has an incentive to make it as high as possible.

I assume the player also has to sign up to the number, so its more what the player will sign than the true market value, as a player is more likely to be flattered and willing to along with it than thinking of his next move. A cunning agent might want to keep it from going too high, but is probably more concerned with boosting wage and his cut then arguing over the buy-out clause.

In the Leandro case, if the buyout clause is £47m it just means they have to sell if we offer £47m. Anything else and its up to them. In practice, I'd expect them to want at least what they got for Oscar, probably a bit higher.

 

[Mumorn]

Rodwell and Sinclair? Gotta buy like for like replacements for Johnson and Barry I suppose

 

[Rossi22]

Really? Seems like an odd one to me

Yep, on Everton's site. Fee agreed, medical today. No word of the fee yet though, probably something silly like £20m.

 

[ArcspacE]

Thats exactly what Im saying. Its is a purposefully high - read unrealistic - valuation of a player. The club HAS to have the buy out, its doesnt HAVE to be reasonable though.

That does not hold true in every instance. We are not talking about some of the Spanish 100-200m superstar clauses here (which apparently are only 'true' to local clubs). Remember - Aguero had his reduced from 60 to 45 not long before his move

So what you are saying is that our reported bid is low and they are sounding off to suggest we pay more? Or in other words, exactly what I posted a page back?

You are suggestting they would agree to sell for considerbly cheaper compared to their valuatioin eventhough they have already dismissed that possibility and even referred to their buy-out clause as reference? I ask again - why would they do that logically, cosidering they don't NEED to sell?

 

[Kingdawson]

Emirates Marketing Project sign Jack Rodwell...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

for real?

 

[Kingdawson]

Yeh just read it and still don't really understand the signing.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

That does not hold true in every instance. We are not talking about some of the Spanish 100-200m superstar clauses here (which apparently are only 'true' to local clubs). Remember - Aguero had his reduced from 60 to 45 not long before his move

So Aguero had an extremely high release clause and it was reduced to a very high one - would this have happened to have coincided with him signing a new contract?

You are suggestting they would agree to sell for considerbly cheaper compared to their valuatioin eventhough they have already dismissed that possibility and even referred to their buy-out clause as reference? I ask again - why would they do that logically, cosidering they don't NEED to sell?

I am suggesting only that the buy out clause is a red herring. That IF a club is willing to sell they will have a much more realistic/reasonable value at which they will do business.

Its quite possible Inter dont want to sell, and so - surprise surprise - they fall back to that prohibitive release clause. In essence "F!ck you, we dont want to sell - so if you want to push it its going to cost a kings ransom"

Its possible their valuation hasnt been met, so they are sounding off to the effect "Put up or shut up". Again, citing a ridiculously high number is "simply saying - put up or shut up"

 

[ArcspacE]

I say again - don't think their valuation of the player is 47m - I do however believe their valuation is considerably more than what we have (supposedly) offered, hence the buy-out clause reminder. They don't need to sell, so they can dictate the price unfortunately.

Aguero updated his buy-out when he re-signed a new deal.