Other clubs transfer news (home and abroad)
- Thread starter bluebell
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
-
- Tags
- liverpool
Which they will after they sell the U21 team to themselves to raise the cash.
Yep. Woefully inappropriate bid.
He was underwhelming to say the least
View: https://x.com/DeadlineDayLive/status/1957466048870957397
View: https://x.com/DeadlineDayLive/status/1957466048870957397
They're fucked financially, more with UEFA than the Premier League. They were sanctioned by UEFA a few weeks back after participating in the Champions League and they have suspended fines, squad restrictions and possible future exclusion from UEFA competitions hanging over them if they don't sort their shit out.
The way UEFA's squad restrictions work, they have to reduce their "List A" costs before they can register new players for UEFA competitions. The published documents are summaries of the agreements with the clubs so they don't really define what that means, but one interpretation is the wage and amortisation costs for players registered on their "List A" with UEFA last year v the same costs for their List A players this year. That being the case, they've already got rid of the costs of the players they had on loan last year, and chances are they've got Bailey's wages off the books for the season via this deal with Roma. They probably know the chance of a permanent deal is low, they just need to fix it for next year, and they don't have any offers for a sale. If they hadn't qualified for Europe this season they wouldn't need to bother.
However, losing the loan players from last year and Bailey going out on loan gives them some capacity to bring new players in (possibly on loan rather than purchases, to keep the costs down) and still register them for UEFA competitions.
So for example, if Rashford's loan fee was £5m, just by not renewing his loan they have capacity to spend £5m on a player's wages / amortisation / loan fee and register him for UEFA. That figure then rises with Asencio and Disasi, plus possibly getting Bailey's wages off the books (but they'll still have the amortisation cost).
The precise mechanics are slightly speculative on my part as the full agreement isn't public, but because it talks about reducing "costs" my take is that a profit on sale wouldn't count towards the calculations (at is is NOT a reduction in "costs"), although losing the amortisation charge for the rest of the year would help.
So again, with an example, let's say a player is 3 years into a 5-year contract, he cost £50m and his wages are £5m p.a. His value on the books is £20m and half of that will be amortised this coming season. If they sold him for £30m, they'd make a £10m profit, and save £10m of amortisation for the coming season and £5m of wages. Only the amortisation and wage saving qualify as reductions in costs. So the total benefit, financially, is £10m profit + £10m amortisation saved + £5m wages saved = £25m, but only £15m counts towards UEFA's test.
But it would allow them to buy a new £50m player over 5 years and pay him £5m, or they could pay £15m in loan fees (which is why I think loans in are more likely as they'll get more bang for their buck).
Chelsea are playing the same game (although I reckon they still need to shift a chunk more cost if they want to register all their new signings) and it seems to me that they are also trying to bring in players who weren't at the Club World Cup to help manage fatigue through the season. Villa just have the financial stuff to deal with.
Their wage to turnover ratio is 97%!!!!
Think about that. For every £1 the club receives, 97p goes to player wages! And they have the nerve to cry about selling Jacob Ramsey etc
Arsenal in the market for a forward. Havertz out with a knee injury.
Arsenal have been dealt a significant setback with forward Kai Havertz sustaining a knee injury, casting doubt over his immediate availability as the new Premier League season gathers pace.
The news broke via a tweet from renowned journalist David Ornstein of The Athletic, who reported: “Arsenal forward Kai Havertz set for spell out with knee injury. Assessments on 26yo Germany int’l at early stage so prognosis + duration unclear but #AFC actively exploring transfer market for signing to strengthen attack & provide cover.”
Arsenal have been dealt a significant setback with forward Kai Havertz sustaining a knee injury, casting doubt over his immediate availability as the new Premier League season gathers pace.
The news broke via a tweet from renowned journalist David Ornstein of The Athletic, who reported: “Arsenal forward Kai Havertz set for spell out with knee injury. Assessments on 26yo Germany int’l at early stage so prognosis + duration unclear but #AFC actively exploring transfer market for signing to strengthen attack & provide cover.”
Bit surprised about Richarlison. He's actually been playing well for Tottenham and keeping Solanke out of the team, not that it'll matter if Eze prefers the Arse (to coin a phrase). Frank must really be mustard keen to replace him with Wissa.
They'll just go for another 10, surely?
Grealished. Learned from Pep.
I agree he's a great player but I'm not really sure he's a great signing for them. Odegaard's the captain so are they really going to drop him? If not he'll play on the left, and I think he's a bit wasted there.
The thing about our transfers compared to arsenal is that in general I think some of our purchases are spending money to hopefully stay in the same place. Both of our fullbacks for example, will not likely be short term improvements. We see how the defensive stability has decreased based on bedding in new personnel already.
In the case of wirtz, it's a whole new thing we have to hope works out.
I think arsenal just have mostly focused on having better options. I hope their manager tinkers them to death, but in general there's more continuity there.
In the case of wirtz, it's a whole new thing we have to hope works out.
I think arsenal just have mostly focused on having better options. I hope their manager tinkers them to death, but in general there's more continuity there.
I’d have thought the opposite - all our signings are designed to push the squad on in the long term, but at the potential cost of a short term levelling, whereas a lot of Arsenal’s signings are players close to peak that are designed for quick, short term gain, but will need replaced in 2-3 years.
Obviously Isak & Guehi change that, but up till now Frimpong is our oldest signing at 24.
I agree with that, it's just they are selecting players who instantly improve them and can play much the way they already do in terms of their defensive core.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked