Jesus Garcia Pitarch

[Rob182]

1 hour ago, tomav84 said:

i think that's something that people defending the recruitment need to take a step back and look at. from the signings made, who would we make profit on now?

IMO, the likely profit is FAR less than the likely losses:

wes - NO

trez - NO

guilbert - MAYBE

mings - PROBABLY

luiz - YES

targett - NO

konsa - PROBABLY

marvelous - NO

samatta - NO

el ghazi - NO

heaton - NO - but that's ok cause of his age and worth the money spent for experience

engels - NO

jota - NO

hause - YES

This feels like a short-sighted way of looking at our transfers, because unless we go down, we’re not looking to sell the whole squad. (Also, conversely, if we’d gone down a different transfer route and signed some ageing pros (Cahill etc) and some experienced loans like some people wanted, if we’d then gone down, we’d have probably needed a much larger rebuild with even less money incoming).
 

A better way at looking at things is, how has the transfer worked out for the money spent, and are the players showing signs that they can play at this level.

This wasn’t a one time job of building a perfect Premier League squad. Suso & Co tried the best they could with the money available. If we stay up, that job continues.

I think some of our signings are undoubtedly good enough. Heaton, Mings, Luiz & Guilbert. 
 

Then I think that most of our players are showing that they can play some part in a Premier League squad, and have shown potential at different parts of the season. Targett, Engels, Konsa, Hause, Trez & Wes.

The only players that I think have fallen short of what we expected, are Jota and El Ghazi. (Plus Trez until recent weeks. But his important goals now undoubtedly warrant the £8m paid).

The only other ‘falling short’ player, IMO, is the fee that we paid for Wesley. I’d have expected more from a £25m player. But then again, we played much better when he was around, and his return of 5 in 21 (I think) equates to around 9/10 goals in his first season, had he stayed fit, which wouldn’t have been bad.

So, as I make out, we aimed to buy ‘potential’, and that’s what Purslow talked about in the early season. You’ll never get the finished article when you follow this path, and that’s why some of our players have had spells of poor performances, but I think it’s fair to say that all of the top two lists are good enough to either be first team players or rotation options. 
 

Their value might not have increased yet, but if we stay up, add quality and then these players are allowed to play without as much pressure of relegation (some as first teamers, some as squad options), then their values will reflect that of Premier League players.

[GENTLEMAN]

9 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

If you actually read the article that you yourself provided a link for, you'd see that only £5m extra is a load of tosh:

 

It then goes onto say that this is pure speculation as no details have been released. I cannot see Purslow getting his pants pulled down in any matter that is financial. 
 

If City really want him back, we make a tidy profit, and wish him well. Move on. As opposed to us loaning him, seeing him return to City and paying 2.5million for the privilege. It’s good business for Villa imo. 

Edited July 23, 2020 by GENTLEMAN
Sp

[Nigel]

4 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

If you actually read the article that you yourself provided a link for, you'd see that only £5m extra is a load of tosh:

 

They have made up the values based on the 'substantial' quote. 

'Substantial' is very subjective.

My point is whether its £5 or £10 million its Citys choice whether they want him back, we can do nothing about it.

If hes any good, and we want the player we will have to pay a lot more than 15 million.

[tomav84]

1 minute ago, Rob182 said:

So, as I make out, we aimed to buy ‘potential’, and that’s what Purslow talked about in the early season. You’ll never get the finished article when you follow this path, and that’s why some of our players have had spells of poor performances, but I think it’s fair to say that all of the top two lists are good enough to either be first team players or rotation options. 

 

Their value might not have increased yet, but if we stay up, add quality and then these players are allowed to play without as much pressure of relegation (some as first teamers, some as squad options), then their values will reflect that of Premier League players.

purslow i think also indicated value increase along with potential. and the fact that so few have increased in value is concerning. you are right, that they may increase in value in the future, but from what i've seen so far i don't think many have justified their fees

[Rob182]

5 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

purslow i think also indicated value increase along with potential. and the fact that so few have increased in value is concerning. you are right, that they may increase in value in the future, but from what i've seen so far i don't think many have justified their fees

I think we slightly overpaid for Targett and I think we overpaid for Wesley. Other than that, I actually think the rest will be worth the same, if not more. (Aside from Heaton, who was bought for his experience).

Some players were bought for such a pittance that their value can, in no way, have gone down. Jota, Hause, Guilbert & El Ghazi were around £2m, £3m, £3m & £6.5m.

Many of our players were £8-12m signings. I’d say they’ve all shown potential to play ‘some’ part in a Prem squad, and whether they’ve got a high potential like Konsa, or have just shown for a few months that they can perform to a decent standard, like Engels and Nakamba, Premier League squad players are generally worth £10-20m nowadays, if they’re of a good age and the club has a few years on their contract. None of them will have gone down in price, unless we get relegated IMO, at which point we wouldn’t be getting their true value anyway, because teams would use our league situation to underpay.

[Nigel]

21 minutes ago, GENTLEMAN said:

Liverpool put in a buy-back clause in for Jordan Ibe, who leaves Bournemouth on a free this summer. I believe Barca did for Adama. Iheanacho, Depay reportedly have them. I think they are far more common than 1st perceived. It’s common practice for ‘big’ clubs to insert such conditions. 
 

Besides from my understanding, I still struggle to see how city would gain WP for him just yet. Villa won appeal due to his importance to our team.

They will only buy him back once they can secure a work permit. However the work permit will be granted now as he played most of our games.

The most likely thing that will happen now is that he remains here for the next season (If we stay up) then they will recall him the following year if his value increases (Which it probably will)

The real wounder is that we will be able to buy him, but only at the new value. Its good business from Man City!

About the common practice thing, it is but its only been a recent phenomenon when the loan rules got changed a few years back. 

It will be really common from now on as its such a great strategy for the selling clubs.

 

[tomav84]

1 minute ago, Nigel said:

They will only buy him back once they can secure a work permit. However the work permit will be granted now as he played most of our games.

The most likely thing that will happen now is that he remains here for the next season (If we stay up) then they will recall him the following year if his value increases (Which it probably will)

The real wounder is that we will be able to buy him, but only at the new value. Its good business from Man City!

About the common practice thing, it is but its only been a recent phenomenon when the loan rules got changed a few years back. 

It will be really common from now on as its such a great strategy for the selling clubs.

 

not true. domestic games played counts for nowt when getting work permits. it's largely around intl caps and % of the buying club's record fee. it's how we secured the WP for both luiz and wesley. 15m is a much higher % of our record fee than it is for city

they could buy him back, but will have to ship him off on loan somewhere else

[Nigel]

1 minute ago, tomav84 said:

not true. domestic games played counts for nowt when getting work permits. it's largely around intl caps and % of the buying club's record fee. it's how we secured the WP for both luiz and wesley. 15m is a much higher % of our record fee than it is for city

they could buy him back, but will have to ship him off on loan somewhere else

Yes I agree its not as simple as just the games but I believe that was the main stumbling block with his permit at the time, I may be wrong.

By the time they will want him (next summer) Id reason he will be well enough qualified.

[Zatman]

Just now, Nigel said:

Yes I agree its not as simple as just the games but I believe that was the main stumbling block with his permit at the time, I may be wrong.

By the time they will want him (next summer) Id reason he will be well enough qualified.

We were only allowed sign him along with Wesley and Newcastle with Joe Linton as we paid a high fee compared to our record transfer. Think must be in the top 5 fees. 

If City wanted him now to get a work permit they would have to stump up 40 or so million 

[villa4europe]

42 minutes ago, GENTLEMAN said:

Liverpool put in a buy-back clause in for Jordan Ibe, who leaves Bournemouth on a free this summer. I believe Barca did for Adama. Iheanacho, Depay reportedly have them. I think they are far more common than 1st perceived. It’s common practice for ‘big’ clubs to insert such conditions. 
 

Besides from my understanding, I still struggle to see how city would gain WP for him just yet. Villa won appeal due to his importance to our team.

juve have done it with moise kean to everton too

they were always popular with the Spanish clubs but with FFP and massaging the figures its going to become more popular along with these player swap deals

I don't see what the problem is really unless he goes on to become a £80m world beater that city pay us £25m for and take him back, if that was on the horizon id hope the club look to buy the clause out, or if city ever came after one of our players, grealish for example, we bin the clause off as part of negotiations 

and he still has to accept a contract from city (but lets not kid ourselves that wont happen)

worst case scenario is city take him back in 2 years when fernandinho is finished and Gundogan starts to decline and we make less profit on him than what we could have done

[Nigel]

2 minutes ago, Zatman said:

We were only allowed sign him along with Wesley and Newcastle with Joe Linton as we paid a high fee compared to our record transfer. Think must be in the top 5 fees. 

If City wanted him now to get a work permit they would have to stump up 40 or so million 

The fee is one of a few criteria, but its holds far more importance before many appearances have been made.

Im no expert here but I think these criteria lessen once he has been playing regularly in the league.

 

[VillaChris]

People talk about Mendes but how the hell didn't we sign anyone from Valencia or Atletico Madrid last summer, he actually worked at those two clubs not so long ago!

When we got him as DOF I assumed we'd be a front runner for any decent squad player not getting a game at one of the top 6 La Liga clubs instead of scouting in Belgium all the time.

[tomav84]

15 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

juve have done it with moise kean to everton too

they were always popular with the Spanish clubs but with FFP and massaging the figures its going to become more popular along with these player swap deals

I don't see what the problem is really unless he goes on to become a £80m world beater that city pay us £25m for and take him back, if that was on the horizon id hope the club look to buy the clause out, or if city ever came after one of our players, grealish for example, we bin the clause off as part of negotiations 

and he still has to accept a contract from city (but lets not kid ourselves that wont happen)

worst case scenario is city take him back in 2 years when fernandinho is finished and Gundogan starts to decline and we make less profit on him than what we could have done

exactly. and the clause doesn't last forever. it usually disappears after 2-3 years. chelseas clause for ake expired in jan for example

Edited July 23, 2020 by tomav84

[GENTLEMAN]

5 minutes ago, Nigel said:

They will only buy him back once they can secure a work permit. However the work permit will be granted now as he played most of our games.

The most likely thing that will happen now is that he remains here for the next season (If we stay up) then they will recall him the following year if his value increases (Which it probably will)

The real wounder is that we will be able to buy him, but only at the new value. Its good business from Man City!

About the common practice thing, it is but its only been a recent phenomenon when the loan rules got changed a few years back. 

It will be really common from now on as its such a great strategy for the selling clubs.

 

I am not so sure of this (regards WP) as I don’t see how playing games for us would alter the ruling against his previous failed WP application for Man City, but will cede as I’m no expert in such matters.

Of course it’s good business for Man City. It’s also good business for Aston Villa. It is not a zero-sum game. We’ve negated some of the risk too.

Consider the permeations. We’ve paid ‘15 million’ with buy back clause which is below market value (I would say), he performs very well for 2 seasons, Aston Villa remain in the premier league and push up the table. Man City trigger the release clause. We make a profit (maybe below his market value) and we’re in a better position to find a replacement. Players are expendable, and there are myriad of options available. Or we could potentially negotiate removing the buy back clause this summer for say 15 million. Now imagine he didn’t perform, he didn’t acclimatise, well we’re a damn site more likely to get closer to our ‘15 million’ outlay than his market value we would have purchased him for without the buyback clause. If we had pushed for no buy back clause I’m sure the transfer fee would have been closer to 30 million. Maybe we would have walked away and gone for secondary targets. Maybe City wouldn’t have sold him. Maybe we would have signed him and neglected other areas of the pitch. Say we signed him for 30 million, and he did not perform, does not acclimatise. All the risk is then with Villa.
 

All I’m saying is given the limited information of the deal and when taking a holistic view of our squad depth, prestige level and transfer window post promotion, I’m happy with this deal.

Sure I’ll be disappointed if he is brought back by City in the summer. He playing well atm. I think he’s a good player with great potential, but if he goes, so be it. We take the profit and move on.

[Xela]

6 hours ago, Mjvilla said:

I'd prefer a midfield 3 of Phillips, Luiz and mcginn to be honest.

Me too. 

Grealish, Wesley/Maupay and Benrahma up front

I think that was what Smith was trying to get to but obviously finances couldn't stretch. 

[dudevillaisnice]

Wonder what happens with him now..

[hippo]

6 minutes ago, dudevillaisnice said:

Wonder what happens with him now..

Smith without prompting said he would be sitting down with the sporting director , I assume he meant suso?  From that maybe he is staying

[Demitri_C]

Dont let this guy sign anymore bloody players. He almost cost us big

[DCJonah]

I was angry earlier in the year with him. So much so, that I actually thought he was 2 different people. 

Part of me thinks, why rip things up to start again. If he goes, then so do our summer transfer plans. We can't mess about this summer. I think, as a club, we will learn from our mistakes. 

[KMitch]

I still don't get the slating of Suso here...  We basically had to build a team from scratch while being handcuffed by FFP.  The goal was to survive this season and get the team used to the Premier League.  Mission Successful!

• Wesley - Jury is still out on him.  Shame about the injury, but I still think he'll be better after he settles a bit more in England.
• Trezeguet - Flop.  I still think he's shit, even if he's played decently since the restart.
• Guilbert - Phenomenal signing - We got him in January, in the Championship, when we were out of the playoff picture.  The guy is a Premier League quality player, IMO. 
• Mings - Masterstroke signing on loan - Needed to be signed permanently in the summer.
• Douglas Luiz - I wasn't a fan when the announcement came out, but he's proven to be a great player after the restart.  
• Targett - Great signing.  I love Matty, even with the mistakes he's made.  He'll continue to develop for us.
• Konsa - Made some mistakes this season, but he's good enough to be a rotation option for us going forward.
• Marvelous - I'd throw him in the flop category.  Hasn't done enough for me.
• Samatta - Garbage.  Poor movement and finishing, but it sounds like our budget was limited in January, which made our options limited too.  Let's move him on.
• El Ghazi - Not consistent enough, but we needed to sign him at the price we negotiated because he got us up but we should look to move him on.
• Heaton - Great signing and will hopefully be solid for us next season.  Shame about the injury.
• Engels - Solid signing for the price.  Shame about his injuries, but I think he'll be a good option for the team to have next season
• Jota - Worth the deal for swapping with that waste of space Gardner.
• Hause - I don't think he's good enough for us going forward, but at 2 million, he was a good bargain signing.  We should try to get 3-4 for him this summer.