Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, TheAuthority said:

I can't remember who it was, but someone on Radio 5's "Fighting Talk" was talking about Dian and said, "when he walked out of the shower it was like there were 3 footprints on the floor" 😂

You'd think Dion would just film the homes under the hammer wouldn't you,? 😉🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is presuming the buy back clause means a profit for us, people guessing at £30m+

If rumours are to be believed Man City need him to play games to qualify for a work permit, so I think they are playing a clever game by doing a reverse loan to beat the system

Usually a club would be paying £5m+ for a season loan fee so I think the opposite to most on here thinking the buy back agreement would be under £10m to compensate for the loan fee.

Just a thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Everyone is presuming the buy back clause means a profit for us, people guessing at £30m+

If rumours are to be believed Man City need him to play games to qualify for a work permit, so I think they are playing a clever game by doing a reverse loan to beat the system

Usually a club would be paying £5m+ for a season loan fee so I think the opposite to most on here thinking the buy back agreement would be under £10m to compensate for the loan fee.

Just a thought.

I doubt that very much - but I could see it being neutral (i.e. £15m).

Hopefully not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Everyone is presuming the buy back clause means a profit for us, people guessing at £30m+

If rumours are to be believed Man City need him to play games to qualify for a work permit, so I think they are playing a clever game by doing a reverse loan to beat the system

Usually a club would be paying £5m+ for a season loan fee so I think the opposite to most on here thinking the buy back agreement would be under £10m to compensate for the loan fee.

Just a thought.

I think people just need to forget about this Santa Claus thingy, if he helps us stay up and become a established premier league club again where we can attract our own quality players then so be it. Let’s use them and worry about what ifs later.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Everyone is presuming the buy back clause means a profit for us, people guessing at £30m+

If rumours are to be believed Man City need him to play games to qualify for a work permit, so I think they are playing a clever game by doing a reverse loan to beat the system

Usually a club would be paying £5m+ for a season loan fee so I think the opposite to most on here thinking the buy back agreement would be under £10m to compensate for the loan fee.

Just a thought.

I think it’s probably around £45m and you are all overthinking it because Man City (and other clubs) will all be inserting these from now on. They all already do in Italy and Spain and it’s always a good sum. It’s just insurance for them, but Villa clearly wouldn’t agree to anything that could leave us stuck with a player on a multiyear contract who could snap his cruciate in a week but who we could lose immediately if he does well for no profit. Business works on risk/reward - us potentially being stuck with him if something goes wrong offsets that balance enough that the club clearly wouldn’t stitch themselves up.

If Man City want any of our players, any time, they will take them. Whether we get more or less money for that is irrelevant when transfer fees are such an abstract science anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

i was hoping this would be announced tonight :(

If he really was on the first plane to the US then I’d imagine they would let him settle, and take some press shots and training shots etc.

Or maybe it’ll be a few days waiting on the work permit stuff?

Edited by alreadyexists
Link to post
Share on other sites

We're getting a really good player and if we sell him it'll be because he's been good and we'll make a profit. 

Just like with any other player we buy. The amount of profit isn't important, it's not why any of us follow football.

Great news for us as he's really **** good apparently and he'll be playing for our club.

Edited by HalfTimePost
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HalfTimePost said:

We're getting a really good player and if we sell him it'll be because he's been good and we'll make a profit. 

Just like with any other player we buy. 

Great news for us as he's really **** good apparently

I hope so.

The amount of times i have heard that in the last 20 years though when we bought someone....

sad face GIF

Link to post
Share on other sites

guarePersonale I think it's a sign of improved off field shizzle that it's us involved in this signing. He becomes our player, if he hits astronomical heights then citeh will invoke the buy back. If he's toilet then we haven't got him on a long contract. Most probably he'll be very good but not man city guaranted first team level. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Everyone is presuming the buy back clause means a profit for us, people guessing at £30m+

If rumours are to be believed Man City need him to play games to qualify for a work permit, so I think they are playing a clever game by doing a reverse loan to beat the system

Usually a club would be paying £5m+ for a season loan fee so I think the opposite to most on here thinking the buy back agreement would be under £10m to compensate for the loan fee.

Just a thought.

It's unlikely cause it goes against everything the club has said about developing other club's players. Most likely the buyback clause is substantial so the leaders at the club see it as a financially sound decision. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Adam2003 said:

I think it’s probably around £45m and you are all overthinking it because Man City (and other clubs) will all be inserting these from now on. They all already do in Italy and Spain and it’s always a good sum. It’s just insurance for them, but Villa clearly wouldn’t agree to anything that could leave us stuck with a player on a multiyear contract who could snap his cruciate in a week but who we could lose immediately if he does well for no profit. Business works on risk/reward - us potentially being stuck with him if something goes wrong offsets that balance enough that the club clearly wouldn’t stitch themselves up.

If Man City want any of our players, any time, they will take them. Whether we get more or less money for that is irrelevant when transfer fees are such an abstract science anyway.

Man City rate him highly and are only selling him to us to get around the work permit issue. The buyback will likely be for 15m, they will come back and collect him when they feel he’s ready to play for them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, TheAuthority said:

I can't remember who it was, but someone on Radio 5's "Fighting Talk" was talking about Dian and said, "when he walked out of the shower it was like there were 3 footprints on the floor" 😂

I’ve always wanted to use this word, but I’ve always been nervous about using it wrongly and having the piss ripped out of me. But I think I’ve nailed it.

Dion has a plethora of a giant penis.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting signing.

Pep rates him highly, he'd have been in their first team squad last year if he could've got a work permit. Fully expect they'll be buy back clause in deal.

He has good potential but he wasn't actually a week in week starter for Girona and they got relegated last season. Started one match in 17/18 (came on about 15 times) and started 16 games last season.

Would be gamble for him to be our week in week out DM although think he can also play as CB in a 3 so could be more likely option.

This reminds me of when we signed Tiago Iiori, he'd had a good loan season before in La Liga but quickly faded into obscurity once Garde came in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

I’ve always wanted to use this word, but I’ve always been nervous about using it wrongly and having the piss ripped out of me. But I think I’ve nailed it.

Dion has a plethora of a giant penis.

The plural for penis is Gardner but you nailed 90% of it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

It's unlikely cause it goes against everything the club has said about developing other club's players. Most likely the buyback clause is substantial so the leaders at the club see it as a financially sound decision. 

I know it goes against what the club has said lately, but sometimes you have to make exceptions, I mean I said I’d never date a girl with small boobs but one day I did, and now I’m married to her, you never know how things will pan out 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Man City rate him highly and are only selling him to us to get around the work permit issue. The buyback will likely be for 15m, they will come back and collect him when they feel he’s ready to play for them. 

Ok I think you’re somewhat correct in all your assertions but wrong on price. Anyway if they try to sign him for £15m in a year they won’t get a work permit for him as it won’t be a high enough % of their top transfers and he won’t be on a high enough % of their top salaries. His work permit for us won’t be valid for them, so unless he plays every game for Brazil for the next year their reasons for being unable to sign him won’t change with a £15m transfer.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Adam2003 said:

Ok I think you’re somewhat correct in all your assertions but wrong on price. Anyway if they try to sign him for £15m in a year they won’t get a work permit for him as it won’t be a high enough % of their top transfers and he won’t be on a high enough % of their top salaries. His work permit for us won’t be valid for them, so unless he plays every game for Brazil for the next year their reasons for being unable to sign him won’t change with a £15m transfer.

Thats completely wrong. Once he has a permit he would need another to go back to City. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â