Jump to content

Pedro Gonçalves


Delphinho123

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, picicata said:

He didn't have 'a go' he asked for proof of your assertion

 

3 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

So you would advocate that the club should just pay twice what they think a player is worth?

all im saying they wont let go for lower than release clause thats what its for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AshVilla said:

68m is madness.

 

Oh, it's not "madness." It's market. Take £30M off, and I'd say it's just about fair. But all the Boehly-Saudi PIF-Nasser Al-Khelaifi-petroclub money has distorted the price points. This is precisely what many have predicted. Clubs without those resources who are edging into the top of the table -- like us and Brighton -- really face messed up prices. Did you think all that was going to stop this summer because we made the Conference league?

Edited by Marka Ragnos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, beachboys1 said:

 

all im saying they wont let go for lower than release clause thats what its for

It isn't really.  Lots of Spanish players get sold for well under their release clause.  Sometimes it is there just to put other teams off.  Sometimes it is there as a kind of insurance policy - this player might turn into the next Messi so we need to make sure that IF he does then we get a good deal.  Sometimes I am sure it is just there as an ego booster - we're buying you for £5m but hey we think you could be a £60m player.  It's a bit like going into a carpet shop on holiday and the guy saying "This is top quality.  I can do you a special deal for just £5k."  You counter with £1k and both of you know that the selling price is going to be around £2.5k.  Every now and again the seller will get lucky and someone will pay the full amount up front because they really like the colour / pattern. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, beachboys1 said:

 

all im saying they wont let go for lower than release clause thats what its for

Joao Palhinha was sold for £20m by Sporting to Fulham and he had a £50m release clause. They decided to cash in as they wanted to give Ugarte more time. Similar can happen again.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, beachboys1 said:

 

all im saying they wont let go for lower than release clause thats what its for

 Disagree. See posts following yours by allani and sne.

Edited by AntrimBlack
edit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, sne said:

Joao Palhinha was sold for £20m by Sporting to Fulham and he had a £50m release clause. They decided to cash in as they wanted to give Ugarte more time. Similar can happen again.

Can? Yes. Will? Who knows. Sporting sit in a position of strength. While they might sell Gonçalves well below his release in the end, there's no reason for them to hurry when you have clubs buying up players at inflated values all around you. Perhaps Sporting will wait to see what the fishing nets bring in, and then start considering lower offers in earnest? 

I think Gonçalves is exciting and I bet he would work well at Villa, but he's capable of runs of poor form, too. Glad I'm not the one tasked with making these calls lol. It just all seems soooooooooo confusing right now.

Edited by Marka Ragnos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

Oh, it's not "madness." It's market. Take £30M off, and I'd say it's just about fair. But all the Boehly-Saudi PIF-Nasser Al-Khelaifi-petroclub money has distorted the price points. This is precisely what many have predicted. Clubs without those resources who are edging into the top of the table -- like us and Brighton -- really face messed up prices. Did you think all that was going to stop this summer because we made the Conference league?

We have far more resources than Brighton, it's not even close. Likewise Brentfird and Fulham too.

 

Only the Sky 6 + Newcastle have more resources than us and Newcastle's turnover is still lower than ours so both of us have to come up with ways to increase this.

Edited by Leeroy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Goncalves I would also be reluctant to pay the £68m release clause but £45-50m is probably about fair. He's better than Buendia and we paid £38m in total for him. I'd have thought we could break our transfer record to sign Goncalves and if he had a similar impact to Fernándes at Man Utd it would be worth it. His stats are very impressive but it is the Portuguese league.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leeroy said:

We have far more resources than Brighton, it's not even close. Likewise Brentfird and Fulham too.

 

Only the Sky 6 + Newcastle have more resources than us and Newcastle's turnover is still lower than ours so both of us have to come up with ways to increase this.

Newcastle have already done that with their latest related-party sponsorship deals.

We have to come up with genuine ways to increase it, which is a big part of why our fans are being screwed over with the season ticket price rises.

Villa live, hosting shows, increased box capacity, more hospitality options, increased seating capacity. Will all help, but fundamentally we'll never close the gap on their sponsorship deals. Even if we made the CL for one season, I doubt we'd get even half what they get from whoever the **** Sela are.

 

Edit: realising we're on the Goncalves thread.... if we can afford €68m on one player,  and still get the other targets we need, I'd be fine with that. But I don't think we can.

If there is genuine interest hopefully we can negotiate it down. Or there might be better value to be has elsewhere, especially using Monchi's knowledge. 

Edited by MrBlack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Villan_of_oz said:

I am all for being a diverse and inclusive club but.... If his calves have really gone will he be of much use to us?

It might be better to spend this amount of money on someone who still has full use of both legs.

Just my opinion of course.

It's a Ç not a C, - it's his complete lack of ointment that we need to worry about. What if he burns himself making a fry up? We'd be f****d!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/06/2023 at 19:19, beachboys1 said:

 

all im saying they wont let go for lower than release clause thats what its for

As other have pointed out, the minimum fee release clause is to protect the player, not the club. Even  If the club wanted to let him go for free, they can.

What they CAN’T do, is decline a bid that matches the minimum fee release clause.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/06/2023 at 03:27, Villan_of_oz said:

I am all for being a diverse and inclusive club but.... If his calves have really gone will he be of much use to us?

It might be better to spend this amount of money on someone who still has full use of both legs.

Just my opinion of course.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/06/2023 at 21:36, Marka Ragnos said:

 

Can? Yes. Will? Who knows. Sporting sit in a position of strength. While they might sell Gonçalves well below his release in the end, there's no reason for them to hurry when you have clubs buying up players at inflated values all around you. Perhaps Sporting will wait to see what the fishing nets bring in, and then start considering lower offers in earnest? 

I think Gonçalves is exciting and I bet he would work well at Villa, but he's capable of runs of poor form, too. Glad I'm not the one tasked with making these calls lol. It just all seems soooooooooo confusing right now.

Which is why we’ve employed the expprtienced Monchi to guide us through the minefield without stepping on a mine. We can’t negotiate the minefield though without going through it. Staying at home behind the lines is always safer but rarely productive I’m afraid. If we want to play the game at a higher level we need to be brave but clever. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â