Vive_La_Villa Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 4 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said: That's paper talk. I've seen €19m and has been said before maybe based on lots of caveats. If we do sign reasonable to assume Monchi bottom dollar special Whatever the amount should we sign any player that hasn’t been good enough or has only shown odd glimpses? You get stuck with a Chambers, Donk type situation. He has to improve a lot regardless of the fee in my opinion. Hopefully he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc1982am Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 20 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: However I have a feeling the whole loan thing was just a way around FFP How does the loan fee get round FFP. Do you mean by delaying the purchase but acquiring the asset? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc1982am Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) . Edited January 9 by avfc1982am 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: Whatever the amount should we sign any player that hasn’t been good enough or has only shown odd glimpses? You get stuck with a Chambers, Donk type situation. He has to improve a lot regardless of the fee in my opinion. Hopefully he does. Many many people on here including me wanted Bailey moved on before end of last season. I mentioned Solanke at Bournemouth that fee was running joke for years and now he's come good I've seen people on here suggest trying to sign him. People wanted rid of Benteke debut season at January only 6 goals then he ended the season with 19 Edited January 9 by Kiwivillan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 34 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: How could anyone want us to shell 25m on him based on what we’ve seen to date just because it’s apparently ‘peanuts’? 25m is still a lot of money. He has to show a lot more before the clubs should shell that kind of money out for him in my opinion. However I have a feeling the whole loan thing was just a way around FFP and we will in fact be signing him regardless. It becomes an obligation to buy once he plays a certain amount of games. So doesn't matter if we want him or not, if he plays X amount of games he'll be signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 22 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said: That's paper talk. I've seen €19m and has been said before maybe based on lots of caveats. If we do sign reasonable to assume Monchi bottom dollar special. As an aside Brighton signed Webster for similar money several years ago. I think Solanke was similar 5 years ago and taken that long to come good. That figure has been chump change in PL for half a decade. Just shows even Watkins fee was incredible business relatively I worry for your sanity if we buy a championship player for £30m at any point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 17 minutes ago, Tomaszk said: I worry for your sanity if we buy a championship player for £30m at any point. I wish we'd got Bowen for £20m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 5 hours ago, CVByrne said: He won't cost £25m though. It's about £25m in total including all the add ons if they're met. We had an option to Buy Coutinho for 30m+ I remember but agreed a fee if 17m. From what has been explicitly tweeted by Gala official twitter (€19.5m buy and €15m possible add-ons) and via other sources. We have a loan fee and conditional triggers to make it obligation to buy OR we pay an additional fee to cancel the obligation. So at the end of the season if we want to buy him bit not at the fee on the obligation then we can negotiate. At this stage it's unlikely he's going to hit whatever the obligations are I would assume. It's probably goal contributions and total number of PL mins or something. I trust Emery and Monchi on this. After a full season of him here and t knowledge of him from Roma. Talking about money in transfers is very boring. If we buy him it's a minimum £23.5m in total. Currently that cannot be justified IMO. We've already paid £4m for him on loan. That's not a terrible deal in isolation at all. But the fact we sold Philogene for a similar fee, who we already owned, will have been on a tenth of the wage and currently is a similar level of player, means I don't look at the loan in isolation and it niggles me. If Zaniolo ever trusts his body again he can be a real player. That could happen in a week, in April, next year or never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 2 hours ago, Taxahunter said: If you compare to Brennan Johnson who was sold to Tottenham for 50million, then 25million is peanutes, and how many of You wanted us to buy him... £25m isn't peanuts. 1 hour ago, gwi1890 said: Makes more sense than when we signed Coutinho when you really take time to think about it logically. Being a better signing/player/whatever than a crap signing/player/whatever means nothing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 44 minutes ago, avfc1982am said: How does the loan fee get round FFP. Do you mean by delaying the purchase but acquiring the asset? Yep. Although I’m no expert. I just heard people talk about it being a way around acquiring players when not much FFP wiggle room for transfer fees. Could be bollocks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 44 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said: Whatever the amount should we sign any player that hasn’t been good enough or has only shown odd glimpses? You get stuck with a Chambers, Donk type situation. He has to improve a lot regardless of the fee in my opinion. Hopefully he does. We'll the club we signed him from tweeted the details of the entire deal. So we have a reliable source for the cost of buying him. The add ons are a lot of money and no idea how easy it hard they are to meet. Often there are bonuses to pay of we win CL or PL etc.. and real ones like appearances, goal contributions etc.. Anyway, unlike Chambers and Donk we have a lot of information about Zaniolo. Monchi sogned him at Roma for the two years he was there. We will have had him for an entire season here at Villa under Emery. If Emery and Monchi don't want him come may he'll be going back to Gala. It's not something I worry about. This isn't Countinho and his mate Gerrard. We have a proper team running the football side at Villa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted January 9 VT Supporter Share Posted January 9 Do we think the decision on Nicolo is being made imminently then? As in this window? It’s what I had in my mind, but if there’s scope to make the decision at the season’s end that wouldn’t be too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 8 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: Do we think the decision on Nicolo is being made imminently then? As in this window? It’s what I had in my mind, but if there’s scope to make the decision at the season’s end that wouldn’t be too bad. All possibilities are open with the lad I think. It's definitely possible we sign him and he's crap. It's probably about the same odds we don't sign him, he goes somewhere else and does really really well and we've tuned him up nicely. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 19 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: Do we think the decision on Nicolo is being made imminently then? As in this window? It’s what I had in my mind, but if there’s scope to make the decision at the season’s end that wouldn’t be too bad. No, there is a compulsory purchase option in the loan deal. Which will become mandatory if certain criteria are met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted January 9 VT Supporter Share Posted January 9 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Tomaszk said: All possibilities are open with the lad I think. It's definitely possible we sign him and he's crap. It's probably about the same odds we don't sign him, he goes somewhere else and does really really well and we've tuned him up nicely. 10 minutes ago, duke313 said: No, there is a compulsory purchase option in the loan deal. Which will become mandatory if certain criteria are met. Yeah I suppose what I’m asking is, is there a sense that whatever the requirements are to make the deal a compulsory purchase, is that imminent? For whatever reason I had 20 appearances in my mind to trigger a permanent deal. I’ve likely made that up. Let’s say we’re close to the number of appearances being met and the permanent deal arrangement is triggered after the January window but before the summer. I don’t know, but I would guess this month might act as a point of no return regarding the deal. Unless we keep him around but don’t play him and thereby posting the decision. Which would be slightly silly, but I suppose it’s a possibility. Edited January 9 by Mark Albrighton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anything11 Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 1 hour ago, Kiwivillan said: That's paper talk. I've seen €19m and has been said before maybe based on lots of caveats. If we do sign reasonable to assume Monchi bottom dollar special. As an aside Brighton signed Webster for similar money several years ago. I think Solanke was similar 5 years ago and taken that long to come good. That figure has been chump change in PL for half a decade. Just shows even Watkins fee was incredible business relatively This makes a lot of sense actually. Clearly they (Monchi esp) see something in him and from what we have seen he is taking it seriously and trying to learn the system. Would have been interesting if some of those early chances in his brief time here went it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc1982am Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 9 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: Yeah I suppose what I’m asking is, is there a sense that whatever the requirements are to make the deal a compulsory purchase, is that imminent? For whatever reason I had 20 appearances in my mind to trigger a permanent deal. I’ve likely made that up. Let’s say we’re close to the number of appearances being met and the permanent deal arrangement is triggered after the January window but before the summer. I don’t know, but I would guess this month might act as a point of no return regarding the deal. Unless we keep him around but don’t play him and thereby posting the decision. Which would be slightly silly, but I suppose it’s a possibility. I don't think there is any chance he goes back this Jan. He's a highly regarded player so I would gather there will have been assurances given to him in order to do any deal. Regardless of how he's currently performed or turns out for us he'll have no shortage suitors. He's on 21 appearances currently so it would be interesting to know what the triggers are for the permanent deal to be activated. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 It's a "conditional compulsory purchase option", the condition is if he plays a certain amount of games then we have the 'option' of buying him for the pre-agreed fee, the complusory element is on Galatasaray's side, they're obligated to let us have Zaniolo if we want him for the pre-agreed fee if the condition is met, so basically we can play him as many times as we want or don't want, we won't have to buy him on a permanent if we don't want to. One might wonder why they agreed to such a deal, well they got a big loan fee, which I think was bigger than most actual transfer fees they get, so either way they're not losing out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 4 minutes ago, useless said: It's a "conditional compulsory purchase option", the condition is if he plays a certain amount of games then we have the 'option' of buying him for the pre-agreed fee, the complusory element is on Galatasaray's side, they're obligated to let us have Zaniolo if we want him for the pre-agreed fee if the condition is met, so basically we can play him as many times as we want or don't want, we won't have to buy him on a permanent if we don't want to. One might wonder why they agreed to such a deal, well they got a big loan fee, which I think was bigger than most actual transfer fees they get, so either way they're not losing out 'Compulsory' and 'Option' kind of contradict each other, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 7 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: Yeah I suppose what I’m asking is, is there a sense that whatever the requirements are to make the deal a compulsory purchase, is that imminent? For whatever reason I had 20 appearances in my mind to trigger a permanent. I’ve likely made that up. Let’s say we’re close to the number of appearances being met and the permanent deal arrangement is triggered after the January window but before the summer. I don’t know, but I would guess this month might act as a point of no return regarding the deal. Unless we keep him around but don’t play him and thereby posting the decision. Which would be slightly silly, but I suppose it’s a possibility. Officially, I think it's still unconfirmed. I think we're signing him. The deal doesn't make sense if he was a loan. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts