Stevo985 Posted July 17, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) Staggerd payments wtf They're completely commonplace in football. The fees we'll be paying for players like Gueye and Amavi (if we sign him) will be in staggered payments. The £49m Liverpool will be getting for Sterling will be in staggered payments. AFAIK that's how transfer fees work. Edit: Here's an interview with Peter Ridsdale who talks about transfer fees "Today, there are deals going on all the time at that £30m level. The risks are getting higher, though, because a lot of these players haven’t played in the Premier League before and so you don’t really know how they will adapt. "When I did the Rio deal I think I got £13m up front, £13m after 12 months, and £4m dependent on appearances. "I have done the odd deal of £5m, which I did with Aaron Ramsey at Cardiff, which in the end Arsenal paid up front. But it’s usual that it is staged payments. "There are banks out there that are in the business of discounting transfer fees and paying you all the money up front. But they’ll take the view on the risk of the club, the bank guarantee, and add the discount for how many years the payments are over. You could argue in the current climate, that’s the way to go." Edited July 17, 2015 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I don't care that Liverpool are going to get him, to be honest. They're just another stepping stone and a bigger platform than we are to get his big move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YGabbana Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Staggerd payments wtf They're completely commonplace in football. The fees we'll be paying for players like Gueye and Amavi (if we sign him) will be in staggered payments. The £49m Liverpool will be getting for Sterling will be in staggered payments. AFAIK that's how transfer fees work. Edit: Here's an interview with Peter Ridsdale who talks about transfer fees"Today, there are deals going on all the time at that £30m level. The risks are getting higher, though, because a lot of these players haven’t played in the Premier League before and so you don’t really know how they will adapt. "When I did the Rio deal I think I got £13m up front, £13m after 12 months, and £4m dependent on appearances. "I have done the odd deal of £5m, which I did with Aaron Ramsey at Cardiff, which in the end Arsenal paid up front. But it’s usual that it is staged payments. "There are banks out there that are in the business of discounting transfer fees and paying you all the money up front. But they’ll take the view on the risk of the club, the bank guarantee, and add the discount for how many years the payments are over. You could argue in the current climate, that’s the way to go." Thats no good for us though we'd need the money up front to get strikers in. We should tell them to do 1! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 As long as if its the full amount of 32.5 mill i don't care if the payments are staggered or not If any of the payments are performance related i'd be annoyed though but that can't happen in this situation as its a minimum release clause correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 17, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) Staggerd payments wtf They're completely commonplace in football. The fees we'll be paying for players like Gueye and Amavi (if we sign him) will be in staggered payments. The £49m Liverpool will be getting for Sterling will be in staggered payments. AFAIK that's how transfer fees work. Edit: Here's an interview with Peter Ridsdale who talks about transfer fees "Today, there are deals going on all the time at that £30m level. The risks are getting higher, though, because a lot of these players haven’t played in the Premier League before and so you don’t really know how they will adapt."When I did the Rio deal I think I got £13m up front, £13m after 12 months, and £4m dependent on appearances."I have done the odd deal of £5m, which I did with Aaron Ramsey at Cardiff, which in the end Arsenal paid up front. But it’s usual that it is staged payments."There are banks out there that are in the business of discounting transfer fees and paying you all the money up front. But they’ll take the view on the risk of the club, the bank guarantee, and add the discount for how many years the payments are over. You could argue in the current climate, that’s the way to go." Thats no good for us though we'd need the money up front to get strikers in. We should tell them to do 1! No we don't. Because all of our transfers will be staggered payments too. That's not how business works.You don't have to turn up with a wheelbarrow full of £50 notes to do deals. We're not buying players from a high street shop. Telling Liverpool to "do one" would be telling them to do one because of completely standard footballing activities. Edited July 17, 2015 by Stevo985 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Personally find all the Liverpool hate etc. quite embarrassing. Whether we like it or not, they are a "big club" with realistic aspirations of achieving CL football and pushing on for a title challenge with the right purchases - they've been incredibly close recently with Luis Suarez. If Benteke is as good as people here believe (needs a "bigger club" than Liverpool) then the purchases of Milner, Firmino and (assumed) Benteke would be a big push towards a top 4 finish next season. Good luck to Benteke. He provided us with some great goals and a cult figure in one of the more difficult periods of Villa's modern history. Arguably one of our best ever signings. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Thomas Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 How hilarious would it be if he changed his mind like Delph? As Kevin Keegan once said, "I will love it" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Staggerd payments wtf They're completely commonplace in football. The fees we'll be paying for players like Gueye and Amavi (if we sign him) will be in staggered payments. The £49m Liverpool will be getting for Sterling will be in staggered payments. AFAIK that's how transfer fees work. Edit: Here's an interview with Peter Ridsdale who talks about transfer fees "Today, there are deals going on all the time at that £30m level. The risks are getting higher, though, because a lot of these players haven’t played in the Premier League before and so you don’t really know how they will adapt."When I did the Rio deal I think I got £13m up front, £13m after 12 months, and £4m dependent on appearances."I have done the odd deal of £5m, which I did with Aaron Ramsey at Cardiff, which in the end Arsenal paid up front. But it’s usual that it is staged payments."There are banks out there that are in the business of discounting transfer fees and paying you all the money up front. But they’ll take the view on the risk of the club, the bank guarantee, and add the discount for how many years the payments are over. You could argue in the current climate, that’s the way to go." Thats no good for us though we'd need the money up front to get strikers in. We should tell them to do 1! Surely we'll just stagger the payments to the club(s) we're buying the strikers off. Think the point being made is that the staggered payments bit is irrelevant. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Personally i find all the Liverpool hate etc. quite refreshing. They are a "piss pot club" with unrealistic aspirations of achieving CL football and winning the title every season - they' have come close one season in about thirty attempts but Gerrard fell over Fixed 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YGabbana Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Staggerd payments wtfThey're completely commonplace in football. The fees we'll be paying for players like Gueye and Amavi (if we sign him) will be in staggered payments. The £49m Liverpool will be getting for Sterling will be in staggered payments. AFAIK that's how transfer fees work. Edit: Here's an interview with Peter Ridsdale who talks about transfer fees "Today, there are deals going on all the time at that £30m level. The risks are getting higher, though, because a lot of these players haven’t played in the Premier League before and so you don’t really know how they will adapt."When I did the Rio deal I think I got £13m up front, £13m after 12 months, and £4m dependent on appearances."I have done the odd deal of £5m, which I did with Aaron Ramsey at Cardiff, which in the end Arsenal paid up front. But it’s usual that it is staged payments."There are banks out there that are in the business of discounting transfer fees and paying you all the money up front. But they’ll take the view on the risk of the club, the bank guarantee, and add the discount for how many years the payments are over. You could argue in the current climate, that’s the way to go."Thats no good for us though we'd need the money up front to get strikers in. We should tell them to do 1! Surely we'll just stagger the payments to the club(s) we're buying the strikers off. Think the point being made is that the staggered payments bit is irrelevant. Doesnt mean we have to accept it, none of us know how much each payment will be either. We need to put our foot down and get the best deal for us in the long run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightysasquatch Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Heard a rumour that we want Adebayor but only if they pay most of his wages and reduce his transfer fee. Could be one we do late in the day. I doubt he would be Benteke replacement. More an experienced striker to complement the squad. Has deadline day written all over it. I saw an article saying city were still paying him at the end of his first season at Spurs & he was on 170k a week & part of his now 100k a week to. If we can get him down to 80k/Spurs pay 50% & it's under 5m I think it's ok but not as our main striker...which he would want to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 17, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2015 I'm genuinely amazed that anyone is making any noise at all about staggered payments. Firstly it's Twitter of course so nonsense, but secondly as everyone's been pointing out this is standard practice. From an accounts point of view the money is essence ours (whether we get out now or in bits over the next 2 years or whatever) so we can spend it because we will get the money. It'll have no effect on is buying anyone else. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Staggerd payments wtf They're completely commonplace in football. The fees we'll be paying for players like Gueye and Amavi (if we sign him) will be in staggered payments. The £49m Liverpool will be getting for Sterling will be in staggered payments. AFAIK that's how transfer fees work. Edit: Here's an interview with Peter Ridsdale who talks about transfer fees "Today, there are deals going on all the time at that £30m level. The risks are getting higher, though, because a lot of these players haven’t played in the Premier League before and so you don’t really know how they will adapt."When I did the Rio deal I think I got £13m up front, £13m after 12 months, and £4m dependent on appearances."I have done the odd deal of £5m, which I did with Aaron Ramsey at Cardiff, which in the end Arsenal paid up front. But it’s usual that it is staged payments."There are banks out there that are in the business of discounting transfer fees and paying you all the money up front. But they’ll take the view on the risk of the club, the bank guarantee, and add the discount for how many years the payments are over. You could argue in the current climate, that’s the way to go." Thats no good for us though we'd need the money up front to get strikers in. We should tell them to do 1! Surely we'll just stagger the payments to the club(s) we're buying the strikers off. Think the point being made is that the staggered payments bit is irrelevant. Doesnt mean we have to accept it, none of us know how much each payment will be either. We need to put our foot down and get the best deal for us in the long run You don't know that staggered payments may actually be the best deal for the club in the long run. You have to expect that the staff at the club will know what's best for the club and will do everything they can to get it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 17, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2015 I'm genuinely amazed that anyone is making any noise at all about staggered payments. Firstly it's Twitter of course so nonsense, but secondly as everyone's been pointing out this is standard practice. From an accounts point of view the money is essence ours (whether we get out now or in bits over the next 2 years or whatever) so we can spend it because we will get the money. It'll have no effect on is buying anyone else. "This is something I don't understand so I am outraged!!" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I'm resigned to losing Benteke, but I'm surprised that he is considering Liverpool? They couldn't make a CL spot without Suarez and I really doubt that they can do so next season without Sterling and Gerrard - 5th-8th looks about their level. A move to MU (or any other CL team) would make much more sense I also think that Benteke 1) won't suit their style of play and 2) will not be g'teed a place once Sturridge is fit again. I think he thrives on being the main man aand he needs to look at what happened to the careers of Carroll, Lambert and Balotelli once they rocked up at Liverpool As I say, not sour grapes as I'm resigned to losing him but why swap a team that may finish 10th-12th for one that will probably finish 5th-8th? A small progression but I would have thought that he needs CL football at this stage of his career 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I'm genuinely amazed that anyone is making any noise at all about staggered payments. Firstly it's Twitter of course so nonsense, but secondly as everyone's been pointing out this is standard practice. From an accounts point of view the money is essence ours (whether we get out now or in bits over the next 2 years or whatever) so we can spend it because we will get the money. It'll have no effect on is buying anyone else. Yeah, this is what I was trying to explain earlier. Once the deal is done, or in my terms the invoice is raised...the money is in the company and we can spend it providing we can finance it which of course we can. It's like I can raise invoices and pay myself dividends based on the profit calculated from invoice value not necessarily after I've received the money...or at least that's how I'm lead to believe it works. Our limiting factor, as outlined by our manager, is we can spend within the means of financial fair play...so x amount of loss vs turnover maximum or whatever it is. Once the "invoice is raised" for benteke for the full amount, it's a profit increase line and we can spend the amount in full and balance out the profit vs loss in that years accounts. In real business, this would mean if they didn't pay then you would write it off later and post the losses in another year...which would mean I would still have been within dividend payment guideline despite making losses overall due to non-payment. Obviously non payment won't happen in football, because Liverpool would be struck off or something if there was such a thing. At least that's how I'm lead to believe it all works, I am not a financial authority in any means I just have to do a bit of accounting as I'm self employed lol. But my point is, chill out people...once the deal is done the money can be spent...and I think that's what most are worried about, despite missing the point everyone making about this being hte normal way to do business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightysasquatch Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I'm resigned to losing Benteke, but I'm surprised that he is considering Liverpool? They couldn't make a CL spot without Suarez and I really doubt that they can do so next season without Sterling and Gerrard - 5th-8th looks about their level. A move to MU (or any other CL team) would make much more sense I also think that Benteke 1) won't suit their style of play and 2) will not be g'teed a place once Sturridge is fit again. I think he thrives on being the main man aand he needs to look at what happened to the careers of Carroll, Lambert and Balotelli once they rocked up at Liverpool As I say, not sour grapes as I'm resigned to losing him but why swap a team that may finish 10th-12th for one that will probably finish 5th-8th? A small progression but I would have thought that he needs CL football at this stage of his career Good post, if he does end up at Liverpool they'll have change their play to get the best from him. I'm still surprised Chelsea haven't gone in for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I'm resigned to losing Benteke, but I'm surprised that he is considering Liverpool? They couldn't make a CL spot without Suarez and I really doubt that they can do so next season without Sterling and Gerrard - 5th-8th looks about their level. A move to MU (or any other CL team) would make much more sense I also think that Benteke 1) won't suit their style of play and 2) will not be g'teed a place once Sturridge is fit again. I think he thrives on being the main man aand he needs to look at what happened to the careers of Carroll, Lambert and Balotelli once they rocked up at Liverpool As I say, not sour grapes as I'm resigned to losing him but why swap a team that may finish 10th-12th for one that will probably finish 5th-8th? A small progression but I would have thought that he needs CL football at this stage of his career Totally agree with your sentiment, though care very little about where he goes and what he does...if he's shit at Liverpool I won't shed a tear for them and at the same time I don't wish it on Benteke to become a flop at the kop. I can see benteke being dragged off on his few too many "lazy days" at liverplop, to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 17, 2015 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2015 I know it's a massive 'if' but 'if' Sturridge could somehow stay fit, a front 2 of Sturridge and Benteke would arguably be the best strike partnership in the league. It helps that Citeh and Chelsea don't really rely on partnerships, but on paper those 2 would complement each other unbelievably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I'm resigned to losing Benteke, but I'm surprised that he is considering Liverpool? They couldn't make a CL spot without Suarez and I really doubt that they can do so next season without Sterling and Gerrard - 5th-8th looks about their level. A move to MU (or any other CL team) would make much more sense I also think that Benteke 1) won't suit their style of play and 2) will not be g'teed a place once Sturridge is fit again. I think he thrives on being the main man aand he needs to look at what happened to the careers of Carroll, Lambert and Balotelli once they rocked up at Liverpool As I say, not sour grapes as I'm resigned to losing him but why swap a team that may finish 10th-12th for one that will probably finish 5th-8th? A small progression but I would have thought that he needs CL football at this stage of his career Good post, if he does end up at Liverpool they'll have change their play to get the best from him. I'm still surprised Chelsea haven't gone in for him. Yes, he would seem ideal for Chelsea. I'd much rather see him there or at another top 4 club Maybe no CL side has come in for him and he thinks a move to Liverpool (with a suitable release clause) will give him a pay rise and a better shop window. I think it could go either wat for him - either he hits the ground running and is a huge success or he has a run of form like he had for us part of last season and he fades away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts