You can't buy a player's registration without both him and his current club signing off on it.

I would have thought that much was obvious, but clearly it wasn't. We only have the right to get Vela for practically nothing if he wants to come here.

By all accounts, Vela wants out of Sociedad. If he thinks achieving that is easier by going through the middle-man of Arsenal then he'll go along with it. It's as simple as that really.

To be clear, Klaus et, I was responding to Evoh's claim Vela could command a premium on his wages from Arsenal due to his low transfer fee. I do not believe that this is possible because we face a transfer fee that is 10 - 15m pounds less than what other clubs would face. The other clubs are less likely to spend 10 - 15m pounds more than us on his registration and then outspend us on his wages. If all clubs faced a 3m pound transfer fee, then there would be heightened competition for his registration. He could then pocket this premium in the form of higher wages or a signing bonus

In the worst scenario: even if they were willing to outspend us on his wages, the 10 million pound difference means that we can pay 40,000 pounds extra a week over a 5 year contract to face the same cost-to-company as them.

The Fabregas case is less clear. The types of clubs that could go for Fabregas would be willing to pay anything in transfer fees and anything in wages. He is a guy who United could pay 200- 250 pounds a week comfortably to solve their midfield risis

This whole deal is weird...

Kike Marin** ‏@Kike_Marin_ 35 min
Vela, en el vestuario de la #RealSociedad "Si hace falta, me quedo en el #Arsenal hasta el mercado de invierno y luego ficho por otro club".

No it's not wierd. Arsenal don't want him. Maybe clubs don't want to pay 30m for Vela but rather pay 18-22 million. If we buy-him back and sell him than we stand to make a bigger profit at the 18-22m amount solely to us rather than half of the 30m. Why would we do that now? Well he'd be a free agent in 1 year and then we would get nothing.

Yes but I'm guessing Vela has no real interest in whether or not we make any money. Also, if we buy Vela and he's shit or doesn't play then I can guarantee you no one will buy him for 18-22m.

Not a fan of all these buy back clauses. Just seems to complicate things and probably favours the wealthier clubs

The loan system needs revamping too

Rumored to be on his way to Atletico Madrid. Seriously what's the point of inserting clauses when you are not going to use them.

DelhiGooner87 wrote:

Rumored to be on his way to Atletico Madrid. Seriously what's the point of inserting clauses when you are not going to use them.

Because we don't really need him? There's a sell on clause anyway, so we'll make money if he moves.

Good that we're not singing him just because he has the clause, we wouldn't look twice at him otherwise. Hopefully we get some good money out of it.

Ricky1985 wrote:

Good that we're not singing him just because he has the clause, we wouldn't look twice at him otherwise. Hopefully we get some good money out of it.

Why not? :confused: He's been fantastic for Sociedad and now the La Liga champions are after him.

Vela has developed into a really good player. If we have severe financial restrictions this summer, I think we should hang on to him and maybe sell Podolski.

This one is a no-brainer, if only as an arbitrage opportunity

Ron Burgundy wrote:

Ricky1985 wrote:

Good that we're not singing him just because he has the clause, we wouldn't look twice at him otherwise. Hopefully we get some good money out of it.

Why not? :confused: He's been fantastic for Sociedad and now the La Liga champions are after him.

Because he doesn't fit into our formation. He's can't play centre forward here and he's not the sort of wide man Wenger would usually go for, and, unlike Walcott, for example, he's not got the athleticism or mobility worth making a exception for. We all know what Vela's about even if he has improved and developed since leaving. Atletico can find a space for him off of a striker, we can't. It's right wing and nowhere else here, and, in my opinion, he's far from an ideal player for us in that position.

Claudius wrote:

evoh wrote:

We have a clause, but the clause isn't a handgun against Vela's head. He has to want to sign a contract here, that will come at a premium due to his low fee.

not at all true.
the low fee is available only to us. so, if for example we bought him for 3.5m pounds and offered him 5m pounds a year for 3 years, we would face a total cost of 18.5m pounds
if United were to buy him, they might have to pay 18.5m pounds just for his registration.
given this, he has little bargaining power over us wrt his wages.

The lack of fee to sociedad will allow him to command a bigger wage or fee from us and he doesn't have to sign here, we just have the option to offer him a contract for a set price. I doubt his agent would be mug enough to not get a substantial fee from the fact we would only have to pay £4m for the player's registration papers.

Please explain how he gets more money from us? I'm not at all understanding. We gave no competition at this low price.

Sagna gets a big salary because he is available for zero bucks to City AND P.S.G AND United, etc. We don't have to outbid anyone for Vela's services.

Claudius wrote:

Please explain how he gets more money from us? I'm not at all understanding. We gave no competition at this low price.

Sagna gets a big salary because he is available for zero bucks to City AND P.S.G AND United, etc. We don't have to outbid anyone for Vela's services.

Because Vela still has to agree to a contract. His agent knows that we'd be picking him up for peanuts, so he'll ask for big wages or a big signing on fee. In the same way that free agents often get bumper wages because there is no transfer fee, and thus the overall expenditure of the buying club is greatly diminished.

If we don't want to do that, Vela's agent can play hardball by refusing our contract offer and threatening to leave on a free next summer when his contract expires. Leaving on a free means that we don't get any money, since the sell on fee wouldn't be activated.

There is a reason very few players ever get to free agency. The risk isn't worth it. Players would rather have a contract in hand. You can always extend and renegotiate the wage. Ask Ramsey.