Lucas Torreira (David Ornstein+Guardian update on page 5)

Gunner89

There are many suitors for Sampdoria's 22-year-old midfielder Lucas Torreira, including concrete interest from the Premier League. Arsenal have contacted Sampdoria about the Uruguayan, who has a €25m release clause in his contract, leading to discussions between the parties. A different transfer fee or payment formulation could be agreed between the two clubs, however. Sampdoria would seem to prefer a club to pay a higher fee (around €30m) over more years, than to pay the €25m clause which must be paid in one installment. Torreira's agents have made their requests known and have asked Napoli to wait until 15 June to allow them to evaluate all the offers: the partenopei are another team who are very interested in Torreira, and have already met with Sampdoria about him.

https://gianlucadimarzio.com/en/arsenal-enter-race-for-sampdorias-torreira-while-napoli-remain-involved-in-talks

BWoolley

This should be a no-brainer at that price. Let's just pay the release clause and force their hand rather than drag it out through the summer. Top quality player.

Klaus

You'd think a higher fee set over more years would suit us perfectly this summer.

BWoolley

Agreed - and we can negotiate that as we go along, but we should at least force the conversation rather than negotiate endlessly between 25 and 30M.

Kel Varnsen

Know absolutely nothing about him. But as long as he's a midfielder, I'd welcome him here and hope he replaces Xhaka.

BWoolley

Hope we can get this over the line quickly.

lorddulaarsenal

Would be great wouldn’t it

DiabyKungFu

Plays like a peak Denilson. World class baller. I hope we get him.

Gunner89

A peak Denilson couldn't tackle, was outpaced by referees and had the sideways passing ability of Elneny so that doesn't sound good.

Don Pacifico

"Sampdoria would seem to prefer a club to pay a higher fee (around €30m) over more years, than to pay the €25m clause which must be paid in one installment."

Bit confused by this - if he has a release clause, surely the fact Samp would prefer more money paid over a longer period of time is irrelevant by the intrinsic terms of a release clause...?

mdgoonah41

Don Pacifico wrote:
"Sampdoria would seem to prefer a club to pay a higher fee (around €30m) over more years, than to pay the €25m clause which must be paid in one installment."

Bit confused by this - if he has a release clause, surely the fact Samp would prefer more money paid over a longer period of time is irrelevant by the intrinsic terms of a release clause...?

there are benefits to paying above the release clause from our perspective. if we are limited in transfer funds this summer, it would be better to pay 30m euros over 5 years instead of paying 25m euros on july 1. and the fact that we can just trigger the release clause means we can probably dictate better payment terms.

Don Pacifico

Fair point. I'd have thought that opens us up to a potential bidding war though.

Ray

Or they could take a loan out and pay that over 5 years.

goon

Hope we get this done, he looks super on YouTube.

Meatwad

whether arsenal pay a fee up front or in installments has no bearing on how his fee is booked accounting wise. that's why they would prefer to pay the fee up front. the club isn't cash poor.

Claudius

Kel Varnsen wrote:
Know absolutely nothing about him. But as long as he's a midfielder, I'd welcome him here and hope he replaces Xhaka.

Watch Egypt Uruguay next Friday. Thank me later

mdgoonah41

Meatwad wrote:
whether arsenal pay a fee up front or in installments has no bearing on how his fee is booked accounting wise. that's why they would prefer to pay the fee up front. the club isn't cash poor.

do we know that is true, that we're not suffering cash wise? swissramble doenst update his blog anymore, but he did a twitter thread on our finances back in march

he didnt seem too troubled by our cash position or anything else, but i havent seen any other analysis. given those results, it would seem odd that we only have a small amount of money to spend this summer.

from an accounting perspective, you are right, it doesn't matter, but from a cash perspective it certainly does.

MistaT

It's not that we don't have cash to spend - we do - but that we're challenged by our large wage bill and the premier league (and FFP) restrictions on wages. In a nutshell, we are struggling to sign players because our wage bill is growing too much year over year. With Ozil's new wages that will continue to limit us, and it's why we are often pushing players out (Giroud/Sanchez) to make room for new players.

Don't see us signing Torreira unless a few more players leave (Jack/Ramsey/Perez/Campbell/etc.). Fortunately we have Cazorla, Mertesacker and a few others off the books.

Bryant

Watch out for Napoli on this. The Sampdoria owner has claimed that the Napoli owner told him that he's waiting for Ancelotti to give him to green light to make the bid.

I think it's going to end up with Torreira deciding which team he wants to play for next.

Meatwad

mdgoonah41 wrote:
Meatwad wrote:
whether arsenal pay a fee up front or in installments has no bearing on how his fee is booked accounting wise. that's why they would prefer to pay the fee up front. the club isn't cash poor.

do we know that is true, that we're not suffering cash wise? swissramble doenst update his blog anymore, but he did a twitter thread on our finances back in march

he didnt seem too troubled by our cash position or anything else, but i havent seen any other analysis. given those results, it would seem odd that we only have a small amount of money to spend this summer.

from an accounting perspective, you are right, it doesn't matter, but from a cash perspective it certainly does.

well even in that ramble thread he posted some graphics that show for the same 6 month accounting period in 2016/17 vs 2017/18 arsenal's cash position improved and that was without champions league football. for the fiscal year ending May 31 we'll probably be back over £200m after last year being under for the first time since 2013.

i don't think £50 or £70m however the media reports it is a small amount of money. you could acquire players with fees in the range of £150m total on 5 year contracts (£125k/wk) and that's £62.5m in new annual player costs right there. agent fees would probably take up the remaining £8m.