Arsenal Summer Exits 2020: Page 19 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Arsenal Summer Exits 2020

Ray

Meatwad wrote:
goon wrote:
FYI Spurs signing Matt Doherty for 12m. The idea that Wolves will spend more than double that on a replacement is fanciful at best.

doherty is 28 (29 in january) and has no resale value.

Exactly, not to mention AMN isn't only a FB / English etc.

Qwiss

goon wrote:
FYI Spurs signing Matt Doherty for 12m. The idea that Wolves will spend more than double that on a replacement is fanciful at best.

Double the price for a player who's nowhere near as good at RWB too. I suppose its the investment potential.

ohboy

Still do not understand how Doherty can only move for £12mil

He has been so good, only Trent offers more going forward at the moment in the league from that position. Mental fee

HomeSteak

Fiorentina are interested in Lucas Torreira - they have made an initial €8.5m loan fee offer and a further €18m to sign him permanently. [@LaStampa]

That's a fair price.

ohboy

HomeSteak wrote:

Fiorentina are interested in Lucas Torreira - they have made an initial €8.5m loan fee offer and a further €18m to sign him permanently. [@LaStampa]

That's a fair price.

Is that an obligation to buy?

HomeSteak

No ideea, that was my first reaction as well, but nobody seems to know for sure. But I would say it's an obligation, beacuse they said further 18 mil, with no if or but...again just how I saw it, based on nothing.

Claudius

LOL. That's who much we bought him for. He hasn't progressed any and we are selling in a depressed market. If they want options, they need to pay for the options though. So we should ask for a little more

goon

To be honest the 9m loan fee means an option to buy wouldn’t be the end of the world.

Claudius

the loan fee is fine. It's the signing on fee that is too low
when you do an option to buy, 2 things happen
1) you de-risk the situation, so you don't end up having to pay the full amount if the guy doesn't pan out for you
2) if you do end up buying him, you push out the payments further, which is helpful in football which has a high discount rate.

We should punish teams for these options.

Ray

£8m is a high loan fee, if he was to have a good season and return we could potentially sell for more than the £18m they propose in a better market.

I'd prefer no option to buy, just a loan fee, if the amount we are getting on top of that is potentially only £18m next year.

ohboy

HomeSteak wrote:
No ideea, that was my first reaction as well, but nobody seems to know for sure. But I would say it's an obligation, beacuse they said further 18 mil, with no if or but...again just how I saw it, based on nothing.

Yeah, I agree with your reasoning.

I think I would accept.

It could be a bit higher, but we really need to get a move one with our midfield transformation. Rather sell him now, than hang on and miss potential targets.

Claudius

As we are doing our various sales and loans we need to ask ourselves, do they put us closer to getting the midfield we need to compete? So maybe we can pretty much exactly match the terms of the Torreira deal with the terms of the Ceballos deal.

Then we still need to sort out a deal for Partey. So that's dependent on finding something for Guendouzi and a few more guys.

I think when we signed Pépé, we expected to be in Champions League this year, so we need to deal with that and other payments on a Europa League budget and reduced gate.

Bring Back Kerrea Gilbert

Yeah I would put option rather than obligation, or no option at all (just loan) and hope his stock goes up come next summer so we can sell for more.

QuincyAbeyie

How would option be better than obligation?

Klaus

I feel that getting what we paid for Torreira would be good business in whatever shape or form it comes. He's a worse player now than when we got him. Shame it didn't work out, but all his energy was gone at the first sight of snow. We kept him a season too long and now we just have to get what we can.

KingslandBarge

Klaus wrote:
I feel that getting what we paid for Torreira would be good business in whatever shape or form it comes. He's a worse player now than when we got him. Shame it didn't work out, but all his energy was gone at the first sight of snow. We kept him a season too long and now we just have to get what we can.

December player of the month, stand-out one man midfield against United in the winter and Spurs in the autumn. Just doesn't make sense for me.

Not referring to you Klaus, but generally wonder if people take into account the time out with serious injuries when discussing Holding, Bellerin or even Torriera. Determination over full-recovery doesn't arrive for a long long time. At least its always paid off for me to relent.

Bring Back Kerrea Gilbert

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
How would option be better than obligation?

In case he kills it next season and we're forced to sell him for a lowish fee. Unlikely though, granted.

QuincyAbeyie

If it was an option they'd buy him in that case. Option means they can choose, not that we can choose. So with option they'll buy him if he's good and with obligation they'll have to buy him if he's terrible as well. That's the only difference.

Clrnc

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
If it was an option they'd buy him in that case. Option means they can choose, not that we can choose. So with option they'll buy him if he's good and with obligation they'll have to buy him if he's terrible as well. That's the only difference.

Won't we be able to reject if its just an option to buy?

Bring Back Kerrea Gilbert

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
If it was an option they'd buy him in that case. Option means they can choose, not that we can choose. So with option they'll buy him if he's good and with obligation they'll have to buy him if he's terrible as well. That's the only difference.

So with option we'd have to accept any bid at that amount?

Well that would suck and wouldn't work then, lol.

« Previous Page Next Page »