Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Lambert09

Ghezzal

By Lambert09, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

FoxFossil

FoxFossil

Posted
Posted (edited)

Could Top fund a purchase of Ghezzal for Leuven, say £20m, and same for Silva, and same for Slimani? Are there rules to stop this kind of thing?

Edited by FoxFossil
  • Haha 1
Lesta2014

Lesta2014

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Depends how he has recovered form his leg break, I surprised he hasn't feature considering our injuries in defence or gone out on loan. 

 

If he was fit and Rodgers preferred to pick Bennett over him, probably say everything about his standing with the boss.  

I don’t think he is fit hasn’t been training out on grass yet I don’t think?

  • Like 1
Sly

Sly

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, FoxFossil said:

Could Top fund a purchase of Ghezzal for Leuven, say £20m, and same for Silva, and same for Slimani? Are are there rules to stop this kind of thing?

FFP I suppose, if they wanted to compete in Europe. 
 

No doubt we’d be banned from all future competitions for flouting the rules.

Webbo

Webbo

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, FoxFossil said:

Could Top fund a purchase of Ghezzal for Leuven, say £20m, and same for Silva, and same for Slimani? Are there rules to stop this kind of thing?

Couldn't we just loan them? 

 

Im not sure the players would agree, plus he'd be paying 100% of their wages. 

sacreblueits442

sacreblueits442

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sly said:

FFP I suppose, if they wanted to compete in Europe. 
 

No doubt we’d be banned from all future competitions for flouting the rules.

..not too sure if you have read the question correctly!!!

  I suspect what the post was asking if Leuven were to purchase Slimani, Silva and Ghezzal for £20m each would that be a problem?

  I would think it would depend on the finances of Leuven and their ability to spend at a rate which would not impact on FFP in relation to wages/Revenue ratio.

moore_94

moore_94

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

..not too sure if you have read the question correctly!!!

  I suspect what the post was asking if Leuven were to purchase Slimani, Silva and Ghezzal for £20m each would that be a problem?

  I would think it would depend on the finances of Leuven and their ability to spend at a rate which would not impact on FFP in relation to wages/Revenue ratio.

I don't think you could get away with values like that, I imagine the value would need to be more realistic

 

Watford and Udinese who have the same owners do it occassionally, recently Watford bought a player from Udinese for £8m and then sold a player to them for £2m, and they also loan players to Udinese with a loan fee attached, so basically just an easy way of moving money between the 2 clubs

 

There are definitely ways we can move money around between the 2 clubs if we needed, the whole Hirst thing is an example of this as it ended up being a way of getting him cheap but also being able to give a transfer fee to Leuven

Long Eaton Fox

Long Eaton Fox

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, FoxFossil said:

Could Top fund a purchase of Ghezzal for Leuven, say £20m, and same for Silva, and same for Slimani? Are there rules to stop this kind of thing?

Like your thinking and I think Watford do it already.

  • Like 1
UniFox21

UniFox21

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, chapero82 said:

📢 There #Fiorentina asked the #LCFC another loan season for Rachid Ghezzal. The details on @TuttoMercatoWeb

Guess that wouldn't be an issue should there be a decent loan fee or obligation to buy along with them paying his wages.

jeffschlupp

jeffschlupp

Posted
Posted

Dodgy maths incoming.

 

If Rachid is on £45k a week, a loan for a season is £2.34m in wages. Last season they reportedly paid £270k in a loan fee, so that makes at most £3m for us if Fiorentina pay all of his wages (possibly unlikely).

 

If we did the same next summer we'd 'make' £6m from his final two seasons here. We could also sell him next summer but you're unlikely to get more than £3m for the player - add that to his foregone wages and you've probably saved/made £9m at the very most.

 

Alternatively, we sell him this summer, clear his £4.6m wages for the two seasons, and take a fee of at least £4.5m. That generates more money for the club and also ensures we don't have to look for a buyer or team to loan to next summer, when he could have had a crap season there.

 

The agreed option to buy was roughly £9m, and TMW report we'd rather do the permanent deal than have another loan. £5m would be a decent deal for us.

leuven

leuven

Posted
Posted
On 06/08/2020 at 15:54, Long Eaton Fox said:

Like your thinking and I think Watford do it already.

Leuven has a total budget of 15 million for the upcoming season, so that not an option I believe.

mozartfox

mozartfox

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, jeffschlupp said:

Dodgy maths incoming.

 

If Rachid is on £45k a week, a loan for a season is £2.34m in wages. Last season they reportedly paid £270k in a loan fee, so that makes at most £3m for us if Fiorentina pay all of his wages (possibly unlikely).

 

If we did the same next summer we'd 'make' £6m from his final two seasons here. We could also sell him next summer but you're unlikely to get more than £3m for the player - add that to his foregone wages and you've probably saved/made £9m at the very most.

 

Alternatively, we sell him this summer, clear his £4.6m wages for the two seasons, and take a fee of at least £4.5m. That generates more money for the club and also ensures we don't have to look for a buyer or team to loan to next summer, when he could have had a crap season there.

 

The agreed option to buy was roughly £9m, and TMW report we'd rather do the permanent deal than have another loan. £5m would be a decent deal for us.

A Fiver would be a good deal for us. The Italian rascals no there will be no queue for this transaction.  Probably better to look at the saved wages as opposed to a receiving a fee of any magnitude 

VLC86

VLC86

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, jeffschlupp said:

Dodgy maths incoming.

 

If Rachid is on £45k a week, a loan for a season is £2.34m in wages. Last season they reportedly paid £270k in a loan fee, so that makes at most £3m for us if Fiorentina pay all of his wages (possibly unlikely).

 

If we did the same next summer we'd 'make' £6m from his final two seasons here. We could also sell him next summer but you're unlikely to get more than £3m for the player - add that to his foregone wages and you've probably saved/made £9m at the very most.

 

Alternatively, we sell him this summer, clear his £4.6m wages for the two seasons, and take a fee of at least £4.5m. That generates more money for the club and also ensures we don't have to look for a buyer or team to loan to next summer, when he could have had a crap season there.

 

The agreed option to buy was roughly £9m, and TMW report we'd rather do the permanent deal than have another loan. £5m would be a decent deal for us.

When you say it like that I’m thinking how much does a hitman cost.

  • Haha 2
coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, jeffschlupp said:

Dodgy maths incoming.

 

If Rachid is on £45k a week, a loan for a season is £2.34m in wages. Last season they reportedly paid £270k in a loan fee, so that makes at most £3m for us if Fiorentina pay all of his wages (possibly unlikely).

 

If we did the same next summer we'd 'make' £6m from his final two seasons here. We could also sell him next summer but you're unlikely to get more than £3m for the player - add that to his foregone wages and you've probably saved/made £9m at the very most.

 

Alternatively, we sell him this summer, clear his £4.6m wages for the two seasons, and take a fee of at least £4.5m. That generates more money for the club and also ensures we don't have to look for a buyer or team to loan to next summer, when he could have had a crap season there.

 

The agreed option to buy was roughly £9m, and TMW report we'd rather do the permanent deal than have another loan. £5m would be a decent deal for us.

Someone still has to want to buy him, and match our wages.

 

I suggest that's unlikely with the current set of the football world.

  • Popular Post
lcfcfan97

lcfcfan97

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 06/08/2020 at 10:28, HighPeakFox said:

He became a scapegoat (I was going to say THE scapegoat but he wasn't the only one) for general dislike of Puel. It didn't matter what he did on the field, minds were made up and no amount of positive evidence was going to be noticed. People were too busy (and I heard this when sat in the Kop) indulgently and self-importantly loudly wishing Puel to 'get out of MY club', like they owned it, or it is/was any more their club than anyone else's, or that their petulant, angry diatribes were any more of value than anyone else's. This was just having beaten Chelsea, Man City and Everton.

Puel was a reliable coach who was never going to win us silverware or get promoted. People forget we had just lost Mahrez, he did great to make up for those lost goals and assist through great signings - some of the best in the clubs history, Madison, Ricky, Evans, Soy, Tielemans. The success rate of his signings would be much much higher than the prem average. He trusted young talent a lot too, Barnes, Chilwell, Hamza, Madison, Wilf. He built the foundation for the recent success and our owners switched manager at the right time. He was also excellent against the top 6, ideally Brendan would coach against all the lower teams and Puel against top 6.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
  • 2 weeks later...
volpeazzurro

volpeazzurro

Posted
Posted
On 06/08/2020 at 10:11, pmcla26 said:

Ghezzal is no where near Pérez let’s not make silly comments. 

Strangely enough, not unlike Perez, I thought Ghezzal was better played down the middle, which is where he's supposedly having some success now at Fiorentina. Personally, I'd rather play Ghezzal than the hapless Perez though I recognise that would be perhaps an unpopular view.

  • Haha 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...