Viktor Kristiansen joins Bologna on loan

[TheGoldenGod]

42 minutes ago, Babylon said:

And what clubs do you think we should have dealt with?

I'm not the one demanding we break even on our players when we enter into the Italian market, in fact I'll take what we can get for our boards poor decision making! Wouldn't get the 'arse fella.

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, Reg Vardy said:

Italian clubs delight in the loan, option to buy, pitiful offer, don't sign at agreed price......and most are skint.......I suspect Inter shifted the goalposts last month, rendering the Sensi deal dead.....

Tbf thought when I was watching VK on Sunday, literally said to my mate, it's been great last few years getting a deal at City. 

 

Play in the PL on decent wages, fail with the intensity of PL, get loaned abroad and live in a beautiful country/city whilst on PL wages. See also Soumare and Praet. 

 

Saving grace is the success and form of Bologna might coax someone else to spend in region of £10m on him. 

[Stadt]

I think the summer would be a fresh start, the wage situation would have been a problem last yea. VK would have had suitors so he would have been identified as an easy loan out.

 

Enzo might reassess in the summer, we've ended up playing Choudhury as LCB/RCB, VK is twice the player. There's proof in the pudding for Enzo too, the jury was out in the summer and VK might want to be involved.

[st albans fox]

Will he get into the danish euro squad ? 

[CosbehFox]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Will he get into the danish euro squad ? 

Likely as it stands - made the November squad and his season has got stronger since. 

[Reg Vardy]

12 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Tbf thought when I was watching VK on Sunday, literally said to my mate, it's been great last few years getting a deal at City. 

 

Play in the PL on decent wages, fail with the intensity of PL, get loaned abroad and live in a beautiful country/city whilst on PL wages. See also Soumare and Praet. 

 

Saving grace is the success and form of Bologna might coax someone else to spend in region of £10m on him. 

Good point well made......although the market has dropped and players valuations have gone the same way.....

[st albans fox]

16 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Likely as it stands - made the November squad and his season has got stronger since. 

So if Bologna won’t pay the price then he hopefully shines in the euros and we can get our money back 

[coolhandfox]

49 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said:

I'm not the one demanding we break even on our players when we enter into the Italian market, in fact I'll take what we can get for our boards poor decision making! Wouldn't get the 'arse fella.

Which doesn't really help our FFP position.  

[TheGoldenGod]

1 minute ago, coolhandfox said:

Which doesn't really help our FFP position.  

No it doesn't mate but its almost as if that's the consequence of poor and expensive decision making. The fact we've tried to get more out of clubs is the exact reason players like Praet/Souttar/Ward etc cannot be shifted on! Best to make what we can in terms of fees so we can actually back the current manager than keep players he doesn't want.

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, TheGoldenGod said:

No it doesn't mate but its almost as if that's the consequence of poor and expensive decision making. The fact we've tried to get more out of clubs is the exact reason players like Praet/Souttar/Ward etc cannot be shifted on! Best to make what we can in terms of fees so we can actually back the current manager than keep players he doesn't want.

Unless you get more than their value against the account back, it does not release any funds. 

[Paninistickers]

4 hours ago, st albans fox said:

So if Bologna won’t pay the price then he hopefully shines in the euros and we can get our money back 

I have no issue in insisting he resumes his career with us, whether he likes it or not. 

 

The PSR mean it could be a game changer in the way the Bisman ruling was gears ago.  A new era of clubs having to work with players, whether either party like it or not. 

[iancognito]

5 hours ago, Stadt said:

I think the summer would be a fresh start, the wage situation would have been a problem last yea. VK would have had suitors so he would have been identified as an easy loan out.

 

Enzo might reassess in the summer, we've ended up playing Choudhury as LCB/RCB, VK is twice the player. There's proof in the pudding for Enzo too, the jury was out in the summer and VK might want to be involved.

Except VK said in an early-season interview after his move that a big part of him moving was that he doesn't want to play that CB/LB hybrid role as he sees himself as just an LB and stated very soon after Enzo arrived he wanted to move on. Shame as he's a decent LB.

[Stadt]

48 minutes ago, iancognito said:

Except VK said in an early-season interview after his move that a big part of him moving was that he doesn't want to play that CB/LB hybrid role as he sees himself as just an LB and stated very soon after Enzo arrived he wanted to move on. Shame as he's a decent LB.

Who knows, playing as an inverted FB (which I think he has at times for Bologna anyway) is different in the championship slogging against Rotherham as it is in the Prem

[foxinsocks]

8 hours ago, Babylon said:

Why? Loans can be more lucrative than just flogging someone ridiculously cheap. Every player, their age, contract length, cost, wages, offers coming in (or not), shold be considered individually. The "just get rid" attitude just flys in the face of what we really want to do, which is recoup as much as we possibly can, whether that's in one transaction or multiple. 

agree with you loans are  sometime useful.... but... we seem to send too many out on loan - inflating our wage bill which is probably not covered (as we pay too high)... the loanees are a financial drag that mess up our fpp position.  Sometime you have to admit you made a mistake buying or made a mistake offering big wages.... but lcfc don't seem to face this

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, Stadt said:

Who knows, playing as an inverted FB (which I think he has at times for Bologna anyway) is different in the championship slogging against Rotherham as it is in the Prem

He did invert a little to start but now they have a CB ‘invert’ and join the midfield in possession. Also VK sits because having Saelemakers at LW means he doesn’t get a lot of help. 

[Babylon]

12 hours ago, foxinsocks said:

agree with you loans are  sometime useful.... but... we seem to send too many out on loan - inflating our wage bill which is probably not covered (as we pay too high)... the loanees are a financial drag that mess up our fpp position.  Sometime you have to admit you made a mistake buying or made a mistake offering big wages.... but lcfc don't seem to face this

If we are to get rid of a player, whether on loan or even a sale, if there is a huge discrepancy between what the buying / loaning club are willing to offer, and what we pay. We are going to have to cover that shortfall one way or another. So I'm not sure there is any particular saving to be had. 

 

The obvious benefit is that they are off the books for good, but if you can pick up loan fees and a decent percentage of wage covered, then I don't think people should be against them. It would be nice, if there were loads of clubs out there who can afford them, but the problem is, the premier league in general pays too muck, not just us. So any flops are giant financial problems for all, as the money just isn't there in Europe. 

[LVFox]

Tactically he will have improved working under Motta, who's a brilliant coach.

 

It might have just unlocked something in him that makes working under Enzo in the Prem more appealing.

 

Im still of the opinion he's more of an up and down the wing LB, and it's just a role we don't have space for. Unlikely he moves on without us making a loss so best bet is he has another loan next year.

[honeybradger]

17 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Unless you get more than their value against the account back, it does not release any funds. 

If you buy a player for 20 mil on a 4 year contract then you are paying 5 mil a year for him on your balance sheet. If you sell him for 8 mil with 2 years left then you would pay 10 mil for the player in that accounting year and receive 8 mil back, which would be a loss on the books for that accounting year. The following 2 years you would have more wiggle room in the transfer market as you no longer have the 5 mil payments. So selling a player for a loss does release funds in the long term but is detrimental in the short term, it also gets wages off the book. If we had more FFP wiggle room then selling players for a loss would be a better long term strategy.

[honeybradger]

17 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Unless you get more than their value against the account back, it does not release any funds. 

If you buy a player for 20 mil on a 4 year contract then you are paying 5 mil a year for him on your balance sheet. If you sell him for 8 mil with 2 years left then you would pay 10 mil for the player in that accounting year and receive 8 mil back, which would be a loss on the books for that accounting year. The following 2 years you would have more wiggle room in the transfer market as you no longer have the 5 mil payments. So selling a player for a loss does release funds in the long term but is detrimental in the short term, it also gets wages off the book. If we had more FFP wiggle room then selling players for a loss would be a better long term strategy.

[Ric Flair]

He won't get the wages he's getting in the Prem (which will kick back in if we go up) and nor will anyone pay £13m for him. So he might well have play in Enzo's system.

[TheLittleBigMan]

I love him and I want to have his babies.

[coolhandfox]

31 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

If you buy a player for 20 mil on a 4 year contract then you are paying 5 mil a year for him on your balance sheet. If you sell him for 8 mil with 2 years left then you would pay 10 mil for the player in that accounting year and receive 8 mil back, which would be a loss on the books for that accounting year. The following 2 years you would have more wiggle room in the transfer market as you no longer have the 5 mil payments. So selling a player for a loss does release funds in the long term but is detrimental in the short term, it also gets wages off the book. If we had more FFP wiggle room then selling players for a loss would be a better long term strategy.

Correct. Ideally, we would sell all the deadwood off to help us in the long term. 

 

The elephant in the room is the lack of wriggle room in the accounts; for 2018-2022, we had about around 4m headroom on FFP. Before anyone says that a 4 year period, not a 3 year the PL took 2019/20 and 2020/21 as a single (average) to reduce the impact of COVID. 

 

That is before you factor in a season in the Championship, which reduces our allowable losses from 105m to 83m, which we are going to feel the impact of until it drops out of the 3-year monitoring period in 26/27

 

We crippled ourselves with a high wage-to-revenue ratio and a high amount of transfer amortisation, which in turn has reduced opportunities to be flexible.  

 

It will not be a short fix; we are already 18 months into a recovery period, which has seen us slash our wage bill and reduce the amount of transfer amortisation on our accounts; this is a long-term rebuild. 

 

This is why Enzo's approach to our academy players is really important; we are going to need the likes of Nelson, Alves, Braybrooke, McAteer, et al. to fill holes we can't fund in the squad short term, with a long-term view of developing them and make some sales. 

 

 

Edited 16 February 2024 by coolhandfox

[coolhandfox]

20 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

He won't get the wages he's getting in the Prem (which will kick back in if we go up) and nor will anyone pay £13m for him. So he might well have play in Enzo's system.

I've not seen anything that makes me think he's good enough on the ball for Enzo. 

 

I can see him going on loan again, saving wages and a loan fee. 

 

We have been scouting a number of left-footed CBs, which points to the fact he's not in our future plans.

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, coolhandfox said:

I've not seen anything that makes me think he's good enough on the ball for Enzo. 

 

I can see him going on loan again, saving wages and a loan fee. 

 

We have been scouting a number of left-footed CBs, which points to the fact he's not in our future plans.

We have to do that on the basis that Bologna are contractually entitled to buy him in June 

can’t assume it won’t happen, irrespective of the noises 

 

 

[Ric Flair]

4 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

I've not seen anything that makes me think he's good enough on the ball for Enzo. 

 

I can see him going on loan again, saving wages and a loan fee. 

 

We have been scouting a number of left-footed CBs, which points to the fact he's not in our future plans.

If James Justin can play in Enzo's system then Kristiansen can. Justin is not particularly strong on the ball but he's developed in to being able to still do what's required of him. Kristiansen would do OK IMO.