Discussion in 'The Transfer List' started by Steve Leo Beleck, May 6, 2019.
Highlights of the Wolves game are available on the Club's official website...
Just to confirm, yes, I think the Origi ship has sailed
I have to agree after tonight's heroics by L'Pool.
Ahhh the belief that we get significant loan fee's raises its head again. Has this ever been proved anywhere? Or is it just a way for fans to cover when Gino and Co make an error in the market? The reality is more likely that we don't get any fee (or a totally negligible one) and the club simply get to to park a percentage of the players wages elsewhere for the loan period.
The fact we are getting a transfer fee for him is amazing really given his time contacted to us. But I don't think we should be pretending that we haven't taken a hit financially overall.
Proved in what way? I'm pretty sure loan fees are sometimes mentioned in the foreign news articles that report our players' moves.
I thought loan fees were part of the transfer business these days and the fact that we have so many players out on loan would suggest that is still the case. I saw quite a few loan moves in January with loan fees of around £2m quoted for some like Denis Suarez. Not suggesting we got a £2m loan fee for Obbi by the way! I think with rising transfer fees it's become more commonplace these days as the risk is minimal.
I think I either didn't phrase myself well, or didn't get what I meant across in the right way. I am sure there are nominal fee's involved in loan deals. I just think for players like Oulare etc, it is perhaps churlish to think that these fee's would be anywhere near enough to claim we are likely to have made minimal loss on the initial outlay.
I will say initially for what its worth I agree with you, I expect we made a loss on him. However for the sake of argument:
We signed him for 7.4m, he went on loan 4 times including the spell at Standard Liege. We have sold him to Liege for somewhere in the realms of 2.5-2.7m. So at the optimistic end we have a shortfall of 4.7m to make up in fees.
Bearing in mind he spent:
5 1/2 months on loan at Zulte Waregem
5 months on loan at Willem II
11 months on loan at Royal Antwerp FC
10 months on loan at Standard Liege
Thats a total of 31.5 months roughly. Now of course we don't know the ins and outs of the deals or who paid what but:
- If clubs paid 100k a month for Oulare thats 3.15m
- If clubs paid 75k a month for Oulare thats 2.36m
- If clubs paid 50k a month for Oulare thats 1.57m
What is more likely is that when Oulare had a higher market value, a higher loan fee was paid by the renting club. In his more recent seasons as his market value has decreased further, the loan fee would obviously have been less.
This article https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...il-s-estimates-fees-Chelsea-s-35-loanees.html talks mainly about chelsea but has a go at estimating player fees below. Of course our loanees are probably not of the same quality as some Chelsea's but the fees mooted mean it is perhaps not entirely unreasonable to suggest we received a reasonable fee for his first move.
If you guess that we might have received:
£1m from Zulte (5.5 month loan)
£1m from Willim (5 month loan)
£1.5 m from Royal Antwerp (11 month loan)
That is already £3.5m towards that £4.7m deficit, before considering any fees that Liege have paid above and beyond his transfer. This sort of loan fee would put him in the bracket of players like:
- Victorien Angban (Granada £1.5m)
- Jeremie Boga (Granada £1.5m)
- Danilo Pantic (Excelsior £3m)
- Charlie Colkett (Swindon £2m)
To give you an idea on these players careers now as opposed to when the article was written:
- Victorien Angban is currently on loan at Metz (Ligue 2) who have an option to buy.
- Jeremie Boga moved to Sassuolo from Chelsea in the Summer of 2018 for a fee of £3.51m
- Danilo Pantic currently on two year loan from Chelsea to FK Partizan Belgrade with an option to buy.
- Charlie Colkett moved to Ostersunds in the Swedish Premier League for an undisclosed fee in January, current market value of £360k.
I believe we have probably made a loss in the region of £1.5m on Oulare, but it would be silly to suggest that we didn't receive any loan fees for his time away.
In fairness you are probably right with Oulare as we paid quite a large sum of money and we have probably not made our money back on him. On others though I suspect we have made a profit otherwise we wouldn't be doing it. I'm still amazed that somebody has given us money for this chap!
Yep. But as I said, I didn’t really mean we wouldn’t have taken any loan fees, just that I believe they would have been nominal.
The three figures you mention as potential monthly fees from clubs would mean they would be paying anywhere between £10k - £20k a week for Oulare on top of what they contributed to his wages. I think those figures would be way off, especially for clubs of those sizes where I doubt the top earners are earning that much.
I really doubt that in this particular deal, the figures are anywhere near what you’ve put down.
Unfortunately we will never know, but i think loan fees tend to be higher than what we would ever believe feasible for low level talent.
Whatever happened to him ?
I'm 100% sure a loan fee would have been involved. However I have no idea how much we had to pay them.
Why do you believe that?
I'm not sure any of those Belgian or Dutch clubs have the sort of money you're quoting there for a loan for a few months. Willem II's record signing was £1.8m about 18 years ago. Also I suspect that the agents took a big fat cut of what was paid to set up these transfers - seems top be a roaring trade in moving sub-standard players from bigger leagues over to Holland and Belgium to cut losses for the parent club.
No well wishes from the club:
You need to also take into account all the Obbi Oulare merch shifted over the last few years.
I wonder if any Watford fan actually had Oulare on the back of his shirt?
I had Brice Dja Djedje and the club charged double for ‘J’s.
They refused to print my Danny Shittu shirt, it read ****tu instead. They charge triple for *.
We're both finalists.
Not a cigarette paper between us in that respect.
Odd to note that in the LotS awards story beneath, most of those pictured are men.
Has Gino found the Semenya Loophole?
My mate got Sietes on his shirt..
In 2 days Oulare has got more posts than he played minutes for our beloved club!, the only good to come out of his signing must be a message to the recruitment department to " try harder "
Maybe any dud signing in future should be know as an Oulare!
Surely the article is estimating the transfer value, not the loan fees? (It’s badly expressed and poorly written admittedly) Borussia didn’t pay £32 million in loan fees for Christensen! Swindon couldn’t afford a £2m loan fee.
Well he shouldn't have got intimate with a peripheral squad player.
completely did not notice that. in that case everything i have written is complete ****, so feel free to ignore
Still valid . Even 50k per month adds up over the seasons.
But it’s still £10k a week which is a lot for the clubs he’s been at given his injury record. And then with the wage contribution on top of that. He’d have been one of the mid-to-higher wage earners when you combine those amounts I expect - I doubt those clubs would have taken the punt at those kind of sums.
It’s more likely we’ve had a ‘flexible’ loan fee. The more he played, the more they contributed as a fee. Seeing as he hasn’t played, I really don’t think we can reasonably expect we’ve made much from his loans.
Say £2.5 a week, doubled should he play a certain amount of minutes. And then 50% of his wage, going up to 75% again after a certain amount of time on the pitch. Sounds more likely to me, not that we will ever find out!