Discussion in 'The Transfer List' started by Squibba, Apr 8, 2018.
Has this **** left yet?
Yes I'm one of them. There's a £30k limit for compensation for loss of office that can be tax free but that mainly affects an employee not employer. Doesnt really affect what Everton pay us or how they disclose it but if we can keep any compensation to Silva's from us to be below £30k, he can have it tax free and we can save a little bit of employers NI. Hopefully thst won't be relevant !
Richarlison is the white Isaac Success.
Isaac Success is not the black Richarlison.
I'm not an accountant but I think you can write down transfer fees or at least part of them over the contract period, similar to the goodwill element of a company purchase. Whereas presumably a compensation payment has to be fully accounted for at the point of payment?
That said as long as there is no tax avoidance it is presumably not an amount of money that will worry Moshiri.
Mixed feelings about this myself . Obviously the money is huge. If Richy can rediscover his early season form he will be one hell of a player and I’d love to have seen that . However, for the last 5 months of the season he was a complete passenger , couldn’t seem to beat his man and missed countless chances . Still wish him well as he was always committed and didn’t baulk at the physical side of the game. I just wish he wasn’t going to Everton cos i really hope silva fails badly there
What does this mean?
It's a fair point. I suspect that we tend to judge forwards by the goals they score. Goalkeepers by the goals they stop or let in. Defenders by the goals they stop. Midfielders by the goals they set up. Really we should look at all round contribution in a game and let's at judge individuals conteibution to the team. We shouldn't judge the team by the number of goals they score or let in during a game. We should remember Everton plan to play Richarlison as a centre forward.
Should've asked for Lookman in exchange + ££
There are two sides to this deal...
The first side is that it’s too good to turn down. We can mostly all agree that Richarlison has promise. But it looked increasingly unlikely as last season went on that he would realise that promise with ourselves. I think if no bids were forthcoming we would all like to have seen how he would have got on after having a Summer of rest. But as it is, as mentioned, the bid is too good. He could have had a real breakout year with us next season and won PFA YPOTS and we still wouldn’t have got bids any bigger. It makes every bit of sense to accept this bid. And as much as I don’t like Silva or Moshiri, it doesn’t serve us well to be at loggerheads with another PL club or chairman long term.
The second side is how this money is used - I will stop short of saying we will waste it. Because we have made a number of great signings - Pereyra, Doucoure, Richarlison, Cleverley... But this money, or the bulk of it, must be reinvested in 2/3 players that are ready to come straight into the First XI. With £40m-£50m coming in, I really don’t think there is an excuse that maybe we could have had before this deal goes through. We have enough players at the club now that it really should be used for us to build up our portfolio of players even more - we don’t need another 10 players from Belgium who are unlikely to break into the first team squad.
Richarlison going gives us the chance to make a real statement of intention that we want to push higher up the table. I only hope we take it.
Hit the nail on the head. Great post Burnsy.
It's hard to comment on how the funds will be used without knowing the Pozzo's short and long term aims. Udinese need strengthening, they want to expand the stadium, rumours of a new club to buy - unfortunately there's a bigger picture than just us at the moment so it wouldn't surprise me if the funds were split across several projects, rather than throwing millions at players. I'm sure there will be some strengthening but as ever, it will be just enough to keep us in the Premier League.
Question, how do the Pozzo's make their money using Watford and Udinese as a business investment? Could we reasonably expect some of the Richarlison fee not to be reinvested in the club/players as part of the Pozzo model? Is this why they adopt the model so they can benefit off the large transfers that come around occasionally? I honestly am not sure, but curious to hear what people think.
That's why I'd potentially suggest some caution thinking that all this money will be reinvested in the club or 2/3 players for the first team.
I agree with your points and admit it’s something I hadn’t really thought about. But it can’t be denied that a chunk of this money should be reinvested in 2/3 key players. To me that is the ultimate test that they are committed to trying to make us ‘best of the rest’ as Duxbury has often said. If they don’t, it would give me the impression they are quite happy with what we do every season at present.
Udinese have already strengthened this summer. In fact, they have spent much more than us.
Really? Given the massive fee they got for Meret their net spend must be pretty low, if anything.
Is he any relation to JD Meret?
Agreed. But that wasn’t the point. They have still spent more than us in terms of expenditure.
Wolves signing João Moutinho from Monaco for 5m, seriously good business! Wolves and Fulham having a very good transfer window
We are likely to only get a fifth of the transfer fee up front. The rest and any add-ons will be spread over 5 years.
Also at least 10% will go to his old club + a further 10% to the player + the agents at both end of the deal getting 5 to 10%
So at best we will get 20m up front but able to budget for a further 15m over 5 years.
One 20m player we buy will cost an extra 10% agents fees. Then their salary - will it be substantialy higher than our other players? If so we would have to pay them more as well to keep a good team spirit.
Let's say we pay him 50k a week = 2.75m a year + taxes so over 5 years that will cost about 15m + taxes so say 18m. Add agents fees:
Total cost of one 20m player = 40m
Yes, I'd be surprised if either of these 2 were relegated which seems to tie up with the bookies expectations.
Personally think Richarlison is too much of an emotional player to ever justify the £50mil. That sounds odd, but he cried when he didn't score against Chelsea - imagine the pressure he'll put on himself to justify the £50mil fee. You could quite often tell when he was trying too hard in games, and as soon as things stop going his way he'll start to feel the pressure. Also think he'll struggle being in Liverpool.
Everton's transfer strategy is strange. They could easily get a player at the same level of quality as him for less than half that fee. What will they do if Richarlison breaks his leg in his first game?
How the payments are spread is presumably part of any negotiation. I don't see how you can say it will be over 5 years definitively.
10% of the profit goes to Fluminese, not 10% of the fee.
For Richarlison to get some of the fee it would need something in his contract to give him that entitlement. Who knows if he has such a clause?
I would expect paying agents' tabs to be mainly Everton and Richarlison's concern. I can't see why that would be a substantial cost for Watford to pick up.
Not saying you are wrong, but if it includes compensation, IMHO it would then cease to be a good deal.
Unless Gino believes Richarlison is shot, 40-50 should be the minimum to bag someone with that potential.
Personally I don't believe Everton will pay compensation until they are instructed to because they genuinely believe they can persuade everyone that they acted normally.
As in the port of Liverpool with one of the largest expat Brazilian communities in the country? You do realise that virtually all the Liverpool based players live in the "Footballers' Ghettos" in Cheshire (notably around Congleton - handy for all the Bentley dealerships)?
The figures I quoted are quite obviously guesstimates aren't they?
Pointless to pick them apart as if they are acurate or mean something.
The point I was making is don't expect 2 or 3 players from this money. It is not realistic. The accounts show borrowing/loan from the family of over 40m doesn't it? We also will have our transfer budget previously set to add these funds to but I suspect we will continue to build slowly.
Just remember though guys - Tim Vickery said that Richarlison was average and strikers like him are 2-a-penny in the Brazilian league. So let’s spend the £50m buying 5 more of them if this is the profit you can make...
Absolutely ! Keep picking up the youngsters like Cucho, but we should also add a few players who are just breaking through in the top leagues and are ready to make an impact quickly.
I agree that if this includes money for Silva it’s horrendous for us because A) Richarlison is then valued at only around £25-30m, which is too low and
B) We then have to pay some of our Silva compensation to Fluminense.
I believe Gino is smarter than that.
But we aren’t building slowly. Not on the pitch anyway. The last 3 season’s have been largely the same. Sadly, investing heavily on players is the modern way of building slowly unless you can spend £70m on each player which gets you there quicker. Maybe we shouldn’t expect to spend heavily on a couple of players - but I repeat, Duxbury has been vocal in believing we can be ‘best of the rest’. If the rest are spending those types of sums, logic says we need to start doing that too.
Gino won’t be looking to recoup some of his debts with this money I doubt. We aren’t falling foul of FFP. If Gino wants to recoup some of his loans, it will be done out of money we garner when the club gets near to what the end goal for him is. Or by selling the club for a vast profit. I don’t think we are there yet.
We are building slowly, but everyone else is too, some more quickly than us.
Our squad has improved year on year. Also the depth of the squad has improved.
This I see as solid building of the squad, sensibly. Today we will see the first player to be sold at 40 to 50m and it won't be the last. It costs quite a bit to run the club and we are realy only interested in the success of the 1st team (mainly) whilst the owners have the plan of buying huge swaths of young talent and planting them around the world to see what will grow. They need a Sanchez or Richarlison to pay for that. That policy will allow us to thrive through the years that they stay our owners.
I'm not picking apart the figures, just the basis for them even being included. But yeah, if that's your wider point I absolutely agree with it. This money isn't going to go as far as a few people seem to believe.
The Evening Standard are suggesting they have sources that claim the deal is £50m with over £40m as guaranteed payment and the deal does NOT include any provision for the Silva compensation. It claims in fact that we will still pursue Everton for this.
Would be the deal of the century if true but I do have to wonder how that would look if we are doing business with someone we are in litigation with over another matter. Seems bizarre to me.
Look to who? It won't affect any legal claim we have, if that's what you mean. Football is too small a world to not sell on principle. Of course we won't be doing Everton any favours but nothing about this deal smacks of that.
I’d be happy with one centre back for 15m who is a step up on what we have already. That would be an achievable reinvestment and still leave the coffers healthy.
I appreciate in the black and white of the rules or legal matters, it’s not something that would be of concern. But you’d have to admit it being a strange scenario?