Transfer Talk Topic

[paulw66]

1 minute ago, Bob Singleton said:

Apparently we're getting around £20m for Mendy

.

So, by my maths, around 75m for Mendy, Ziyech, KK and Kova, with a huge wedge off the wage bill. 

[Bob Singleton]

Just now, paulw66 said:

So, by my maths, around 75m for Mendy, Ziyech, KK and Kova, with a huge wedge off the wage bill. 

And around the £60m mark for Havertz, if the stories of the latest bids are accurate.

[ROTG]

18 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

If we had it your way we'd have Ben Mee and Tarkowski starting in central defence for us. 

 

Lets put it like this, they could have done as good if not better than the £33m misfit you championed last season

[xceleryx]

Just now, ROTG said:

Lets put it like this, they could have done as good if not better than the £33m misfit you championed last season

Like they did for Burnley when they got relegated the other season? 😂

[ROTG]

20 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Madueke has been bright, but still considerably raw. Not claimed him to be some world beating player by any means, however if I'm comparing him to Hudson-Odoi I'll take him every day of the week. 

Please explain your logic of  Madueke 21 and Raw having only played at championship level league, CHO is past it at 22 even though he has played most of his career at a higher level

Next you will be saying Madueke is a late developer

[ROTG]

5 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Like they did for Burnley when they got relegated the other season? 😂

But last season one finished higher and the a couple of placed below, not sure why you are going back two season, maybe you are realising that actual data from last season support me rather than another one of your strawman defences

Time to get back to the money laundering debate

[ROTG]

15 minutes ago, Bison said:

100%. We are terrible at the dark arts and have too many nice guys in the team. That is one of the reasons why we're crap.

Out and out diving is not a dark art, winding opponents up getting them to react is a dark art

As for being crap you can put that down to the leadership a replacing a WC coach with a nobody coach and his full entourage 

[xceleryx]

9 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Please explain your logic of  Madueke 21 and Raw having only played at championship level league, CHO is past it at 22 even though he has played most of his career at a higher level

Next you will be saying Madueke is a late developer

The answer is staring your in the face, you work it out because I'm not jumping on this merry-go-round with you yet again. 

4 minutes ago, ROTG said:

But last season one finished higher and the a couple of placed below, not sure why you are going back two season, maybe you are realising that actual data from last season support me rather than another one of your strawman defences

Time to get back to the money laundering debate

Okay.

[Bert19]

31 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

Apparently we're getting around £20m for Mendy

None of the fees are outrageous. In some cases below 'book value', but the important bits are that the full value of the deals go into the "income" column AND we're getting rid of a couple of players on big wages who would be difficult to off-load elsewhere.

Agree 100% - another 3-6 players out in the next few weeks and we'll be in a much more healthy position

29 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

So, by my maths, around 75m for Mendy, Ziyech, KK and Kova, with a huge wedge off the wage bill. 

Definitely a positive start.  I think it's generally going under the radar how much our wage bill will have shrunk by next season.  Some fringe players on crazy money at Chelsea (and many other PL clubs) 

[xceleryx]

2 minutes ago, Bert19 said:

Definitely a positive start.  I think it's generally going under the radar how much our wage bill will have shrunk by next season.  Some fringe players on crazy money at Chelsea (and many other PL clubs) 

Had seen elsewhere, and not sure if the math works itself out properly or not, but selling Ziyech and KK alone frees up around £400k pw in wages. In FFP terms that means we could sign a £70m player on around £130pw on a 5 year deal and be breaking even.

[thevelourfog]

1 hour ago, Bob Singleton said:

Just seen 'ChelseaDodgers' Twitter feed claiming around £8m for Ziyech  (we bought him for €40m in 2020 on 5 year contract, so his 'book value' is currently €16m). If the fee is accurate, I'm not sure how any 'commentators' (like G Neville) can claim we're "cheating" in any way.

I think the reasonable questions about "cheating" are more about the nature of the relationship between Clearlake (and by extension, Chelsea) and PIF than they are the specific fees we receive. And also about what should, for want of a better way of putting it, be right rather than what is.

I can't see we're cheating but I also don't know how comfortable it is to see money exchange hands in this way.

I personally doubt we get anything like £8m for Ziyech on the non-Saudi open market. 

48 minutes ago, Proud-Blue said:

 

£30 million?! We've rinsed them here!

I think it's about right. They are getting an experienced international at his peak (age-wise) and would pay much more for a similar player if contract conditions were different. I'm sure he'll do well for them, but it won't be any indication that he'd have done a job for us any longer. 

[Bob Singleton]

26 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Had seen elsewhere, and not sure if the math works itself out properly or not, but selling Ziyech and KK alone frees up around £400k pw in wages. In FFP terms that means we could sign a £70m player on around £130pw on a 5 year deal and be breaking even.

Sounds about right. KK was on £295,000/pw so Ziyech on around £100,000/pw given his initial fee and how he'd been in the UEFA CL Team of the Season when at Ajax sounds about right for such a player signed in the RA era.

We're bringing in around £150m on KK, Mendy, Ziyech, Kovacic and Havertz plus the savings on wages. That allows a lot of spending, in theory.

Edited June 21, 2023 by Bob Singleton
Typo

[Original 21]

Amazed that Lukaku, who couldn’t get a start ahead of an ageing ineffective Edin Dzeko in the CL final, thinks his future is still at Inter Milan. And not in the Saudi league, which is where his level is these days and where he can basically earn a fortune for lumbering about. 

[Mark Kelly]

Just now, Original 21 said:

Amazed that Lukaku, who couldn’t get a start ahead of an ageing ineffective Edin Dzeko in the CL final, thinks his future is still at Inter Milan. And not in the Saudi league, which is where his level is these days and where he can basically earn a fortune for lumbering about. 

Ahh but he wants to earn a fortune we're paying him whilst he plays for another club , I expect it'll be due to our disrespect in asking a buffoon to be a team player and run about a bit 

[Bob Singleton]

19 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

I think the reasonable questions about "cheating" are more about the nature of the relationship between Clearlake (and by extension, Chelsea) and PIF than they are the specific fees we receive. And also about what should, for want of a better way of putting it, be right rather than what is.

I can't see we're cheating but I also don't know how comfortable it is to see money exchange hands in this way.

[SNIP]

The Daily Mail are claiming that PIF are "major investors" in Clearlake.  That simply isn't true, because if they were, questions would have been raised when Boehly & Co took over, given PIF essentially own Newcastle. Such a conflict of interest would have been flagged up then. There are clearly links between the two, but given the nature of Clearlake's business, that's hardly unusual. I've read elsewhere figures of around 5% of Clearlake's investments coming from PIF.

I'm sure some commentators will continue to complain, but I'd be very surprised if the PL or FA did anything other than confirm that they looked at Boehly & Cos bid carefully last year, were aware of business dealings with many groups and institutions as part of their commercial operations, and that they could see no conflict of interests.

You have to wonder why PIF would be so keen to help out a rival (ie CFC) rather than helping out the club it owns? Surely that in itself proves there's nothing inherently dodgy going on? Furthermore, it's not as if Chelsea are forcing the players to join the Saudi clubs. Tentative offers have been made. Some players have accepted, others haven't.

The conspiracy theorists will continue to snipe, but there really isn't anything to see here.

Edited June 21, 2023 by Bob Singleton
Typo

[Original 21]

13 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Ahh but he wants to earn a fortune we're paying him whilst he plays for another club , I expect it'll be due to our disrespect in asking a buffoon to be a team player and run about a bit 

Basically he prefers the lifestyle in Milan to Riyadh and wants us to subsidise him so he can mingle with rap stars. While deluding himself that he’s a leading player at a top European club.  

[thevelourfog]

3 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

The Daily Mail are claiming that PIF are "major investors" in Clearlake.  That simply isn't true, because if they were, questions would have been raised when Boehly & Co took over, given PIF essentially own Newcastle. Such a conflict of interest. There are clearly links between the two, but given the nature of Clearlake's business, that's hardly unusual. I've read elsewhere figures of around 5% of Clearlake's investments coming from PIF.

I'm sure some commentators will continue to complain, but I'd be very surprised if the PL or FA did anything other than confirm that they looked at Boehly & Cos bid carefully last year, were aware of business dealings with many groups and institutions as part of their commercial operations, and that they could see no conflict of interests.

You have to wonder why PIF would be so keen to help out a rival (ie CFC) rather than helping out the club it owns? Surely that in itself proves there's nothing inherently dodgy going on? Furthermore, it's not as if Chelsea are forcing the players to join the Saudi clubs. Tentative offers have been made. Some players have accepted, others haven't.

The conspiracy theorists will continue to snipe, but there really isn't anything to see here.

I hope you're right. As I said, there really is not any strong evidence or indication of cheating based on anything any of us, or any pundit or opposition fan, has sight of.

Even so, I'll remain a little suspicious of it all ... I don't have a great deal of faith in the "fit and proper" procedures and could think of a fair few reasons why PIF would happily spread their money and influence beyond just Newcastle Utd. But it is just suspicion and a slight discomfort, not an assertion that something is definitely not right.

[CarefreeMuratcan]

6 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

I hope you're right. As I said, there really is not any strong evidence or indication of cheating based on anything any of us, or any pundit or opposition fan, has sight of.

Even so, I'll remain a little suspicious of it all ... I don't have a great deal of faith in the "fit and proper" procedures and could think of a fair few reasons why PIF would happily spread their money and influence beyond just Newcastle Utd. But it is just suspicion and a slight discomfort, not an assertion that something is definitely not right.

If the PL want to do things properly then all foreign ownership should be banned and we should follow the 50-50 rule of German football club ownership, with 50% of clubs being fan owned.

All this nitpicking around Abu Dhabi, PIF, City, Newcastle or us, is just missing the forest for the trees. 

[Sciatika]

I think PIF are customers of Clearlake. Saying that they own Chelsea would be like trying to claim that if my pension is managed by the Pru, I own the companies that it invests in. I wish.🙂

[Bob Singleton]

8 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

[SNIP]

Even so, I'll remain a little suspicious of it all ... I don't have a great deal of faith in the "fit and proper" procedures and could think of a fair few reasons why PIF would happily spread their money and influence beyond just Newcastle Utd. But it is just suspicion and a slight discomfort, not an assertion that something is definitely not right.

Me too 😉

On the other hand, it can be seen as just "bloody good business" on our part (with a bit of luck thrown in, given the timing of the Saudi league throwing money around just when we have a lot of players we want to get rid of)

It's not unusual in American sports for clubs/teams to "trade" players or for them to sell/buy several players at a time to/from just one other club/team.  We have American owners used to doing such dealings. Just because it's never been done here before doesn't make it wrong (and thinking about it, I'm sure I've read about not dissimilar dealings amongst lower league Italian sides in the past)

[Bob Singleton]

6 minutes ago, CarefreeMuratcan said:

If the PL want to do things properly then all foreign ownership should be banned and we should follow the 50-50 rule of German football club ownership, with 50% of clubs being fan owned.

All this nitpicking around Abu Dhabi, PIF, City, Newcastle or us, is just missing the forest for the trees. 

Not all German clubs are "fan owned".

[Chelsea_Matt]

Personally I don’t care. I just want us to get as much money from them as we can and get the dead wood off the books. I think the “royal family” of Saudi are a cancer on our world, and I hope we take them for as much as we can. 

[Backbiter]

6 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

Not all German clubs are "fan owned".

CM means they have the 50 + 1 rule:

Quote

The 50+1 rule guards against this. The name of the rule refers to the need for members of a club to hold 50 percent, plus one more vote, of voting rights - i.e. a majority. In short, it means that clubs - and, by extension, the fans - have the ultimate say in how they are run, not an outside influence or investor.

https://www.bundesliga.com/en/faq/what-are-the-rules-and-regulations-of-soccer/50-1-fifty-plus-one-german-football-soccer-rule-explained-ownership-22832

[Thiago97]

40 minutes ago, Bob Singleton said:

The Daily Mail are claiming that PIF are "major investors" in Clearlake.  That simply isn't true, because if they were, questions would have been raised when Boehly & Co took over, given PIF essentially own Newcastle. Such a conflict of interest would have been flagged up then. There are clearly links between the two, but given the nature of Clearlake's business, that's hardly unusual. I've read elsewhere figures of around 5% of Clearlake's investments coming from PIF.

I'm sure some commentators will continue to complain, but I'd be very surprised if the PL or FA did anything other than confirm that they looked at Boehly & Cos bid carefully last year, were aware of business dealings with many groups and institutions as part of their commercial operations, and that they could see no conflict of interests.

You have to wonder why PIF would be so keen to help out a rival (ie CFC) rather than helping out the club it owns? Surely that in itself proves there's nothing inherently dodgy going on? Furthermore, it's not as if Chelsea are forcing the players to join the Saudi clubs. Tentative offers have been made. Some players have accepted, others haven't.

The conspiracy theorists will continue to snipe, but there really isn't anything to see here.

I did question this myself initially. I came to the conclusion that Newcastle have more games from next season, so in theory they need a bigger squad. They don't really have too many exciting/established players who would be attractive to the Saudi league and that might be available, the only one I could think of was probably Saint Maximan. Where we have a number of well known players available.

I can't say I have followed these developments to closely, but I believe they only fairly recent change in all this is that PIF have acquired a majority stake in the top 4 Saudi Clubs (recent as in post Clearlake Chelsea takeover)

Which makes me think that this is not so much about helping Chelsea out, though it seems pretty clear that the relationship is good, but more a case of strengthening the Saudi league (top 4 clubs) by attracting players on lower transfer fees (through the good relationship) but coughing up high wages , along similar lines to what these players earn at Chelsea.

That's my take on what is playing out here and why Newcastle are not really too involved in all this . I just dont think they have the right players available to enhance these clubs.

[Bob Singleton]

@Backbiter  Yet in spite of this rule, not ALL German clubs are run by the fans! Many are, but not all, and it's spurious to argue that being fan run makes the clubs inherently better run. I'd hate for Chelsea to be run by some of the people in this forum, for example!