Good to having a loan with option to buy
We could see the performance from him before we need to spend that big.
Manuel Ugarte | Romano - he’s signed | Awaiting Club announcement
- Thread starter WeePat
- Start date
- Status
Good to having a loan with option to buy
We could see the performance from him before we need to spend that big.
A £5m loan fee with an option at £40m I think is fair for all involved.
Great news if PSG will accept a loan.
You can envisage something like the Amrabat deal - £10m loan fee with a circa £40m option.
You can envisage something like the Amrabat deal - £10m loan fee with a circa £40m option.
A couple of good folk have mentioned 'loan with an obligation to buy', but I don't really get that, it just seems a purchase with delayed payment to me. I'm not sure such a thing exists in football, but happy to be educated about it of course.
A 'loan with an option to buy' makes sense.
A 'loan with an option to buy' makes sense.
They've been very common in football over the past few seasons. It's basically just a way to shift the financial hit of the signing onto the next year.
It's how PSG bought Mbappe.
It does exist, and the purpose is to balance the books. A good way to think of it is as borrowing from next year's budget (from an earnings perspective, not cash flow perspective for the accounting nerds).
Arsenal had an option to buy, they could have went back on this deal until July.
My understanding is the obligation usually kicks in if certain factors are met - e.g. in this instance it might be number of appearances and/or the club qualifying for the champions league. As opposed to it being a blanket we must complete a permanent transfer next summer.
Happens all the time in Italy especially, PSG did it with mbappe and so on. It's a PSR workaround.
It usually is like that, but iirc Romero to Tottenham and Gosens to Inter for example were reported as just obligations without any additional conditions.
Fair enough. Bailly is one which sticks in my mind where (of course) he got nowhere near the required appearance numbers to trigger a permanent move to Marseille.
What a crazy suggestion, when it literally happens all the time.
The Italian teams have lived off it for years now.
My bad. I read that it was always going to turn permanent but maybe no obligation to make it so. Just an agreement of some sort maybe.
Loan now makes sense as we NEED another CB desperately. Kick his payments back a year and get De Ligt now.
It’s for FFP reasons and probably something that will grow over the next few years
Do imagine a decent option for a loan will appeal to us.
Ah thank you, it does make sense now I know that. Thanks to all that replied.
If we can agree a loan deal for Ugarte (and potentially pick up Rabiot on a free) we could bolster our midfield options for minimal outlay and direct any fee we receive for McTominay towards a new CB.
The problem with a loan is they'll want a large loan fee which I cant see being something Sir Jims team will be happy with.
It is basically a 40m transfer, with deferred payment until next summer.
Calling it a loan is just another method of getting around the financial regulations.
He will be a regular starter and a good signing for us.
Calling it a loan is just another method of getting around the financial regulations.
He will be a regular starter and a good signing for us.
Never mind what they paid for Neves, they've got an amazing deal there. Ugarte is going for the same or a bit less than last year. I don't think it's a bad deal given his defensive stats.
I imagine they will want 1/5th or 1/6th of the free upfront, essentially paying in advance for the full year and probably balancing their books for him.
Depends if it is obligation or option to buy. But the added flexibility may have a price.
Last edited:
They want a lot more than 40m don’t they?
I believe the rumor talk is they want 60-70m€ and United was maybe willing to go into the 40m£ / 50m€ range.
Yeah, but say a £10m loan and £40m obligation, works out for everyone.
If it were an option to buy that would presumably mean a much higher loan fee in their pocket, but balanced by the risk him being injured or turning shite during the loan. That might fit in to our long-term financial strategy or not, we will only know if it happens.
A loan with option to buy would be perfect, with obligation to buy (with certain criteria being met) would also be good. PSG has to let him go now, especially given the Neves signing. Although, one caveat is that they don't have another player with his skillset.
If he has a stellar season and proved that he’s worth that money then it would work out, no?
I mean the biggest concern most people have with Ugarte doesn’t seem to be the fee in isolation, but rather if he’s going to end up actually being good enough here. If for example he comes here and starts looking like a prime Casemiro then I don’t think anyone would complain about the fee.
loan fee with an option to buy is a great way to get this deal done as it gives you the opportunity to see how he fits and performs much like amrabat from last season
if it's a loan fee with obligation to buy that would be interesting to see the terms.....if they spent 60m on Neves given his age and buyout clause that Benfica stepped back from, somewhat negates their position to negotiate a higher fee for Ugarte
if it's a loan fee with obligation to buy that would be interesting to see the terms.....if they spent 60m on Neves given his age and buyout clause that Benfica stepped back from, somewhat negates their position to negotiate a higher fee for Ugarte
Im surprised how many want him here. Hes little more than a tackling machine. And that wasn’t good enough for RB so why is it good enough for CM?
Just curious what people’s thinking is. I’m not convinced he offers us enough to justify the spend but maybe a loan would be great in these circumstances
Just curious what people’s thinking is. I’m not convinced he offers us enough to justify the spend but maybe a loan would be great in these circumstances
name one midfielder we have that can tackle and/or can win a ball on a fairly regular basis?
I fully understand the idea of pursuing a loan deal with this guy. At the same time, I still have the impression that the club don't know exactly what to do with the midfield and we are just cycling through temporary fixes. We had Sabitzer the year before, Imhotep last year, and now we're doing the same with Ugarte. It seems to be in very similar circumstances to Amrabat last year, where we 'might' take up the option of signing him if we like him, but may not if we don't.
Couple that with the signing of Casemiro, which started to look very short-sighted last season given his very poor form. We've had some mileage out of Eriksen, but even he showed limitations last year. It just feels like we're stumbling from short-term fix to short-term fix without really cementing our ideas in this area. Thank god for Mainoo...we lucked out big time with him.
Couple that with the signing of Casemiro, which started to look very short-sighted last season given his very poor form. We've had some mileage out of Eriksen, but even he showed limitations last year. It just feels like we're stumbling from short-term fix to short-term fix without really cementing our ideas in this area. Thank god for Mainoo...we lucked out big time with him.
They might have been reported like that, but they wouldn’t have been for the simple reason that UEFA counts loans with obligations as certain transfers from a financial point of view.
They actually have to get pretty creative with it, because even loans with basically certain options don’t get around that:
Loan of a player from the lender club to the new club with an unconditional obligation to buy
a) The loan must be reflected by the lender club as a permanent transfer and the player’s registration rights must be derecognised from its intangible assets. The proceeds from the loan and from the future permanent transfer must be recognised from the inception of the loan agreement.
b) The direct costs of the loan and the future permanent transfer for the new club must be recognised by the new club in accordance with the accounting requirements for permanent acquisition of a player’s registration
Loan of a player from the lender club to the new club with a conditional obligation to buy
a) If a condition is considered to be virtually certain, then the player’s registration must be recognised by both clubs as a permanent transfer from the inception of the loan agreement.
now...if i had my choice, i'd rather sign Rabiot on a free and Richard Rios from Colombia
both are willing defenders and both are progressive carriers of the ball
both are willing defenders and both are progressive carriers of the ball
Casemiro. Probably the only thing he still does well
Besides there is more than 1 way to skin a cat. Tell me who was the tackler out of Carrick-Scholes pairing
Case...yes, if he can catch them or they slow down for him
yes, you are correct i think which i was i followed that statement up by saying if i had a preference it would be adding Rabiot and Rios who have a bit more of an all around type of game
as for carrick-scholes....we all know Scholes was a shit tackler, one of the worse i've ever seen and carrick wasn't really either but feck me he was a brilliant player and read the game so well defensively. I see a lot of carrick in how Kobbie plays
Exactly so we don’t necessarily need the dog who chases car wheels type if we put a bit of thought into it. But time and money is against us now so I think a loan would be a good idea to see how he fitsCase...yes, if he can catch them or they slow down for him
yes, you are correct i think which i was i followed that statement up by saying if i had a preference it would be adding Rabiot and Rios who have a bit more of an all around type of game
as for carrick-scholes....we all know Scholes was a shit tackler, one of the worse i've ever seen and carrick wasn't really either but feck me he was a brilliant player and read the game so well defensively. I see a lot of carrick in how Kobbie plays
Dream player for a game like that. Just shove him in front of the defenders and he will let your attacking players shine.
Ah thanks for the details. I was wondering if there was regulations around that because loan with obligations seemed like it would be used and abused as accounting trickery if allowed without any guardrails.
- Status