Moises Caicedo | Chelsea agree £115M fee | signed for Chelsea

Status
Not open for further replies.
Amadaeus said:
Seems like a lot of mind game going on with both liverpool and Chelsea before their opening match. Don't believe Liverpool have enough to pay that asking price Brighton want and neither does bayern. I don't believe chelsea will go after both lavia and Caceido now since they just signed Adam's, so I can't really put my finger on whether their interests in lavia is genuine.

-----------Lavia/adam (santos)
Caceido/Gallagher - Enzo/carni

It can still work if they get all three, but seems a bit much for Pochettino midfield when they have some promising kids that did well in preseason
Click to expand...
Are you excited about potentially getting Caicedo?
 
We need an rvn said:
How about you just give me a one or two line summary to help me out?
Click to expand...

His original contract was a low wage (but more than £3k p/w). For accounting reasons, he additionally received a guaranteed loyalty bonus paid incrementally with his wage, which brought his “guaranteed earnings” up to a reasonable level. This I know first hand.

His new contract ditched this structure and instead offered him a high salary (one of the highest in the club, behind Dunk) and ditched loyalty bonuses.

Loyalty bonuses work thusly: if the player stays under contract with a club, he receives an amount paid incrementally alongside his wage. He forfeits this bonus if he requests or indeed forces a transfer. Any monies paid to the player would be refunded to the club, as he broke his “loyalty” to them.

With Caicedo - or rather his agent - aware he will likely move in the summer, they renegotiated this loyalty payment structure into a fixed wage. This benefitted the player because he was stuck on a relatively low remuneration package for a player of his ability, with years to run on the deal. If the player were to try and force a move, he would lose the majority of his structured pay. It also afforded him a like-for-like pay increase on his previous contract structure.

It benefitted the club, because it allowed them to extend the player’s contract and guarantee the player’s value in the transfer market when the time came to sell.

A negotiated release clause was never an option, because the player - via his new agent - was never in a position to negotiate one. They got a pay rise and fixed salary in return for a contract term extension.

The player was never taking home as little as £3k per week. Structured loyalty bonus schemes are very common with footballers with huge potential, so that as they develop with a club, they earn more.

Anything you read on websites/Twitter/TikTok is fabrication with absolutely no working knowledge of this aspect of the football business. Validate, assess, question.
 
UTAretro said:
His original contract was a low wage (but more than £3k p/w). For accounting reasons, he additionally received a guaranteed loyalty bonus paid incrementally with his wage, which brought his “guaranteed earnings” up to a reasonable level. This I know first hand.

His new contract ditched this structure and instead offered him a high salary (one of the highest in the club, behind Dunk) and ditched loyalty bonuses.

Loyalty bonuses work thusly: if the player stays under contract with a club, he receives an amount paid incrementally alongside his wage. He forfeits this bonus if he requests or indeed forces a transfer. Any monies paid to the player would be refunded to the club, as he broke his “loyalty” to them.

With Caicedo - or rather his agent - aware he will likely move in the summer, they renegotiated this loyalty payment structure into a fixed wage. This benefitted the player because he was stuck on a relatively low remuneration package for a player of his ability, with years to run on the deal. If the player were to try and force a move, he would lose the majority of his structured pay. It also afforded him a like-for-like pay increase on his previous contract structure.

It benefitted the club, because it allowed them to extend the player’s contract and guarantee the player’s value in the transfer market when the time came to sell.

A negotiated release clause was never an option, because the player - via his new agent - was never in a position to negotiate one. They got a pay rise and fixed salary in return for a contract term extension.

The player was never taking home as little as £3k per week. Structured loyalty bonus schemes are very common with footballers with huge potential, so that as they develop with a club, they earn more.

Anything you read on websites/Twitter/TikTok is fabrication with absolutely no working knowledge of this aspect of the football business. Validate, assess, question.
Click to expand...

He asked for 1 or 2 lines, so apart from an excellent post, you failed
 
Can't even get on a walk anymore without the risk of being showered by 100m transfer fees.
 
Real Name said:
Are you excited about potentially getting Caicedo?
Click to expand...
I would prefer him at United. But, i feel like we could be in the market for someone as good as him next season when casemiro role switches from being a starter

I have to be honest, Chelsea scouting department has been top notch in their acquisition of young talented players and identifying players that suit Pochettino ideology. Even though they have struggled to bring first team player to his team, they are looking at the right players. Caceido is exactly the type of players Pochettino needs, but I feel that a combination of lavia and Caceido is better for him. Caceido isn't really a ball carrier, while lavia is. And Pochettino has always had those type of ball carriers in his team from midfield. Ideally for Pochettino

---------------------------Lavia
------------------Caceido - enzo
Kudus(cherki/felix) ------ nkunku/mudryk
--------------------------- jackson

But I can see it being

Caceido - Enzo
Olise - nkunku - mudryk
Jackson
 
He is quality where ever he goes, it's for a reason that he quoted to be a 100m player.
 
UTAretro said:
His original contract was a low wage (but more than £3k p/w). For accounting reasons, he additionally received a guaranteed loyalty bonus paid incrementally with his wage, which brought his “guaranteed earnings” up to a reasonable level. This I know first hand.

His new contract ditched this structure and instead offered him a high salary (one of the highest in the club, behind Dunk) and ditched loyalty bonuses.

Loyalty bonuses work thusly: if the player stays under contract with a club, he receives an amount paid incrementally alongside his wage. He forfeits this bonus if he requests or indeed forces a transfer. Any monies paid to the player would be refunded to the club, as he broke his “loyalty” to them.

With Caicedo - or rather his agent - aware he will likely move in the summer, they renegotiated this loyalty payment structure into a fixed wage. This benefitted the player because he was stuck on a relatively low remuneration package for a player of his ability, with years to run on the deal. If the player were to try and force a move, he would lose the majority of his structured pay. It also afforded him a like-for-like pay increase on his previous contract structure.

It benefitted the club, because it allowed them to extend the player’s contract and guarantee the player’s value in the transfer market when the time came to sell.

A negotiated release clause was never an option, because the player - via his new agent - was never in a position to negotiate one. They got a pay rise and fixed salary in return for a contract term extension.

The player was never taking home as little as £3k per week. Structured loyalty bonus schemes are very common with footballers with huge potential, so that as they develop with a club, they earn more.

Anything you read on websites/Twitter/TikTok is fabrication with absolutely no working knowledge of this aspect of the football business. Validate, assess, question.
Click to expand...
Many thanks for the explanation!
 
OverratedOpinion said:
Great to have your insights about Brighton on here.
Click to expand...

Happy to contribute. This is the only opposition forum I post on because the posters here are a lot more interesting and informed. The Shed End is a disaster, for instance. That said, every time the same misinformation is repeated I am going to correct it when I personally know it to be factually wrong!
 
Adnan said:
Click to expand...

If Liverpool were able to get Caicedo that would be a massive coup and better than any other signing they could have wished for in that position. That would give them a very strong first XI albeit weak depth in midfield and defence.

It would also be bizarre and ironic at the same time that they pulled out of the race for Bellingham due to the cost being too high but could end up signing someone who cost more than Bellingham went for.
 
UTAretro said:
Happy to contribute. This is the only opposition forum I post on because the posters here are a lot more interesting and informed. The Shed End is a disaster, for instance. That said, every time the same misinformation is repeated I am going to correct it when I personally know it to be factually wrong!
Click to expand...

There’s a reason the Chelsea fans here are here and not on shed end. It’s awful. But to be honest, most oppo forums I’ve looked at has been a cesspool, Bluemoon being the worst of them all. The caf is genuinely one of a kind.
 
WeePat said:
There’s a reason the Chelsea fans here are here and not on shed end. It’s awful. But to be honest, most oppo forums I’ve looked at has been a cesspool, Bluemoon being the worst of them all. The caf is genuinely one of a kind.
Click to expand...

It is only natural!
 
Chief123 said:
If Liverpool were able to get Caicedo that would be a massive coup and better than any other signing they could have wished for in that position. That would give them a very strong first XI albeit weak depth in midfield and defence.

It would also be bizarre and ironic at the same time that they pulled out of the race for Bellingham due to the cost being too high but could end up signing someone who cost more than Bellingham went for.
Click to expand...

I guess that was before they found out that Saudi clubs were willing to take their top earners off their wage bill and pay an obscene transfer fee on top of that.
 
FriedClams said:
Liverpool couldn’t get Bellingham, but can pay Brighton 100m?
Click to expand...

Bellingham wanted Madrid, it never got as far as Liverpool bidding because Madrid were ready to meet the asking price before the window opened and the player said that was his preferred outcome. It was a formality and so Liverpool ended up not even wasting their time with an offer.
 
Boom! I love it when the “generation talent“ chat starts.

One of the worst buzz words in football.
 
The player's presence is Chelsea according to Reddy. So it now depends on if Chelsea can do the deal or back away and allow Liverpool to sign him.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.