Douglas Luiz

[markavfc40]

I wouldn't get too hung up on any reported fees with regard Luiz. Regardless of his sale and us buying Barrenechea and Iling-Junior being classed as separate deals clearly the whole deal for the three players is linked and the figures will have been massaged to suit however we/Juventus need them to appear.

It is certainly not worth us losing any sleep over and I'm quietly confident that we have people at the club negotiating these deals that aren't in the business of having their pants pulled down.

Good luck to Dougie by the way. Left us with some good memories and played a part in our remarkable recent rise, a rise which I am confident is still far from having reached it's peak. 

[Kiwivillan]

BBC reporting it as done deal according to Juve sources. The 2 players coming our way seem really good pick ups. Liverpool sold Coutinho and improved. We sold Grealish and so on and so on

[Adam2003]

2 hours ago, CarryOnVilla said:

You might be on to something. The low values all round suggests there are there to keep amortisation down. 

Yep. Bank tens of millions now for the sellers (even if a bit less than you COULD get), but still only a smaller total in terms of costs on the books each year for the buyers.

[thejoker]

48 minutes ago, Made In Aston said:

Juventus really had us by the balls didn't they?! 42.5m for Douglas Luiz is outrageous, as he is worth at least 60m.

The 2 guys that we are signing are cheap too. £22m for 2 young players who both have plenty of Serie A experience - we are selling Kellyman for £19m with barely any first team experience at all.

The figure is irrelevant really anyway. The €28m difference is the key. You can say we’re getting €60m for Dougie and paying €32m for the 2 Juventus players, it doesn’t really matter. 

[The_Steve]

1 hour ago, Adam2003 said:

I actually think the amount is less relevant than ever before, ironically, considering it’s financially motivated. Right now sales/transfers in football will be way less about what a player is ‘worth’ and about what a club needs on a particular timeline. I’m very sad he’s left because I really rate him (Juve have him at a bargain price for sure) but IF we are selling him as part of our wheeler-dealing then whether that’s for £30m or £60m doesn’t matter as long as it lets us skate past PSR for last season and sign whoever our targets are this summer. Obviously more is better, but this is just about moving numbers around on a spreadsheet now.

The sad state of football nowadays. It's no longer about the true valuations of players to each club, but how immediately we can tick arbitrary boxes for financial compliance. We might 'undersell' today to buy bigger next month.

[ChicagoVillan1983]

I like it. We have to judge every deal in both a footballing and commercial sense, and I think it ticks a heck of a lot of boxes. I like the two young prospects, and I'm not devestated to see dougie leave - I think he was nailed on to leave for free in two years anyway: cash in now.

But most importantly it clears up our PSR woes and will allow us to go big in July.

We're going to end up with a very deep squad, and I have faith that Emery can get a tune out of any player that comes his way. This is going to be a key to our success here on out - don't take this literally, but we buy uncut diamonds, Emery polishes them and the we shift them along for a profit. 
 

Under the current structure, this is the only way Villa compete. We gotta be the Del Boys of the league.

[Rich192]

It wouldn't surprise me if the original deal was Doug valued at €65m, but then due to the UEFA rule about doing swaps meant that we had to do them as separate transactions. It was then in our interest to reduce everyone's value, so that we paid less of a sell on clause fee to Man City (20% on anything above £15m I believe). So potentially only around €3m difference, but we got enough FFP profit from the sale to comply with this years accounts, and pay Man City less of a sell on fee, and on top of that also have a lower fee to amoritse for the two new boys.

 

Anyway, I shall miss him, been a really good player for us. I would wish him all the best, but I'm also an Inter fan, so he will always be a pezzo di merda now. 

[Czarnikjak]

Do City really have a sell on fee clause on him? I don't remember that being mentioned (I only remember the buyback clause).

[The_Steve]

45 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Do City really have a sell on fee clause on him? I don't remember that being mentioned (I only remember the buyback clause).

They do. Ornstein reported that they retained a sell-on clause in 2022. City blogs claim it's as high as 20 per cent.

 

Edited June 22 by The_Steve

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

2 hours ago, Rich192 said:

It wouldn't surprise me if the original deal was Doug valued at €65m, but then due to the UEFA rule about doing swaps meant that we had to do them as separate transactions. It was then in our interest to reduce everyone's value, so that we paid less of a sell on clause fee to Man City (20% on anything above £15m I believe). So potentially only around €3m difference, but we got enough FFP profit from the sale to comply with this years accounts, and pay Man City less of a sell on fee, and on top of that also have a lower fee to amoritse for the two new boys.

 

Anyway, I shall miss him, been a really good player for us. I would wish him all the best, but I'm also an Inter fan, so he will always be a pezzo di merda now. 

Just read something saying we never budged from the valuation of 65 mill Euro.

But Iling Junior valued at 25 mill Euro and Barrenechea valued at 12 million euros.

Meaning we receive 28 million euros.

Edited June 23 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN

[Aston_Villan4]

5 hours ago, villaglint said:

Where has this figure come from? All the reports from Italy were suggesting 60-65m euros so £54m. 

No sure but that’s what Ornstein is reporting.

[Panto_Villan]

Ah yeah, it’d definitely make sense to bump down the values of all of the players if we’ve agreed 2 players + 28m, but City have a sell-on clause on Luiz. We’re getting the youngsters very cheap.

[KAZZAM]

The low valuation makes sense now because of the city sell on clause. 

Saved ourself 3-4 mill roughly. 

Wonder how City feels about this type of wrangling tho. 

[Lord Willard]

I think we deflated or inflation the cost of the transfer to suit us. If we needed 40/50m to comply with PSR it means less money to City and it also reduces the cost of the 2 coming in. Lower transfer fee for those means their costs are lower for our PSR figures over the next 3/5 years. 

[Zatman]

Sad time to lose Dougie after 5 years a man who gave all and gave us great memories. That outside the boot pass at Sheffield United was one of the great Villa assists

Pity wont see him in a Villa jersey in Champions League but be welcome back

[cheltenham_villa]

5 minutes ago, KAZZAM said:

The low valuation makes sense now because of the city sell on clause. 

Saved ourself 3-4 mill roughly. 

Wonder how City feels about this type of wrangling tho. 

I dont think a lower valuation is for city's benefit as it would also impact us and how much profit we can record on the books. It would also give other teams a reason to not do this sort of business with us in the future. 

I think the valuation likely just reflects the mix of what we want, what the player wants and what the buy club is prepared to pay. 

[allani]

9 hours ago, The_Steve said:

The sad state of football nowadays. It's no longer about the true valuations of players to each club, but how immediately we can tick arbitrary boxes for financial compliance. We might 'undersell' today to buy bigger next month.

That's the problem when you try and manipulate the rules in favour of the teams with the highest revenues to protect their position and prevent new teams from joining the party.  If FFP or PSR had anything to do with fair play of sustainability then the rules wouldn't have been written the way they are.  Unfortunately (for them) a bunch of old men who have found themselves at the top of an old boy's network aren't as clever as billionaire businessmen - who would have thought it.  The price of Luiz doesn't seem too unreasonable considering the fee quoted for Gallagher and so I don't think we'll have any trouble defending it from any allegations of manipulation.  Similarly I think we'll find examples of similar signings to Iling and Enzo to justify their "low" prices.

I actually quite like seeing teams manipulate prices down because it suits their needs rather than having prices constantly inflated by State sponsored clubs or a State sponsored league who have no cares about "value for money" as they'll just write a bigger Official Airline Partnership or 3rd Kit Sponsorship through another state contolled business to cover any paper loss.

[ender4]

26 minutes ago, KAZZAM said:

The low valuation makes sense now because of the city sell on clause. 

Saved ourself 3-4 mill roughly. 

Lower agent fees for Villa and Juve as well.

[Isa]

If 'ticking the arbitary boxes' for a transfer gives us similar leeway in the market to that of what we would consider the true value of the player, then it's of no real difference. In real terms it will only ultimately reflect a hit to the owners who are happy for that to be the case at present. 

[mjmooney]

Monchi knows what he's doing.