Payero

I haven’t been following that closely admittedly but he’s not exactly lit it up over there has he?

Also I can’t imagine Atalanta would be thrilled at having their eyes out.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
You win some, you lose some. No chance he was getting a call up or we were getting that fee of he'd stayed with us.
Click to expand...
Which ones do we win?

We seem to put some odd clauses in contracts, especially those of players who could develop rapidly. It's clear as day that we don't seem to do a "what if" analysis, we just seem to put numbers on things without thinking about them. Stange how we put those clauses on players we buy and loan out, yet don't get beneficial clauses in players we buy or loan in.

The 9m spent on Traore (a massive risk at the time), yet only 17m recouped if the risk worked (which would have been low value if it worked, like what happened). As soon as he had a few games in the prem we should have renegotiated his deal and got rid of that clause, or upped it. No risky young player should ever have a 2x release fee, as their value can rocket.

Payero, bought for ~5m, didn't give him much time to develop here (or learn language) and then loan him out with a 5m release fee if he got better. The only way this was going to work for us was if he was worth exactly 5m to Boca after the loan, which is quite a big fee for an inbound player to Argentina. If he ends up worth more, they probably can't buy him to keep (don't have much money, and wages too), if another club wants him they buy him and shift him (we don't benefit), if he ends up a dud, we end up stuck with him, but have lost a year to develop. Sure you can say we would have got nothing if he stayed, but we would, we would have had a year to develop him. He wasn't going to get worse, nobody thinks any player playing for international under 20/21/23 sides are going to get worse, they get picked as they're expected to get a lot better.

Sold Spence, a player with some potential, yet structured the deal, and sold to a club where it would be exceptionally unlikely we would see any of the extras.

Sold Tav, a rapidly developing player, yet sold him for less than he was actually worth to us, never mind what he could be to others. We put ourselves in a corner by not giving him a better/ longer contract.

Happens with other players too:

Braithwaite - sold for less than what we paid and even with the 25% sell on we never got our money back, yet he ended up playing for barcelona
Stuani - got next to nothing, was top scorer in la liga for a long while, despite playing for a terrible team. Girona got ~6 years out of him and 116 goals in 210 games
 
Last edited:
Alzi said:
I haven’t been following that closely admittedly but he’s not exactly lit it up over there has he?

Also I can’t imagine Atalanta would be thrilled at having their eyes out.
Click to expand...
If Atalanta think he's worth 15m then they will be happy to buy him for 15m, the only club gettign their eyes taken out would be us, in that scenario.

Chances are they think he's worth a lot more than what they actually pay, as they know that boca are just going to try and take a chunk out of the middle, and if Atalata are interested then others will be too, especially when ever club will be aware boca can buy for 5m and are seemingly very open to making a quick buck.
 
On the bench again last night.

I'd be surprised if he got a call-up.

Good news for us if he does though.
 
Andy_W said:
Which ones do we win?

We seem to put some odd clauses in contracts, especially those of players who could develop rapidly. It's clear as day that we don't seem to do a "what if" analysis, we just seem to put numbers on things without thinking about them. Stange how we put those clauses on players we buy and loan out, yet don't get beneficial clauses in players we buy or loan in.

The 9m spent on Traore (a massive risk at the time), yet only 17m recouped if the risk worked (which would have been low value if it worked, like what happened). As soon as he had a few games in the prem we should have renegotiated his deal and got rid of that clause, or upped it. No risky young player should ever have a 2x release fee, as their value can rocket.

Payero, bought for ~5m, didn't give him much time to develop here (or learn language) and then loan him out with a 5m release fee if he got better. The only way this was going to work for us was if he was worth exactly 5m to Boca after the loan, which is quite a big fee for an inbound player to Argentina. If he ends up worth more, they probably can't buy him to keep (don't have much money, and wages too), if another club wants him they buy him and shift him (we don't benefit), if he ends up a dud, we end up stuck with him, but have lost a year to develop. Sure you can say we would have got nothing if he stayed, but we would, we would have had a year to develop him. He wasn't going to get worse, nobody thinks any player playing for international under 20/21/23 sides are going to get worse, they get picked as they're expected to get a lot better.

Sold Spence, a player with some potential, yet structured the deal, and sold to a club where it would be exceptionally unlikely we would see any of the extras.

Sold Tav, a rapidly developing player, yet sold him for less than he was actually worth to us, never mind what he could be to others. We put ourselves in a corner by not giving him a better/ longer contract.

Happens with other players too:

Braithwaite - sold for less than what we paid and even with the 25% sell on we never got our money back, yet he ended up playing for barcelona
Stuani - got next to nothing, was top scorer in la liga for a long while, despite playing for a terrible team. Girona got ~6 years out of him and 116 goals in 210 games
Click to expand...
If we didn’t put a sell on clause for Payero then I agree we are not learning from our mistakes.
 
He wanted to leave, we didn't want to keep him. We were happy to get our money back on him so we agreed a fee for him. If we could have sold him for £5m last year then we would have done. The option to buy for £5m will be one of the reasons Boca paid his wages otherwise we'd have had a £5m squad player, paying his full wages to sit on the bench.
 
Andy_W said:
If Atalanta think he's worth 15m then they will be happy to buy him for 15m, the only club gettign their eyes taken out would be us, in that scenario.

Chances are they think he's worth a lot more than what they actually pay, as they know that boca are just going to try and take a chunk out of the middle, and if Atalata are interested then others will be too, especially when ever club will be aware boca can buy for 5m and are seemingly very open to making a quick buck.
Click to expand...
It’s all just rumour at the minute, likely put out by his agent. A few weeks ago it was a “host” of European clubs getting ready to splash out 15M on him.
 
Nano said:
He wanted to leave, we didn't want to keep him. We were happy to get our money back on him so we agreed a fee for him. If we could have sold him for £5m last year then we would have done. The option to buy for £5m will be one of the reasons Boca paid his wages otherwise we'd have had a £5m squad player, paying his full wages to sit on the bench.
Click to expand...
He wanted to play (as all young lads do), and the current manager at the time didn't want to play him (his choice and fair enough), but we bought him as a prospect, so it makes no sense to not let him develop, it's not like we were buying Juninho etc.

The option to buy rarely suits the selling club, if it doesn't work out the buying club hasn't really lost anything as they don't have to buy, if it works out big time they clean up and get a bargain. The only risk on the buying club is having a player on loan who won't be good enough, but he had played 50 times in that league, they probably know more about him than we did.

It's different with younger players than with old, as younger players can develop or realise potential very quickly, so the deal structures should be very different.
 
Possibly is agent talk mind, but it seems quite extravagent, and also a good example of how we can easily have the rug pulled from under our feet.

We will know soon enough mind, as his loan contract is up in 4 weeks.
 
No one is having their eyes taken out. If we put in a £5m trigger to get him out of the club without taking a hit it was absolutely the right thing to do. What happens after that is not our concern. If he has become a £15m player then that’s Boca’s business not ours. The hindsight 20/20 some of our fans have over these deals is a bit naive imho.
 
Andy_W said:
Which ones do we win?

We seem to put some odd clauses in contracts, especially those of players who could develop rapidly. It's clear as day that we don't seem to do a "what if" analysis, we just seem to put numbers on things without thinking about them. Stange how we put those clauses on players we buy and loan out, yet don't get beneficial clauses in players we buy or loan in.

The 9m spent on Traore (a massive risk at the time), yet only 17m recouped if the risk worked (which would have been low value if it worked, like what happened). As soon as he had a few games in the prem we should have renegotiated his deal and got rid of that clause, or upped it. No risky young player should ever have a 2x release fee, as their value can rocket.

Payero, bought for ~5m, didn't give him much time to develop here (or learn language) and then loan him out with a 5m release fee if he got better. The only way this was going to work for us was if he was worth exactly 5m to Boca after the loan, which is quite a big fee for an inbound player to Argentina. If he ends up worth more, they probably can't buy him to keep (don't have much money, and wages too), if another club wants him they buy him and shift him (we don't benefit), if he ends up a dud, we end up stuck with him, but have lost a year to develop. Sure you can say we would have got nothing if he stayed, but we would, we would have had a year to develop him. He wasn't going to get worse, nobody thinks any player playing for international under 20/21/23 sides are going to get worse, they get picked as they're expected to get a lot better.

Sold Spence, a player with some potential, yet structured the deal, and sold to a club where it would be exceptionally unlikely we would see any of the extras.

Sold Tav, a rapidly developing player, yet sold him for less than he was actually worth to us, never mind what he could be to others. We put ourselves in a corner by not giving him a better/ longer contract.

Happens with other players too:

Braithwaite - sold for less than what we paid and even with the 25% sell on we never got our money back, yet he ended up playing for barcelona
Stuani - got next to nothing, was top scorer in la liga for a long while, despite playing for a terrible team. Girona got ~6 years out of him and 116 goals in 210 games
Click to expand...
Traore came in as Adomah went the other way. How do we know if we didn't try and renegotiate his contract? I was surprised we had a decent buyout clause in the initial contract, given what we bought him for. I don't think we did badly out of him given some other players we have had coming in over the last 10 seasons.

I think most posters would have liked Tav to stay, however I do hope we have a sell on clause, anyone aware?

Braithwaite only signed for Barcelona as they were desperate and activated the release clause on his contract. He hit the jackpot.
 
Andy_W said:
Which ones do we win?

We seem to put some odd clauses in contracts, especially those of players who could develop rapidly. It's clear as day that we don't seem to do a "what if" analysis, we just seem to put numbers on things without thinking about them. Stange how we put those clauses on players we buy and loan out, yet don't get beneficial clauses in players we buy or loan in.

The 9m spent on Traore (a massive risk at the time), yet only 17m recouped if the risk worked (which would have been low value if it worked, like what happened). As soon as he had a few games in the prem we should have renegotiated his deal and got rid of that clause, or upped it. No risky young player should ever have a 2x release fee, as their value can rocket.

Payero, bought for ~5m, didn't give him much time to develop here (or learn language) and then loan him out with a 5m release fee if he got better. The only way this was going to work for us was if he was worth exactly 5m to Boca after the loan, which is quite a big fee for an inbound player to Argentina. If he ends up worth more, they probably can't buy him to keep (don't have much money, and wages too), if another club wants him they buy him and shift him (we don't benefit), if he ends up a dud, we end up stuck with him, but have lost a year to develop. Sure you can say we would have got nothing if he stayed, but we would, we would have had a year to develop him. He wasn't going to get worse, nobody thinks any player playing for international under 20/21/23 sides are going to get worse, they get picked as they're expected to get a lot better.

Sold Spence, a player with some potential, yet structured the deal, and sold to a club where it would be exceptionally unlikely we would see any of the extras.

Sold Tav, a rapidly developing player, yet sold him for less than he was actually worth to us, never mind what he could be to others. We put ourselves in a corner by not giving him a better/ longer contract.

Happens with other players too:

Braithwaite - sold for less than what we paid and even with the 25% sell on we never got our money back, yet he ended up playing for barcelona
Stuani - got next to nothing, was top scorer in la liga for a long while, despite playing for a terrible team. Girona got ~6 years out of him and 116 goals in 210 games
Click to expand...
So, we doubled our money on Traore. Maybe he wouldn't budge on the size of buyout?

Cleared over £20m on Tav and Spence (and I guess you have literally no idea what any add ons were).

Showed a profit on Stuani.

But yeah, it's easy to do so much better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top