[Albion] Tino Livramento

[Brian Fantana]

We have no idea of the specifics of the deal, so seems foolhardy to second guess the clubs decision based on factors unknown to us. Chelsea have likely wised up and will make damn sure they benefit from future exits of their young talent.

A buyback could be one factor. Could be sell ons, multiple conditions; pay a certain amount to Chelsea after x number of first team games, after an international call up, after a season.

And the big factor I think some are missing is opportunity cost. Which is hard to calculate but I bet someone like Tony would factor in. Ie. We’d be giving game time through a season that we could be giving to one of our young players already here, who could then develop and blossom.

Basically it all comes down to… do you trust the club to make the right decision in our interests.

This.

And in answer to the question in the final line - yes, 100%. Especially any decision made directly by TB.

 

[Wardy's twin]

If Tony just cared about turning us into a profit making business, then yeah it's a good deal.
But he is being asked to relinquish control on what his plans are for that player.

Tony won't do that.
There's loads of other ways he can make £20m without being told what to do by a third party.

Pretty sure he has stated that he would like to make the club self funding so £20million would be a good return on investment. I get the idea that ownership of complete player rights is best option but full ownership does not guarantee that a player will stay. If total control is the issue then I would say that might be a flaw in Tony's thinking.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Pretty sure he has stated that he would like to make the club self funding so £20million would be a good return on investment. I get the idea that ownership of complete player rights is best option but full ownership does not guarantee that a player will stay. If total control is the issue then I would say that might be a flaw in Tony's thinking.

It's entirely possible the player has chosen Southampton over us.
Just strange that there was no mention of a buyback clause until we were out of the running.

 

[Whitechapel]

Anybody wetting their pants over that wuld be a very silly person - as well as incontinent. If we knew at the outset we were getting a player for £5M, but that if he turned out to be good the selling club would have a right to buy him back for £25M we should just look at it calmly and realise that the other club have effectively lent us a player who for whatever length of time he was with us has helped us move forward.
Now normally you would pay a loan fee for a player coming in on loan - but in this case you are being paid a cool £20M just for letting him improve your team for a season or two. It is what is known as a no-brainer. As others have already rightly said, none of us know why he went to Southampton, not us; a penny to a pound though, it wouldn't have been just because of a sell back clause; other factors will have been involved.
Anyway, I'm done with this now - life's to short to try explain to people that £25M for an expenditure of £5M is a healthy profit!

Well then let’s hope we give all of our signings going forward a buyout clause of £20m more than we paid for them. After-all we could have then made £20m profit on White and could look forward to getting £20m for Sanchez & £31m for Bissouma.

But we’ll leave it there, because if you think the deal was a no brainier then the only thing here with no brain is you, so there’s no point trying to explain why they’re terrible deals for the buying club.

 

[Clive Walker]

We have no idea of the specifics of the deal, so seems foolhardy to second guess the clubs decision based on factors unknown to us. Chelsea have likely wised up and will make damn sure they benefit from future exits of their young talent.

A buyback could be one factor. Could be sell ons, multiple conditions; pay a certain amount to Chelsea after x number of first team games, after an international call up, after a season.

And the big factor I think some are missing is opportunity cost. Which is hard to calculate but I bet someone like Tony would factor in. Ie. We’d be giving game time through a season that we could be giving to one of our young players already here, who could then develop and blossom.

Basically it all comes down to… do you trust the club to make the right decision in our interests.

or it had nothing to do with Brightons decision and that the player chose Southampton instead of us. Why oh why do you need to keep on believing that we pulled out of the purchase for whatever reason when it is most probably as simple as he fancied Southampton more than us.

 

[Wardy's twin]

It's entirely possible the player has chosen Southampton over us.
Just strange that there was no mention of a buyback clause until we were out of the running.

Agree , I have not read every comment so had assumed that someone had actually stated that buyback was the cause. As you say who knows. I wonder if it was all of a smoke screen around that guy from Getafe .

 

[Barnet Seagull]

A buy back isnt something Id expect us to sign up for as it doesnt fit our model.

It is potentially an indefinite term.
It limits our return on investment.
It prevents us developing another player without these limits.

Thats not to say it couldnt work but I think we'd want to agree a mimimum of 6-12 months notice of buyback and to get our transfer fee, wages and development costs refunded at a premium.

Given we can turn Lamptey from £4m to £Xm in 6 months, i'd want buyback to be significant and it to grow in value over time. E.g. an additional £5-10m per year for the length of the contract.

I think this deal leaves Saints exposed and is likely more risk than we are willing to take.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[El Turi]

He’s really impressing for Southampton today while we don’t even have a fit right back to play. A real shame we didn’t get the deal done.

 

[BRIGHT ON Q]

He’s really impressing for Southampton today while we don’t even have a fit right back to play. A real shame we didn’t get the deal done.

What a surprise

 

[GT49er]

Well then let’s hope we give all of our signings going forward a buyout clause of £20m more than we paid for them. After-all we could have then made £20m profit on White and could look forward to getting £20m for Sanchez & £31m for Bissouma.

But we’ll leave it there, because if you think the deal was a no brainier then the only thing here with no brain is you, so there’s no point trying to explain why they’re terrible deals for the buying club.

If paying out £5M to get a return of £25M doesn't appeal to you, I suggest you never try running a football club.

 

[Whitechapel]

If paying out £5M to get a return of £25M doesn't appeal to you, I suggest you never try running a football club.

If you can’t fathom that getting £25m for an asset worth double that is bad business then I suggest you never try running any business ever.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

If you can’t fathom that getting £25m for an asset worth double that is bad business then I suggest you never try running any business ever.

This, plus the fact that you are allowing Chelsea to control bringing him back when they want (transfer window allowing of course). Could you imagine the outcry if he was having a fantastic season and they decided they wanted him back on deadline day in January leaving you short of one of your best players and no time to bring anyone in.

This situation has come about as Chelsea were burnt by the Lamptey deal, so now they are sticking more clauses in when selling their youngsters, like this buy back clause, and the match future fee agreement for Guehi at Palace.

 

[SimpKingpin]

He’s really impressing for Southampton today while we don’t even have a fit right back to play. A real shame we didn’t get the deal done.

Yeah this really got me down. I think he would have been great here.

I wish they would do away with these buy-back clauses. Just seems like such an advantage and no-brainer for the rich clubs.

I hear the want a buy-back clause in Tammy Abraham's contract too!

 

[Motogull]

I wish they would do away with these buy-back clauses. Just seems like such an advantage and no-brainer for the rich clubs.

If buying clubs were all to say "fukk off" they'd disappear, but they won't.

 

[dwayne]

Wow this guy looked depresingly good on Saturday, saints fans already comparing him to Bale.

There was a highlights reel that was insane but has been taken down now.

Sooooo frustrating.

https://twitter.com/ZaleCFC/status/1426554214860394498?s=19

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

Wow this guy looked depresingly good on Saturday, saints fans already comparing him to Bale.

There was a highlights reel that was insane but has been taken down now.

Sooooo frustrating.

https://twitter.com/ZaleCFC/status/1426554214860394498?s=19

Highlights package probably showed his attacking skills.
Defensively, they conceded three, at least two of the three came from wide on the right, and there were plenty of crosses coming into the Stains box

 

[dwayne]

Highlights package probably showed his attacking skills.
Defensively, they conceded three, at least two of the three came from wide on the right, and there were plenty of crosses coming into the Stains box

That's a fair comment....

But judging by what I saw he looks very similar to lamptey. Maybe better suited as a winger. At 18, some talent.

Really p1sses me off that we lost out to a team heavily on the way down like Saints.

Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk

 

[GT49er]

That's a fair comment....

But judging by what I saw he looks very similar to lamptey. Maybe better suited as a winger. At 18, some talent.

Really p1sses me off that we lost out to a team heavily on the way down like Saints.

Yes, that last bit does grate a bit.

 

[prawnsarnies]

If we had signed him he wouldn't be anywhere near the first team squad a few days later, he would be in the u23's.

 

[GT49er]

If we had signed him he wouldn't be anywhere near the first team squad a few days later, he would be in the u23's.

Just like Lamptey ..........................