• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Trent, Salah and VVD

Forums Unread posts
Farkmaster said:
Sarky about it, and annoying for him?

He has all the power. His manager has nothing to do with it. He gets to be a big cunt, it's never been more about him and he is loving it.

He is trying to get all the money he possibly can. That's all he's doing. He's willing to be a cunt to do it and unsettle things. I get why he's doing what he's doing, and he'd better do it while he's playing well, but I'm not sure how it illicits sympathy. If this was another club, you'd all be laughing at what suckers the supporters were, and what a cunt the star was being.

Yes, he's a big star and a huge player for us. He is paid accordingly. He's paid as though he should be doing exactly what he is now. I don't think it matters anywhere near as much as anyone else whether he goes or not, but it's in his interest to make the argument that it's critically important that we keep an aging star for years, and he's desperately doing that at the expense of the club. I don't know why it's in our interest to parrot the argument, but he seems to have many takers.
Click to expand...
I agree with some of your points but the only reason he has this much power is because of how poorly this has been handled. Oh, and the fact he appears to be the only player capable of scoring week in, week out. If he goes should we just rely on Nunez to fill in with all the goals? Assists? Or some unearthed signing we have no idea will work out or not?

He’s perfectly within his right to get as much money as he can, as we all do with our careers. It’s a negotiation. Especially when at times he carries this team to victory by himself.

I don’t love him talking to the media about it, but this should’ve been wrapped up and dealt with a year ago. Also from what I’ve seen of Fenway and their penny pinching, the deal they’re probably offering him is insulting for someone who will go down a Liverpool and Premier League legend, and is clearly still head and shoulders above anything we have.
 
Let’s not forget, in slightly over a month he can sign a pre contract with anyone else. As can Virgil, as can Trent. Our entire leadership structure. The more I think about it, what a fuckin shambles, and we’re giving Mo a hard time for saying he hasn’t been offered a contract?
 
neildo said:
Let’s not forget, in slightly over a month he can sign a pre contract with anyone else. As can Virgil, as can Trent. Our entire leadership structure. The more I think about it, what a fuckin shambles, and we’re giving Mo a hard time for saying he hasn’t been offered a contract?
Click to expand...
I'm not giving him a hard time, I'm just rolling my eyes at self interested bullshit.
 
I'm not sure that Mo negotiating in public a private contract is a good idea. Should the team have a poor patch of form he may be accused of destabilising it.
 
Don’t see it an issue, the captian and vice captain are also in the same boat. The situation has been in the public for a while. It’s more whether this will impact Mo, currently it isn’t.
 
I’m sure if Mo said he wanted a rolling contract on his current conditions, then I’m sure this would have been done by now.

I suspect that’s not what his agent is asking for though.
 
neildo said:
I agree with some of your points but the only reason he has this much power is because of how poorly this has been handled. Oh, and the fact he appears to be the only player capable of scoring week in, week out. If he goes should we just rely on Nunez to fill in with all the goals? Assists? Or some unearthed signing we have no idea will work out or not?

He’s perfectly within his right to get as much money as he can, as we all do with our careers. It’s a negotiation. Especially when at times he carries this team to victory by himself.

I don’t love him talking to the media about it, but this should’ve been wrapped up and dealt with a year ago. Also from what I’ve seen of Fenway and their penny pinching, the deal they’re probably offering him is insulting for someone who will go down a Liverpool and Premier League legend, and is clearly still head and shoulders above anything we have.
Click to expand...
A year ago Klopp had just announced to the team he was leaving.

It's more than conceivable that the players would want to know who was taking over, which new management / coaching team would be in place and what new tactics would be employed - to say nothing of whether we'd drop off a cliff or not. Who would want to sign a contract extension under those circumstances?

I feel that it is all coming to a head now (VvD on the verge of signing a new contract, Salah in the media and it's clear a renewal is being discussed, Trent shouting his mouth off, simply because they are all happy with the new manager & mgt / coaching team, very happy with the way we are playing (the style of which could extend their sell by dates) and so are now delighted to sign up again (as long as wages and term are agreeable).

You can't blame Klopp (for resigning), the players (for wanting to see what is happening) or the club (because the players wouldn't sign before now) for this situation. At least I don't.
 
Beamrider said:
And if they've done that job, and looked for a right wing-forward who shits goals and assists, there is one name that ought to be at the top of their list. And he already plays for us.
They can make their job a lot easier by signing him up.
The art is in knowing which players to keep up to retirement and which to move on. And you need to be selective so you don't suddenly find yourself with an ageing squad where all the players drop off together (as with our midfield 2 years ago). So you keep van Dijk and Salah while you scout / develop players to replace them. These are vital positions where you don't want to take chances.
But if there are players where you can see their input declining (Mane, Firmino, probably Robbo now) then you move them on. It looks like that's the decision we've taken on Alisson as well, which is probably more injury based.
But the vibes coming out of the club are that we want to keep Mo, Virgil and Trent. So they need to get it done.
Mo will be hard to replace - there are few, if any, players out there who will match his numbers, particularly from right wing forward.
Virgil is still probably the world's best in his position, even if he's not quite the player of 5 years ago.
Trent is unique - there isn't another RB like him in world football.
So you keep them as long as you can, and as long as they perform, and then you adapt when it's their time to go, because you're not going to get a like for like replacement.
Click to expand...
@Beamrider keeping aside the sporting aspect, purely from a financial perspective (P&L, asset value & cashflow) how would the club evaluate renewing Salah for 25million per season for 3 years vs buying Kudus for 75m fees & 8m in wages for a 5 year contract.
 
Let me pretend to be a budget Beamrider for a moment:

The 75M fee would be spread across the 5 years of the contract (15M per year or 23M including wages). So over 3 years, the cost to us would be 75M for Salah and 69M for Kudus.

So Kudus would be 6M less spend, plus he will be a more saleable asset in 3 years time as he will have 2 years left on his contract while Mo could leave for free or retire.

But the unknown (or less calculable) is the opportunity cost of not having Salah during those 3 years. DB would rate this at about 47 billion
 
tombrown said:
Let me pretend to be a budget Beamrider for a moment:

The 75M fee would be spread across the 5 years of the contract (15M per year or 23M including wages). So over 3 years, the cost to us would be 75M for Salah and 69M for Kudus.

So Kudus would be 6M less spend, plus he will be a more saleable asset in 3 years time as he will have 2 years left on his contract while Mo could leave for free or retire.

But the unknown (or less calculable) is the opportunity cost of not having Salah during those 3 years. DB would rate this at about 47 billion
Click to expand...
I think you’ve lowballed that. Not to mention Kudos is nowhere near Salah’s level.
 
tombrown said:
Let me pretend to be a budget Beamrider for a moment:

The 75M fee would be spread across the 5 years of the contract (15M per year or 23M including wages). So over 3 years, the cost to us would be 75M for Salah and 69M for Kudus.

So Kudus would be 6M less spend, plus he will be a more saleable asset in 3 years time as he will have 2 years left on his contract while Mo could leave for free or retire.

But the unknown (or less calculable) is the opportunity cost of not having Salah during those 3 years. DB would rate this at about 47 billion
Click to expand...
OK, I'll take it from here. Lots of numbers, sorry. And every time I try to post a pic it fails so I'm not just dropping my table in here.

Using these numbers, we need to add in some additional costs:
1. Transfer levy - this will be 4% of the fee for Kudus, nothing for Mo.
2. Social security (NIC) - 15% levy on all the wages.
3. Agent fee. I'm assuming 12% of the wages - not sure what current levels are but it was around 10% when I left and will only have gone up/
4. Loyalty bonus - to cover the tax on the player's share of the agent fee.
I assume performance bonuses are either included or the same for each player.

So these costs add (in total):
1. Nothing for Mo, £4m for Kudus deal (Edit, should be £3m).
2. £11.25m for Mo, £6m for Kudus.
3. £9m for Mo, £4.8m for Kudus.
4. £4.6m for Mo, £2.4m for Kudus.

So firstly, lets look at cash flow profile (in total):

Total cash is £99.8m for Mo, £131.2m for Kudus.

Split as follows:

Mo:

Year 1 £31.7m
Year 2 £33.3m
Year 3 £34.8m

Kudus:

Year 1 £38.8m (includes transfer fee and agent)
Year 2 £36.6m
Year 3 £36.6m
Year 4 £10.0m (no transfer fee / agent)
Year 5 £9.2m

So the difference in cost (Kudus costs more in each year by):

Year 1 £7.1m
Year 2 £3.3m
Year 3 £1.8m
Year 5 £10.0m
Year 6 £9.2m

Total £31.4m

Accounts impact:

Mo
Same as the cash flow - this is just a function of it being a three-year deal.

Kudus:
Year 1 £25.8m
Year 2 £26.6m
Year 3 £26.6m
Year 4 £26.6m
Year 5 £25.7m

Additional accounts impact from Kudus:
Year 1 £-6.0m (saving)
Year 2 £-6.7m
Year 3 £-8.2m
Year 4 £26.6m (expense)
Year 5 £25.8m

You then have the intangible stuff to consider:
- On-field performance of the players
- Commercial revenue generation (Mo will have more commercial value)
- Re-sale value / whether Kudus gets a new deal after 3 years etc.
- Need to replace Mo after 3 years v still having Kudus
- How the extra cash drain affects squad planning in the current period (NB the NIC changes from 1 April will add £4-5m to our existing wage bill too, so affects our spending power going forward)
- PSR should not be an issue and the football costs ratio will be better for Kudus over next three years, then worse for last 2 (but in the Mo scenario we'd need to bring in a replacement player which would offset this)
 
Beamrider said:
OK, I'll take it from here. Lots of numbers, sorry. And every time I try to post a pic it fails so I'm not just dropping my table in here.

Using these numbers, we need to add in some additional costs:
1. Transfer levy - this will be 4% of the fee for Kudus, nothing for Mo.
2. Social security (NIC) - 15% levy on all the wages.
3. Agent fee. I'm assuming 12% of the wages - not sure what current levels are but it was around 10% when I left and will only have gone up/
4. Loyalty bonus - to cover the tax on the player's share of the agent fee.
I assume performance bonuses are either included or the same for each player.

So these costs add (in total):
1. Nothing for Mo, £4m for Kudus deal.
2. £11.25m for Mo, £6m for Kudus.
3. £9m for Mo, £4.8m for Kudus.
4. £4.6m for Mo, £2.4m for Kudus.

So firstly, lets look at cash flow profile (in total):

Total cash is £99.8m for Mo, £131.2m for Kudus.

Split as follows:

Mo:

Year 1 £31.7m
Year 2 £33.3m
Year 3 £34.8m

Kudus:

Year 1 £38.8m (includes transfer fee and agent)
Year 2 £36.6m
Year 3 £36.6m
Year 4 £10.0m (no transfer fee / agent)
Year 5 £9.2m

So the difference in cost (Kudus costs more in each year by):

Year 1 £7.1m
Year 2 £3.3m
Year 3 £1.8m
Year 5 £10.0m
Year 6 £9.2m

Total £31.4m

Accounts impact:

Mo
Same as the cash flow - this is just a function of it being a three-year deal.

Kudus:
Year 1 £25.8m
Year 2 £26.6m
Year 3 £26.6m
Year 4 £26.6m
Year 5 £25.7m

Additional accounts impact from Kudus:
Year 1 £-6.0m (saving)
Year 2 £-6.7m
Year 3 £-8.2m
Year 4 £26.6m (expense)
Year 5 £25.8m

You then have the intangible stuff to consider:
- On-field performance of the players
- Commercial revenue generation (Mo will have more commercial value)
- Re-sale value / whether Kudus gets a new deal after 3 years etc.
- Need to replace Mo after 3 years v still having Kudus
- How the extra cash drain affects squad planning in the current period (NB the NIC changes from 1 April will add £4-5m to our existing wage bill too, so affects our spending power going forward)
- PSR should not be an issue and the football costs ratio will be better for Kudus over next three years, then worse for last 2 (but in the Mo scenario we'd need to bring in a replacement player which would offset this)
Click to expand...
More or less what I said 😉
 
Fabio said:
You know what I also don't think is worth the effort? Northern Irish tayto
Click to expand...
Stop It Bruce Lee GIF
 
Hansern said:
SSN isnt a good source though.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not, but what they report does sound plausible to me (and it's what I've previously suggested has probably happened).
Ramy will hold out for top dollar and take it to the wire to get it. That's his job. It's a pain, but that's how it is. I don't hold it against him for doing that, but the occasional cryptic / critical tweet pisses me off.
Mo's input to the discussion, speaking to the press at the weekend, is almost certainly his role in the game.
What gives me hope is that he is playing that game - it suggests to me that he wants to stay. I'd be more concerned if he was maintaining a total silence on things.
 
Yeah it would be radio silence if there wasn't a willingness to stay. Both virg and Salah have engaged on their side of the dance; I've just not seen Trent engage yet.
 
Beamrider said:
Perhaps not, but what they report does sound plausible to me (and it's what I've previously suggested has probably happened).
Ramy will hold out for top dollar and take it to the wire to get it. That's his job. It's a pain, but that's how it is. I don't hold it against him for doing that, but the occasional cryptic / critical tweet pisses me off.
Mo's input to the discussion, speaking to the press at the weekend, is almost certainly his role in the game.
What gives me hope is that he is playing that game - it suggests to me that he wants to stay. I'd be more concerned if he was maintaining a total silence on things.
Click to expand...

Could well be correct, but as we all know Sky Kaveh and Jim White aren't any source for news about Liverpool and contracts.
I agree that its plausible though.
 
Beamrider said:
Perhaps not, but what they report does sound plausible to me (and it's what I've previously suggested has probably happened).
Ramy will hold out for top dollar and take it to the wire to get it. That's his job. It's a pain, but that's how it is. I don't hold it against him for doing that, but the occasional cryptic / critical tweet pisses me off.
Mo's input to the discussion, speaking to the press at the weekend, is almost certainly his role in the game.
What gives me hope is that he is playing that game - it suggests to me that he wants to stay. I'd be more concerned if he was maintaining a total silence on things.
Click to expand...

It's also why I'm perplexed at Carraghers stance.

Did he want to wait until January to say it, when every fan would rightly say...

"it's January, he can sign for any club, why didn't he say it before the bosman window opened?"

To me it sounded like, "I'll stay if the offer is right". Which is exactly what it should be.

Upto Hughes to broker a deal.
 
The Nomad said:
It's also why I'm perplexed at Carraghers stance.

Did he want to wait until January to say it, when every fan would rightly say...

"it's January, he can sign for any club, why didn't he say it before the bosman window opened?"

To me it sounded like, "I'll stay if the offer is right". Which is exactly what it should be.

Upto Hughes to broker a deal.
Click to expand...
I think Carragher just didn't like him playing it out in public. I don't think he ever did it like that (I seem to recall after Istanbul that he and Stevie G signed on the same day, but no-one knew he'd been negotiating, although he did say that he didn't just take what he was offered, he asked for more).
He's just being old school and thinks it should all be done behind closed doors, which I get, but he was never in the same bargaining position as Mo is, so didn't have to fight as hard to get what he thought he was worth as the ask wasn't anywhere near as big.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mwake
  • Locked
Mentality Midgets or Arrogance?
Replies
4
Views
312
rubans
rubans
Modo
  • Locked
Sepp kicking up a fuss
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
171
Views
5K
Brizzle
Brizzle
Farkmaster
    • Like
  • Locked
Narrowminded.
Replies
23
Views
1K
Hansern
Hansern
rurikbird
    • Like
  • Locked
A bit of perspective
Replies
0
Views
754
rurikbird
rurikbird
the count
    • Like
  • Locked
Captain Incredible
Replies
10
Views
1K
darkstarexodus
darkstarexodus
Back
Top Bottom