Alejandro Garnacho - loan deal agreed

[Chris Smith]

All I can judge him on is the games I’ve watched him in, mostly on TV, and I can’t say I’ve ever been overly impressed. He clearly has talent and is quick but more often than not there has been very little to show for his efforts. That said I’ve not really played close attention and would hope that  Emery can have the same impact on him as he has had on Rogers.

[LeeB]

Or he’ll get injured on his debut, after an encouraging pre season

ACL in the game that triggers the obligation to buy.

[Dogtanian]

Unai Emery is the best manager Aston Villa can possibly have right now. We are bloody lucky to have him, and god knows who else we would get if he walked out tomorrow.

He is absolutely essential to the club's ambitions.

There is no way the owners are going to start treating him like shit and giving him ultimatums over taking dodgy players and risking him saying goodbye.

[Vegas]

I’m really not getting the angst on this one. We’ve swapped a proven premier league performer for a more questionable one, yes. But we’ve generated (and had to generate) £80m in doing so - of course the incomer at £40m is not going to tick every box the outgoer at £117m did.  For £40m Garnacho is fine and actually to me pretty exciting. Clearly a very high upside player, that Emery wanted. Clearly has some behavioural baggage but he’s only 22. Adds pace add technical ability to our side. I think he’ll be great.

[LeeB]

I’m not entirely convinced this is driven by Unai. It may just be a case that the owners have told him that we have FFP/PSR deal going on with Chelsea for Rogers, but we must take one of these in return for it to work… which one do you want Unai? Player x or y

Do you really believe that the club would treat this manager like that?

Yeah, exactly.

There are some really stupid takes on this thread, and I was unaware all these years just how many Daily Mail columnists we had on this site, fuck me.

[Dave]

I’m not entirely convinced this is driven by Unai. It may just be a case that the owners have told him that we have FFP/PSR deal going on with Chelsea for Rogers, but we must take one of these in return for it to work… which one do you want Unai? Player x or y

We know for sure Unai wanted him last summer.
I can’t see why that would change.

Especially considering he played really well against us, again, since then.

So it's unlikely he saw anything to turn him off the idea in the last twelve months.

[oldtimernow]

I wonder if alternating Nacho with Alysson might be a way of stretching the obligation clause into next years UEFA accounting system?

[Ads]

To replace Rogers with Garnacho is one thing, but to replace him with Garnacho in a way that UEFA are nailed-on guaranteed to find some kind of fault with, and thus make us lose out on most of the profit, is something else.

Make a note of this because this is exactly how it will unfold.They will value Rogers at £60m and Garnacho  at £50m, giving us just £10m profit. I would value Rogers at £130m and Garnacho at £28m

If it happened in a vacuum that might make sense, but value’s are inherently influenced by the market. It’s pretty obvious for us to be able to point to market comparisons and show the fee paid for Rogers is not out of step.

Do you actually get the opportunity to make that representation though?  My reading of the rules is that if Garnacho is deemed a guaranteed obligation, they simply wipe his entire fee off the Rogers fee and we only get to book the difference - so about £75m.

It seems brutal, but that was my reading of the wording.  And IF we have put ourselves in that position, it seems incredibly naive.

If you have read J9 (as you suggest), then it won't guve you much information, save UEFA discretionary powers. The indicators for what may be an associated transfer are in G.3.5(c).

One big factor is if the transfers are part of the same contract and they're self evidently not here. There is no indication either Rogers sale or Garnacho's loan is conditional and indexed to the other. Garnacho has not been sold to us, so the transfer is not within 45 days of Rogers sale. They involve signficant funds (i) £117m and (ii) x% of Garnacho's £110,000 p/w salary. They do not have similar payment obligations; Chelsea have to pay £117m without condition, with Garnacho there is likely a loan fee and it is indicated an obligation to buy. Those are fundamentally different. If they're based on x amount of appearances, x amount of goals, x base level of team performance (i.e. we quality for Europe), then while likely, they're categorically different in substance and performance compared to the £117m Chelsea shall pay. Aston Villa shall not pay Chelsea unless (a), (b) and (c) are met and at a future point in time.

[dave shelley]

A polite reminder not to forget that we used to fish in the pond that contained Grant Holt and the Djemba twins.  Thankfully we've moved on.

[Dogtanian]

With regards to the UEFA issue, I do think we are tending to see it as being catastrophic if UEFA decide they are part of the same transaction. But we don't know this.

It may be that we will still be fine, even if it is not ideal, if UEFA decide against us. And that the risk is worth it overall to sign a player that the manager wants.

There will have been a balance in what Chelsea will accept in the obligations and what would definitely be approved by UEFA. The club is obviously happy with the risk.

[RamboandBruno]

To replace Rogers with Garnacho is one thing, but to replace him with Garnacho in a way that UEFA are nailed-on guaranteed to find some kind of fault with, and thus make us lose out on most of the profit, is something else.

Make a note of this because this is exactly how it will unfold.They will value Rogers at £60m and Garnacho  at £50m, giving us just £10m profit. I would value Rogers at £130m and Garnacho at £28m

You don’t actually know any of this

[garyellis]

All I can judge him on is the games I’ve watched him in, mostly on TV, and I can’t say I’ve ever been overly impressed. He clearly has talent and is quick but more often than not there has been very little to show for his efforts. That said I’ve not really played close attention and would hope that  Emery can have the same impact on him as he has had on Rogers.

But Chris he is a winger and it’s in their DNA to have their ups and downs. What about the games he ripped in to us?

[chrisw1]

ADS

You've read it in more detail than me.  But IF UEFA decide it's a swap deal (and it seems they will if the obligations are highly likely to be achieved) what then?  It seems to me there is no representation on fair values; Villa can only book the £75m (less the Boro sell-on of course).  Fabrizio has already laid the groundwork "the obligation to buy clause is considered easy to reach, almost guaranteed."





What we do know is that if UEFA can fuck us over they will.  They will be all over this.

[Sexual Ealing]

ADS

You've read it in more detail than me.  But IF UEFA decide it's a swap deal (and it seems they will if the obligations are highly likely to be achieved) what then?  It seems to me there is no representation on fair values; Villa can only book the £75m (less the Boro sell-on of course).  Fabrizio has already laid the groundwork "the obligation to buy clause is considered easy to reach, almost guaranteed."





What we do know is that if UEFA can fuck us over they will.  They will be all over this.

I know our recruitment team isn't the sharpest collection of tools, but if you've thought of this, I'm sure someone in there has also done so.

[Ads]

ADS

You've read it in more detail than me.  But IF UEFA decide it's a swap deal (and it seems they will if the obligations are highly likely to be achieved) what then?  It seems to me there is no representation on fair values; Villa can only book the £75m (less the Boro sell-on of course).  Fabrizio has already laid the groundwork "the obligation to buy clause is considered easy to reach, almost guaranteed."





What we do know is that if UEFA can fuck us over they will.  They will be all over this.

My post is that I think, based on the information we have, is that we are compliant.

By way of caution, I have not seen either contract so I am at a serious disadvantage. Equally, neither has Fabrizio and I wouls be skeptical of what his interpretation is and placing any legal significance to it.