Player Watch Player Watch: Pedro Porro

Klinsmannic · Jan 10, 2023

My guess is that we're trying to forgo the Edwards sell on clause to bring the Porro fee down. This will "save" us some cash up front (and there's also no guarantee that anyone will pay big money for Edwards). Sensible to try that approach first rather then pay the release clause up front in full at first time of asking imo.

Whatever the negotiation tactic, I just hope we get him. Can't think of too many better RWB's at this price point who would come to us.

Lappi · Jan 10, 2023

Mixed feelings about this. From the limited amount I've seen he's good going forward, aggressive but quite inconsistent decision making and output.

So 40 plus mill might end up being way overpaying and we'll struggle to sell if it doesn't work out.

On the other hand holy fuck we need an attacking right back more than life itself and even a half decent one will make us a better team and a much much better watch.

mr ashley · Jan 10, 2023

Ghost Hardware said:
Is it a concern that if we end up having to pay the whole fee upfront that it could effect who we bring in at AM? Could be why we are dragging our heals a little as everything is tied together.

Ie, can’t move for Porro until at least 1 if not 2 RWB’s leaves, can’t move for an AM until we finalise Porro deal and know how much we have to pay upfront.

We were told that we could use a third party in order to make this into an instalment style payment?

Ghost Hardware · Jan 10, 2023

mr ashley said:
We were told that we could use a third party in order to make this into an instalment style payment?

Maybe? Not sure. I guess that would help if it’s the case.

cjsimba · Jan 10, 2023

I don’t really get how an instalment plan would work.

Sporting don’t want to sell and don’t need to sell (after selling 2x stars in the summer)

They’ve said the only way they’d sell if if the release clause was met - ie. Because then they wouldn’t have the option of saying no. The clause is met, he is allowed to go.

So why would proposing an instalment plan be of any interest to Sporting? He’s what €40m euros? If the release clause didn’t exist and someone offered them €40m euros (even upfront) they would most likely say no, so why would they entertain our negotiating?

mr ashley · Jan 10, 2023

cjsimba said:
I don’t really get how an instalment plan would work.

Sporting don’t want to sell and don’t need to sell (after selling 2x stars in the summer)

They’ve said the only way they’d sell if if the release clause was met - ie. Because then they wouldn’t have the option of saying no. The clause is met, he is allowed to go.

So why would proposing an instalment plan be of any interest to Sporting? He’s what €40m euros? If the release clause didn’t exist and someone offered them €40m euros (even upfront) they would most likely say no.

As I understand it (and I don’t recall who or where it was posted) if we used an external third party to pay the release fee, we could then pay that company in instalments.
so sporting get the money in one go, but we can still have a payment plan that suits us (I’m sure it costs us in interest and fees ofc).
But like I said, could be totally wrong

cjsimba · Jan 10, 2023

mr ashley said:
As I understand it (and I don’t recall who or where it was posted) if we used an external third party to pay the release fee, we could then pay that company in instalments.
so sporting get the money in one go, but we can still have a payment plan that suits us (I’m sure it costs us in interest and fees ofc).
But like I said, could be totally wrong

Ah ok, that would make more sense. Thanks for the info

$hoguN · Jan 10, 2023

Hotspur88 said:
Doesn't work like that though does it. As has been reported, if we agree to pay the release clause, I think it has to he paid off straight away so clearly the club will be trying to do something to overcome this. I don't know the current state of the transfer, haven't heard much recently tbh. But I know the club were talking to Sporting and trying to get a deal done so they are trying.

Yes but the point is that we are always “trying”. We know what it takes, and his release clause isn’t ridiculous. Yes it will have to be paid upfront but on the other hand we have some of the highest ticket prices in Europe and great Sponsorship deals. Levy can’t keep hiding behind “we tried”.

The release clause isn’t £90 million.

edit: I’m all about living within our means, but this is a crucial position in a crucial season. This shit is why the fans want Levy out.

I appreciate you passing on the info either way fella!

mr ashley · Jan 10, 2023

cjsimba said:
Ah ok, that would make more sense. Thanks for the info

Please, don’t take my word for it!

Reece_Spurs · Jan 10, 2023

cjsimba said:
I don’t really get how an instalment plan would work.

Sporting don’t want to sell and don’t need to sell (after selling 2x stars in the summer)

They’ve said the only way they’d sell if if the release clause was met - ie. Because then they wouldn’t have the option of saying no. The clause is met, he is allowed to go.

So why would proposing an instalment plan be of any interest to Sporting? He’s what €40m euros? If the release clause didn’t exist and someone offered them €40m euros (even upfront) they would most likely say no.

I'm assuming as we have a 50% sell on fee for Edwards there's some wiggle room for a slightly different deal if we were to remove that sell on clause etc. Maybe pay the full amount but if a longer period as appose to paying the full on release clause fee upfront. Having that sell on fee for Edwards opens up many different ways to structure the Porro deal.

cjsimba · Jan 10, 2023

mr ashley said:
Please, don’t take my word for it!

I could understand where the delay is though then as we try to negotiate with the third party over an amount which will come to more than €40m once interest has been added

spursfan77 · Jan 10, 2023

We aren’t going to add a fourth right back until we move on at least one of the three we already have. So until Emerson or Spence go I really cant see this going anywhere.

No concrete links to attackers is more of a concern.

taidgh · Jan 10, 2023

Timberwolf said:
haha love that the example you use is a player another team also hasn't even signed yet

bloody arsenal, they're so much quicker at almost maybe signing players than us

that is funny. however, laughs aside, there are legitimate sources saying he is definitely going there this window, while we have 'begun negotiations' or some such nonsense with sporting for porro.

mr ashley · Jan 10, 2023

taidgh said:
that is funny. however, laughs aside, there are legitimate sources saying he is definitely going there this window, while we have 'begun negotiations' or some such nonsense with sporting for porro.

It’s still in the land of make-believe arguments inside your own head though isn’t it?

SandroClegane · Jan 10, 2023

taidgh said:
that is funny. however, laughs aside, there are legitimate sources saying he is definitely going there this window, while we have 'begun negotiations' or some such nonsense with sporting for porro.

"legitimate sources saying"

Yet the most recent reports are Arsenal won't pay what Shakhtar want.

Gb160 · Jan 10, 2023

Whenever I buy something with PayPal these days they’re always trying to get me to pay it off monthly, so we should buy him with PayPal.

taidgh · Jan 10, 2023

SandroClegane said:
"legitimate sources saying"

Yet the most recent reports are Arsenal won't pay what Shakhtar want.

Okay sure. But we've not even had those positive talks that are being reported for Arsenal-Shakhtar.

And what about my post was off topic?

mr ashley · Jan 10, 2023

taidgh said:
Okay sure. But we've not even had those positive talks that are being reported for Arsenal-Shakhtar.

And what about my post was off topic?

We’ve not had them, or they aren’t being reported?

taidgh · Jan 10, 2023

Now this is verging on off-topic, but..

Depends on whether you think this is 'reliable'. ?‍

WeGotLedley · Jan 10, 2023

I initially thought we were tyih to get cte through City. Along lines of, you buy him for 20. Well do loan with obligation at 30. We save 10, you get 20 you wouldn't (assume no sell on clause). Which financially seems fair. But, also, why would they help us and screw over a club they may want to do business with later? We already take more points (and CL..) off them than they'd like. Felt like typical DL master plan...

But, can see the release clause payment structure (all upfront) being the real issue. Not sure what financing would cost (essentially take a 40m loan from someone, and pay them x% / year over 3 years). And not uncommon, onlg a few clubs are activating release clauses. And while porro looks good, not like he's a haaland/elite player.
Still annoying as even if financing cost an extra 5m, getting him in ahead of a tough run of games feels like a price worth paying... (hence all the we've finally had enough with enic noises I guess)

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Player Watch Player Watch: Pedro Porro

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well done boys. Good process

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads