Confirmed Signing Richarlison

[catcherintherye]

It could be that Moshiri has said that he will bank roll this window but that any signings have to have a resale value to keep us trading in the future. Everybody does it to varying degrees. The greater the success the more high value (with potential) signings we can make. We’ll have to get used to the Lukaku model. We may also end up with a few Colemans hopefully.

I think this is a great point and very likely to be Moshiris approach. It's a classic investors approach. Invest in things that have the best chance of accruing value.

It was always going to be a question of how quickly he was willing to do this and how much he'd want to see players offloaded before he did so.

 

[ToffeeJord]

Them pozzos are asset stripping and buying our rejects and their fans are buzzing, little divvies.

 

[catcherintherye]

Could not disagree more.

Big fees are for players no more than 23 years old. Spending £100m in wages and fees on Sigurdsson is what kills a club.

Even if Richarlinson flops, we likely make 15-20 million back. That's the difference. If he does well we make 30 million +

 

[blueblue]

We seem to be the only ones going for richalison so why is his value 50m then?

You do realise that he is only 21, his whole career is ahead of him. His form last season coincided with the rumpus that happened between Everton/Watford/Silva.
The manager obviously rates him highly, Brands must have backed his judgement as did Moshiri.
Look at the bright side, we can sell Pickford and the profit alone from that sale will pay for Richarlson.....signing young talented players is the way forward , it is back to the future for us.

 

[havrey0123]

Just seen the fee mooted.

 

[blueblue]

Watford also have to pay 10% sell on to Fluminense.

Up to £50m is great PR for those jarg London rats

The reality is £31m plus addons dependent on our success

Which actually sounds like a very decent deal.

 

[wiggie]

Can't believe some of our fans complain when we don't spend complain when we do

 

[brieverton]

If we were getting him for £10M-£20M you could argue it was a good deal: decent first PL season and young enough to maybe get better. This price though?! It's nonsense.

Have to agree. I'm all for getting players in and a bit of excitement, but anything north of 30m for him makes me feel very uneasy.

In what could be our first signing, it completely goes against the model Brands was/is meant to utilise here and at that fee, he is going to have to make one hell of an impact to justify it.

Brands won't preach or implement a more disciplined model of player trading if wads of cash are thrown in his direction - he'll be like anyone else with other people's (or more accurately the club's) money in that scenario.

I expect the initial fee will be much less but to me this signing would underline the continued lack of discipline and coherency at the club after an admittedly underwhelming shake-up. Moshiri does tend to play to the gallery when the pressure comes on but it leaves me concerned about sustainability - something he was keen to emphasise at the AGM.

 

[Tubey]

I don't think anyone could argue this isn't overpaying. It looks a bit desperate.

But the one thing that is good is his age. If we are going to sign players in big money gambles like this, then they need to be under 25. At least there is a chance this lad could turn out great, unlike say Bolasie who was far older and a proven failure at this level.

It doesn't just look desperate. It is desperate.

Same as when Martinez came in and bought Alcaraz, Kone et al - just sends up the clear signal that they don't know what they're doing.

 

[davids]

Can't believe some of our fans complain when we don't spend complain when we do

It's the reason that forums like this exist.

 

[davek]

Have to agree. I'm all for getting players in and a bit of excitement, but anything north of 30m for him makes me feel very uneasy.
In what could be our first signing, it completely goes against the model Brands was/is meant to utilise here and at that fee, he is going to have to make one hell of an impact to justify it.

Brands won't preach or implement a more disciplined model of player trading if wads of cash are thrown in his direction - he'll be like anyone else with other people's (or more accurately the club's) money in that scenario.

I expect the initial fee will be much less but to me this signing would underline the continued lack of discipline and coherency at the club after an admittedly underwhelming shake-up. Moshiri does tend to play to the gallery when the pressure comes on but it leaves me concerned about sustainability - something he was keen to emphasise at the AGM.

EXACTLY mate. It blows the whole "philosophy" out the window in one fell swoop. That's what I've been struggling to say.

Absolutely spot on this post.

 

[davids]

If we were getting him for £10M-£20M you could argue it was a good deal: decent first PL season and young enough to maybe get better. This price though?! It's nonsense.

Undisclosed written all over this one.

 

[ToffeeTim]

It doesn't just look desperate. It is desperate.

Same as when Martinez came in and bought Alcaraz, Kone et al - just sends up the clear signal that they don't know what they're doing.

I agree. But if it gets rid of Bolasie then I can console myself in that a little.

 

[davek]

Undisclosed written all over this one.

Probably.

 

[bol-uk]

Yes but Lozano hasn’t been crap for half a year.. Richarlison has had one 12 game spell in his career . Lozano is coming off the back of a good World Cup and is about 20m cheaper . Walcott cost 20m

He has got 33 goals in 133 games including his crap spell at Watford. Thats better than 1 in 5 for a then teenage
winger.