Jump to content

Mario Lemina - Official: Signs for Nice

Heisenberg

By Heisenberg,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Turkish said:

2 of them hardly play and the rest are being sent out on loan for a year at a time. If it were me i'd want to do my job and also have a bit of stability knowing where i'd be playing for at least a couple of years. Wouldn't you?

I'd prefer not to have a massive wage cut and would either see out my contract or expect Saints to make up the difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shroppie

Shroppie

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Saint_clark said:

Agreed. Cut price sale on our deadwood;

Lemina £10million

Boufal £5million

Forster £5million

Carrillo £3million (he really is that bad, might even struggle to get that)

Elyounoussi £5million

Hoedt £3million

Gunn £5million

Reed £10million

£46million brought in and anywhere between £350,000-450,000 a week saved in wages. We wouldn't miss them at all so they wouldn't need replacing (besides Gunn) and it would allow us to sign a Hojberg replacement and a new goalkeeper. 

You can even chuck Vestergard in there and suddenly you've got over £60million to spend on a keeper, centreback and midfielder.

So simple. Only snags I can see are finding buyers at any price post-Covid, persuading the player to actually go and to accept a pay cut rather than picking up money for doing nothing.

Not many players around nowadays who just want to play and will accept less for regular games 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Other clubs will just wait till late in the window and grab a season long loan bargain from us, subsided wages and smaller fee. Not much money flowing around this transfer window so far.

Either way, it will still be cheaper than us keeping them on our books.

4 hours ago, John B said:

These players have signed contracts with the club playing football is their job .

How would you like it if it happened to you 

No idea what you're talking about. Do you have an issue with the very nature of transfers or something? 

2 hours ago, Shroppie said:

So simple. Only snags I can see are finding buyers at any price post-Covid, persuading the player to actually go and to accept a pay cut rather than picking up money for doing nothing.

Not many players around nowadays who just want to play and will accept less for regular games 

Hence the reduced prices, the money clubs saved can go towards wages. 

Quite honestly when it comes to Lemina, Hoedt, Forster, Elyounoussi, Boufal and Carrillo I wouldn't care if we gave them away for free. They are only going to cost us money and give us nothing in return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintJackoInHurworth

SaintJackoInHurworth

Posted
Posted (edited)

Make of it what you will, but there are rumours on Twitter that Lemina has offered to reduce his annual wages by €0.85m from €2.05m to €1.2m in order to get a transfer (or loan?). It seems, however, that he is offering this to Galatasary which doesn't fit well with reports that Galatasary will not be re-signing Lemina.

https://twitter.com/1905GSFANS/status/1294532275028332544

There is also a report that Mario Lemina has said "Not everything is about money, football is my first love. I am very unhappy when I am not on the field. I want to stay in Galatasaray. If the clubs agree, I will sign.. for Galatasaray."

https://twitter.com/1905GSFANS/status/1294544358134300673

There is also news on Turkish website 'Haberturk' which states that Galatasaray have reached an agreement to sign him: https://www.haberturk.com/lemina-transferinde-sicak-gelisme-galatasaray-anlasma-sagladi-2773490-spor/2

Edited by SaintJackoInHurworth
Not sure if it is for a transfer or loan + have added details from Haberturk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuperSAINT

SuperSAINT

Posted
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, SaintJackoInHurworth said:

Make of it what you will, but there are rumours on Twitter that Lemina has offered to reduce his annual wages by €0.85m from €2.05m to €1.2m in order to get a transfer (or loan?). It seems, however, that he is offering this to Galatasary which doesn't fit well with reports that Galatasary will not be re-signing Lemina.

https://twitter.com/1905GSFANS/status/1294532275028332544

There is also a report that Mario Lemina has said "Not everything is about money, football is my first love. I am very unhappy when I am not on the field. I want to stay in Galatasaray. If the clubs agree, I will sign.. for Galatasaray."

https://twitter.com/1905GSFANS/status/1294544358134300673

Good spot.  At least there's interest.

Edited by SuperSAINT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Says a lot about Lemina, midfield berth in an EPL team for him if he could be arsed after the sale of Hojbjerg. 

Maybe Ralph has already told him he's not wanted. I agree with the gist though - if he was motivated and fit he'd be just what we need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skintsaint

skintsaint

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, benjii said:

Maybe Ralph has already told him he's not wanted.

More than likely - still if he turned up for preseason and busted a gut and showed commitment of wanting to stay giving 100% each week RH wouldn't be so keen to get rid. Talent is there.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevy777_x

stevy777_x

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

More than likely - still if he turned up for preseason and busted a gut and showed commitment of wanting to stay giving 100% each week RH wouldn't be so keen to get rid. Talent is there.....

He is still in Turkey so i m not even sure he is going to turn up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted

Turkish league it is then, Mario. He's technically very good, and he knows it, probably more technical than some midfielders in top teams, but he just has always lacked application and consistency, not through injuries either really. He's an enigma and someone who will ultimately waste his natural talent by floating between clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Boy Saint

John Boy Saint

Posted
Posted
On 17/08/2020 at 07:50, skintsaint said:

More than likely - still if he turned up for preseason and busted a gut and showed commitment of wanting to stay giving 100% each week RH wouldn't be so keen to get rid. Talent is there.....

Seem to recall something during pre season last summer that the training regime was proving a bit tough for him and he was moaning about it on some social media or other. If that’s the case I very much doubt Ralph has much time for him. 
Like we have seen there is a footballer lurking in there somewhere, just beggars belief that him and his brother haven’t worked out that if he did apply himself over 38 games of a season  (which in itself would be a landmark on his CV) delivering to his potential, there’s a pretty good chance he would get snapped up by a team willing to pay him even more than Saints do. Trouble is, referring back to his playing CV, right now no decent club able to pay him more is going to waste money on a bloke yet to play a full season anywhere he has been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuperSAINT

SuperSAINT

Posted
Posted

Oh Mario & your social media b*llocks:

Mario Lemina, who played on loan in Galatasaray in the last season and whose name was mentioned in the new season, stopped following Galatasaray from his Instagram account. Lemina's name is associated with Beşiktaş.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintwbu

saintwbu

Posted
Posted

One of the most disappointing transfers in recent years simply because of what a great footballer he is really. Palace away in his first season he looked like a top midfielder, that would be gone to a top club by the end of the year. Such a shame we couldn’t have found that consistently because he would take us to another level, but clearly there’s something about him that just holds him back from finding that level on a regular basis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saintwbu

saintwbu

Posted
Posted

One of the most disappointing transfers in recent years simply because of what a great footballer he is really. Palace away in his first season he looked like a top midfielder, that would be gone to a top club by the end of the year. Such a shame we couldn’t have found that consistently because he would take us to another level, but clearly there’s something about him that just holds him back from finding that level on a regular basis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SW5 SAINT

SW5 SAINT

Posted
Posted

I remember a few years back the club were always boasting that the black box didn’t just look at footballing skills, but was a deep appraisal of the players attitude, personality, mental make etc. Hasn’t seemed to function too well in recent years....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greenridge

Greenridge

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, SW5 SAINT said:

I remember a few years back the club were always boasting that the black box didn’t just look at footballing skills, but was a deep appraisal of the players attitude, personality, mental make etc. Hasn’t seemed to function too well in recent years....

The new forum software is also supplied by the Co that developed the Black Box system.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
iansums

iansums

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, SW5 SAINT said:

I remember a few years back the club were always boasting that the black box didn’t just look at footballing skills, but was a deep appraisal of the players attitude, personality, mental make etc. Hasn’t seemed to function too well in recent years....

It became a brown box

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuperSAINT

SuperSAINT

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, SuperSAINT said:

Oh Mario & your social media b*llocks:

Mario Lemina, who played on loan in Galatasaray in the last season and whose name was mentioned in the new season, stopped following Galatasaray from his Instagram account. Lemina's name is associated with Beşiktaş.

Latest is he’s apparently agreed terms for a 1 year loan with Besiktas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, SW5 SAINT said:

I remember a few years back the club were always boasting that the black box didn’t just look at footballing skills, but was a deep appraisal of the players attitude, personality, mental make etc. Hasn’t seemed to function too well in recent years....

I always wondered how you appraised a players attitude without speaking to the player in depth. Did our scouts speak with players (presumably without the permission from their current clubs) to get this information? I doubt it. That just leaves people close to them, like their current coach, who would have a invested interest in painting a good impressions to help maximise the fee. Do coaches even provide scouts with time to describe their own player? I doubt it. Who does this leave? Local media, family, their agent?  Hardly the most reliable of sources. So where does this deep insight come from? Wiki, Google... I call bullshit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuperSAINT

SuperSAINT

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Chez said:

I always wondered how you appraised a players attitude without speaking to the player in depth. Did our scouts speak with players (presumably without the permission from their current clubs) to get this information? I doubt it. That just leaves people close to them, like their current coach, who would have a invested interest in painting a good impressions to help maximise the fee. Do coaches even provide scouts with time to describe their own player? I doubt it. Who does this leave? Local media, family, their agent?  Hardly the most reliable of sources. So where does this deep insight come from? Wiki, Google... I call bullshit.

Google told me Osvaldo was a nutcase before we signed him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted
Just now, SuperSAINT said:

Google told me Osvaldo was a nutcase before we signed him.

Must have been a black box data input error there then.

Question. When clubs a agree a fee do they then interview the player before signing him? I wonder how many occasions a club has pulled out based on that chat (and not because the agent wants too much money)?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
On 13/08/2020 at 21:36, stevy777_x said:

Just lower the asking price and be done with it.

what is the point of pricing him out. We ll just end up losing money by just picking up a loan fee plus subsizing Part of his wages

Someone can correct me if I've got this wrong, but I think we'd lose money by selling him for less than say £10m rather than taking a loan fee and having his wages covered. 

I think his amortisation value is £3.1m per year so with 2 years to go its £6.2m. If I understand things correctly, that means we'd need to sell for more than the total of £6.2m + loyalty bonus which would be due to him if we sell + agents fees + the loan fees we'd get for the next 2 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redkeith

redkeith

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, egg said:

Someone can correct me if I've got this wrong, but I think we'd lose money by selling him for less than say £10m rather than taking a loan fee and having his wages covered. 

I think his amortisation value is £3.1m per year so with 2 years to go its £6.2m. If I understand things correctly, that means we'd need to sell for more than the total of £6.2m + loyalty bonus which would be due to him if we sell + agents fees + the loan fees we'd get for the next 2 years. 

I think most loan fees will be of a similar size to the amortisation for a player, so that the loss, the player, and hopefully most of the wages will be of the books for a year. Obviously  this hasn't always been possible with our bigger f'@@k ups!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, redkeith said:

I think most loan fees will be of a similar size to the amortisation for a player, so that the loss, the player, and hopefully most of the wages will be of the books for a year. Obviously  this hasn't always been possible with our bigger f'@@k ups!   

I'm unsure, but I had understood that a loan fee comes into the club but doesn't impact on amortisation. Example, Lemina amortisation is £6.2m for the balance of his contract, if loan fees are say £2m per year for the next 2 years, then keeping and loaning him has a value of £10.2 m. If we sold him for say £8m we're down, plus we'd have to pay him a loyalty bonus if he doesn't formally request the move. That's how I understand these things to work, but as I say, I'm unsure. There is also cash flow of course and getting real money may make selling at a loss attractive. 

Either way, the sad fact is this lad is good, and if he'd shown the right attitude we'd have a cracking player. Never mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clapham Saint

Clapham Saint

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, egg said:

Someone can correct me if I've got this wrong, but I think we'd lose money by selling him for less than say £10m rather than taking a loan fee and having his wages covered. 

I think his amortisation value is £3.1m per year so with 2 years to go its £6.2m. If I understand things correctly, that means we'd need to sell for more than the total of £6.2m + loyalty bonus which would be due to him if we sell + agents fees + the loan fees we'd get for the next 2 years. 

 

You are correct that if his value is £6.2m and he left now then we would show a cost of £6.2m (plus whatever fees), and so would need to sell for at least that much to avoid showing a loss on the transaction in this year's accounts.  

However, I wouldn't get too hung up on the amortisation value.  It is a short term accounting entry and makes no difference to the medium term profit/loss or cash.  Whatever value his contract has in the balance sheet will be written down to zero when he leaves, whether that be in 2 years on a free or being sold, and this can't be avoided.

 

By way of example:

If we were to sell him for £1m now, then (ignoring agents fees and loyalty payments for simplicity), we would show a loss of £5.2m on the transaction in this year's accounts.

If we keep him to the end of his contract then we show an amortisation cost of £3.1m this year and an amortisation cost of £3.1m next year = total cost £6.2m.

We'd also have the cost of whatever his wages are if he does not end up out on loan.

When evaluating what we  "need to sell for" the key number isn't the profit or loss in this year (£5.2m loss in this example), but the total cash flow over the course of the contract.  In this example we're £1m plus his wages (£6.2m - £5.2m), better off by taking the £1m now despite the fact that it would increase costs in this year's accounts by £2.1m (£5.2m - £3.1m).

You can make the example more complicated by adding in figures for wages, loan fees, agents fees and assigning a value that we would "gain" from any games which he actually were to actually play for us before he leaves - but the principle that the amortisation value isn't something to get hung up on stays the same.

 

I hope that makes sense....

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Clapham Saint said:

 

You are correct that if his value is £6.2m and he left now then we would show a cost of £6.2m (plus whatever fees), and so would need to sell for at least that much to avoid showing a loss on the transaction in this year's accounts.  

However, I wouldn't get too hung up on the amortisation value.  It is a short term accounting entry and makes no difference to the medium term profit/loss or cash.  Whatever value his contract has in the balance sheet will be written down to zero when he leaves, whether that be in 2 years on a free or being sold, and this can't be avoided.

 

By way of example:

If we were to sell him for £1m now, then (ignoring agents fees and loyalty payments for simplicity), we would show a loss of £5.2m on the transaction in this year's accounts.

If we keep him to the end of his contract then we show an amortisation cost of £3.1m this year and an amortisation cost of £3.1m next year = total cost £6.2m.

We'd also have the cost of whatever his wages are if he does not end up out on loan.

When evaluating what we  "need to sell for" the key number isn't the profit or loss in this year (£5.2m loss in this example), but the total cash flow over the course of the contract.  In this example we're £1m plus his wages (£6.2m - £5.2m), better off by taking the £1m now despite the fact that it would increase costs in this year's accounts by £2.1m (£5.2m - £3.1m).

You can make the example more complicated by adding in figures for wages, loan fees, agents fees and assigning a value that we would "gain" from any games which he actually were to actually play for us before he leaves - but the principle that the amortisation value isn't something to get hung up on stays the same.

 

I hope that makes sense....

 

 

Brilliant, thanks for that explanation, much appreciated 👍 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Clapham Saint said:

 

You are correct that if his value is £6.2m and he left now then we would show a cost of £6.2m (plus whatever fees), and so would need to sell for at least that much to avoid showing a loss on the transaction in this year's accounts.  

However, I wouldn't get too hung up on the amortisation value.  It is a short term accounting entry and makes no difference to the medium term profit/loss or cash.  Whatever value his contract has in the balance sheet will be written down to zero when he leaves, whether that be in 2 years on a free or being sold, and this can't be avoided.

 

By way of example:

If we were to sell him for £1m now, then (ignoring agents fees and loyalty payments for simplicity), we would show a loss of £5.2m on the transaction in this year's accounts.

If we keep him to the end of his contract then we show an amortisation cost of £3.1m this year and an amortisation cost of £3.1m next year = total cost £6.2m.

We'd also have the cost of whatever his wages are if he does not end up out on loan.

When evaluating what we  "need to sell for" the key number isn't the profit or loss in this year (£5.2m loss in this example), but the total cash flow over the course of the contract.  In this example we're £1m plus his wages (£6.2m - £5.2m), better off by taking the £1m now despite the fact that it would increase costs in this year's accounts by £2.1m (£5.2m - £3.1m).

You can make the example more complicated by adding in figures for wages, loan fees, agents fees and assigning a value that we would "gain" from any games which he actually were to actually play for us before he leaves - but the principle that the amortisation value isn't something to get hung up on stays the same.

 

I hope that makes sense....

 

 

Brilliant, thanks for that explanation, much appreciated 👍 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to Mario Lemina - Official: Signs for Nice

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...