Romelu Lukaku

[brehme1989]

Meh nothing wrong with checking if he d even be ready to take a paycut to stay here.... Cause if he s not we dont even have to start the discussion with chelsea

If he's coming on a loan, there's no paycut. He'll get what his contract dictates. It'll be between Inter and Chelsea to decide who pays what.

 

[CafeCordoba]

This with the exception that i think anything under 15 mio per season for him is more than fair....
I do not expect him to be out for half a season again neither do i think he s close to being finished...

I d also like to see who it is that we could get for that amount who would be on Roms level....

Still think it s more likely that chelsea will want to sell him and take a loss rather than loan him to us again as their ammortization costs are way to fucken high.
But to me it s the same thing as long as his total cost is in that 12to 15 mio range I m fine with it.

Their loss will be bigger if they sell Lukaku. Lukaku's book value is over 60m for Chelsea still (63-66m or something). No one is gonna pay even 40m for Lukaku. Per year amortization cost is 21-22m. So if they sell him for 40m, it's 65-40=25m book loss.

If they loan him, they'll get the amortization hit which is reduced by any loan fee they'll gonna get for the loan. So 21-22m minus any loan fee, that's they cost for next financial year (in case of a loan). Added some salary coverage the loaning club won't pay and Lukaku wanting to have the money. In the case they loan to Inter, they won't have to pay any salary or golden handshake as Lukaku accepts lesser salary at Inter (possibly considerably lesser).

I don't see any reason for Inter to BUY him. That would be insane. Because the minimum which makes any sense for Chelsea is 40m and that would make ZERO sense for Inter. Since we don't wan to give him 5 year contract with high salary (our standards 6m net is high, which is 50% of his Chelsea base net salary). So loan is the only thing which makes sense for Inter. Risking having to have that contract on our books (amortization and salary) is way too risky for us.

 

[CafeCordoba]

If he's coming on a loan, there's no paycut. He'll get what his contract dictates. It'll be between Inter and Chelsea to decide who pays what.

AFAIK he simply lowered his salary for this season. Inter is paying 8m net, Chelsea is paying nothing. Which is 33% off from his Chelsea salary.

 

[.h.]

AFAIK he simply lowered his salary for this season. Inter is paying 8m net, Chelsea is paying nothing. Which is 33% off from his Chelsea salary.

yeah - its not impossible he waived some of his salary. like, typically, brehme is right - inter works out what they're willing to cover, chelsea then have to pay the rest, but it might have been a case of chelsea not willing to pay any salary and lukaku chose to waive a bit just to go back to inter

 

[brehme1989]

AFAIK he simply lowered his salary for this season. Inter is paying 8m net, Chelsea is paying nothing. Which is 33% off from his Chelsea salary.

Well, Chelsea is paying us 23m a year for the Lukaku deal. I'm pretty sure some arrangement was made there.

You may be right on the salary as I don't recall the details.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Well, Chelsea is paying us 23m a year for the Lukaku deal. I'm pretty sure some arrangement was made there.

You may be right on the salary as I don't recall the details.

Well, technically, at least according to rumors last autumn, we sold the Lukaku credit (to bank / 3rd party) so Chelsea doesn't owe anything to us (I think this is pretty common practice in football finance world).

 

[Adriano@10]

Their loss will be bigger if they sell Lukaku. Lukaku's book value is over 60m for Chelsea still (63-66m or something). No one is gonna pay even 40m for Lukaku. Per year amortization cost is 21-22m. So if they sell him for 40m, it's 65-40=25m book loss.

If they loan him, they'll get the amortization hit which is reduced by any loan fee they'll gonna get for the loan. So 21-22m minus any loan fee, that's they cost for next financial year (in case of a loan). Added some salary coverage the loaning club won't pay and Lukaku wanting to have the money. In the case they loan to Inter, they won't have to pay any salary or golden handshake as Lukaku accepts lesser salary at Inter (possibly considerably lesser).

I don't see any reason for Inter to BUY him. That would be insane. Because the minimum which makes any sense for Chelsea is 40m and that would make ZERO sense for Inter. Since we don't wan to give him 5 year contract with high salary (our standards 6m net is high, which is 50% of his Chelsea base net salary). So loan is the only thing which makes sense for Inter. Risking having to have that contract on our books (amortization and salary) is way too risky for us

I think he still fals under the growth decree so his 6 mio are not gonna cost us the same as lautaros also i d hope he d be willing to sign for less if he really wants to stay here and does not want to go to a mid table epl club or rot in chelseas stands......
It was also reported that chelsea had to do those 7 year deals cause their amortization costs were to high and that fifa does not like them giving out 7 year contract.
So if chelsea wants to/has to reduce amortization costs they might prefer taking a large hit now rather than spread t out over the years. Like if lukaku does not want to go to chelsea any more all they are doing is kicking the can down the road even more so if he tells em he only wants Inter.

As far as wether we buy or loan him i really dont care as long as we manage to get the yearly cost in that 15 mio region. Further more if chelsea really wants dumfries we might find a solution that includes dumfries where both clubs proft.
I know i knwo a lot of ifs and buts just saying if he only wants inter we could walk away with a really fucken good deal here and thats all i care about.

One more thing that people tend to forget is that while lukaku is not our best player any more he is easily the most recognizable one and also the one with the biggest marketing potential.
Talk to non football/non serie a fans or just casual followers chances is Lukaku is the only player they really know...

Well, technically, at least according to rumors last autumn, we sold the Lukaku credit (to bank / 3rd party) so Chelsea doesn't owe anything to us (I think this is pretty common practice in football finance world).

True i think it was even marotta who said this once chelsea got into troubles cause of the russia situation

 

[CafeCordoba]

I don't think they can afford any more extra book losses. They need to make plusvalenza by selling their own academy players (RLC, Mount, Chalobah etc.) to make up for the high amortization costs. I just don't think they can sell Lukaku anywhere. Loaning back to Inter is clearly the easiest option as only thing is negotiating fee and salary things since the player is ready to repeat the loan.

Versus situation you need to push Lukaku to find a club which would
a) be interesting for Lukaku
b) would be interested in signing Lukaku and
c) would have financial power to buy Lukaku

 

[Adriano@10]

I don't think they can afford any more extra book losses. They need to make plusvalenza by selling their own academy players (RLC, Mount, Chalobah etc.) to make up for the high amortization costs. I just don't think they can sell Lukaku anywhere. Loaning back to Inter is clearly the easiest option as only thing is negotiating fee and salary things since the player is ready to repeat the loan.

Versus situation you need to push Lukaku to find a club which would
a) be interesting for Lukaku
b) would be interested in signing Lukaku and
c) would have financial power to buy Lukaku

I agree on most things, thing is if i go to your previous example say chlesea accepts a 4 to 5 mio loan they are worse off then just selling him.
I also have to say that i dont know the details about chelseas finances.
But at 4 to 5 mio loan cost chlesea makes an 17 to 18 mio book loss per season now realistically thats not gonna get better over the 3 years remaining on lukakus contract...
So your saying chelsea would be willing to accept to make a 17 to 18 mio book loss on him every year but wont accept to take a 30 to 40 mio hit this summer to be done with this whole situation once and for all?
If the loan him for the remainder of his contract at your numbers they lose 51 (mio) over 3 season if they sell him for even 25 this summer they loose 42mio in one go. In terms of income with one they d get 25 mio up front with the other they get 15 over 3 years.
I just dont see how keep on loaning him is the better option for chelsea especially not at the numbers you mentioned.

Unless they absolutely cant take the hit this summer it imho is clearly the better option.

 

[.h.]

I dont know all the details with chelsea, but they have to comply with english FFP despite not being in europe, and thats why they were handing out these ridiculous 8/9 year contracts. I suspect they're not in a great position financially, I think i saw some suggestion of SERIOUS player sales this summer of the broader squad to try to push some plusvalenza to cover their season
That's the thing as well - in the long term, offloading lukaku asap to cut their amortisation book is the right thing to do. If they get a couple of decent offers this summer, they might use one of them to offset the cost of Lukaku if that makes sense.

 

[CafeCordoba]

I dont know all the details with chelsea, but they have to comply with english FFP despite not being in europe, and thats why they were handing out these ridiculous 8/9 year contracts. I suspect they're not in a great position financially, I think i saw some suggestion of SERIOUS player sales this summer of the broader squad to try to push some plusvalenza to cover their season
That's the thing as well - in the long term, offloading lukaku asap to cut their amortisation book is the right thing to do. If they get a couple of decent offers this summer, they might use one of them to offset the cost of Lukaku if that makes sense.

Yes, they need to sell. And best targets for selling are their academy players who have been rumored to get sold all over the place. This speaks financial difficulties. In the long term, taking loss from Lukaku sale might be the correct move but they might not afford to take the loss now.

Also, they need a buyer and I dearly hope Inter is not stupid enough to buy Lukaku outright. Loaning him in on a yearly basis makes so much more sense in risk-mitigation point of view. Lukaku won't have any resale value. And no matter how low he would come, the biggest factor would be the contract we would be handing to him. Giving him term simply does not make sense, one-year deals should be the way to go. Not good for the player but it is what it is. You reap what you sow.

I feel we have all the leverage on this case, as long as we play it right.

 

[NimAraya]

Yes, they need to sell. And best targets for selling are their academy players who have been rumored to get sold all over the place. This speaks financial difficulties. In the long term, taking loss from Lukaku sale might be the correct move but they might not afford to take the loss now.

Also, they need a buyer and I dearly hope Inter is not stupid enough to buy Lukaku outright. Loaning him in on a yearly basis makes so much more sense in risk-mitigation point of view. Lukaku won't have any resale value. And no matter how low he would come, the biggest factor would be the contract we would be handing to him. Giving him term simply does not make sense, one-year deals should be the way to go. Not good for the player but it is what it is. You reap what you sow.

I feel we have all the leverage on this case, as long as we play it right.

Reports say Pochettino would like to give him a chance, so they might keep him afterall.

 

[.h.]

Tbh though, Chelsea need a goalscorer and at some point they can't afford to pay for a goalscorer to be at another club scoring frequently and winning titles.

I wouldn't be surprised, even if lukaku really wanted to come back, that Chelsea refuse to loan him next year and instead sell him to another club.

Lukaku can probably force a transfer through to Inter. I don't know about a loan with no obligation though.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Selling him to other club would require Lukaku to accept this destination. They can't force a loan or sale. They can force to keep him though and even that's not wise if Lukaku doesn't want to stay.

I don't see Chelsea having a lot of leverage in their situation. Everything depends on what Lukaku wants and how much Inter wants to play ball with Chelsea.

 

[.h.]

Sure, but if its made clear that he wont go back to Inter on a loan, that Inter cant afford him, then I'm sure he'd rather go to another club (say, whatever, Barca, BAyern, who gives a crap) over being at Chelsea for another season, potentially.

 

[Adriano@10]

Selling him to other club would require Lukaku to accept this destination. They can't force a loan or sale. They can force to keep him though and even that's not wise if Lukaku doesn't want to stay.

I don't see Chelsea having a lot of leverage in their situation. Everything depends on what Lukaku wants and how much Inter wants to play ball with Chelsea.

He ll also have to accept the loan destination.....
And thats why i keep on saying if he only wants inter we can force chelsea

Sure, but if its made clear that he wont go back to Inter on a loan, that Inter cant afford him, then I'm sure he'd rather go to another club (say, whatever, Barca, BAyern, who gives a crap) over being at Chelsea for another season, potentially.

Do we really think any top club will come forward with a good offer? After the season he just had?

 

[.h.]

He ll also have to accept the loan destination.....
And thats why i keep on saying if he only wants inter we can force chelsea


Do we really think any top club will come forward with a good offer? After the season he just had?

Depends, really. PSG need a new striker this summer potentially, and if the price isnt too steep - considering his end of season form - it might be worth a punt...

 

[CafeCordoba]

Yeah for PSG, but for Lukaku?

I'm saying, Chelsea doesn't have a good hand here. It requires two interesting parties to make the deal happen. Chelsea is the 3rd one after the two but they will be asked the last.

 

[.h.]

Yeah for PSG, but for Lukaku?

I'm saying, Chelsea doesn't have a good hand here. It requires two interesting parties to make the deal happen. Chelsea is the 3rd one after the two but they will be asked the last.

why wouldnt lukaku go to PSG? Frnech speaking, big club, they need a striker, itll definitely be well paid, live in Paris... stats pad in a farmers league... definitely make cl r16/qf..

 

[Adriano@10]

why wouldnt lukaku go to PSG? Frnech speaking, big club, they need a striker, itll definitely be well paid, live in Paris... stats pad in a farmers league... definitely make cl r16/qf..

The question is why would psg want him? Would be kind of a downgrade for them.
Or let me put it like this no way lukaku is psgs first choice for that striker position