Jump to content


Borats

Member Since 28 Sep 2017
Offline Last Active Dec 23 2020 10:57 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Jorgensen loaned out to some Danish club

17 December 2020 - 05:34 PM

 

very good chance its that high.

$170k international slot

- loan savings is anywhere from his salary to salary plus transfer fee.  Jorgy made 306,250.04 last year.  I was using expected values here but the "~" is also to approximate

- if Jorgy is sold at end of the loan the second half of the salary is off the books even if its a free transfer ~($150k)

- We bought him supposedly for $2.5mm so if we took a 80% hit on that its still ~$500k

- If they cover half his salary during the loan its another ~$75k

 

So its reasonably anywhere from $170k - $895k using what i think are pretty conservative assumptions.  He's still getting Danish youth team call ups so he's for sure valued there.  Personally I'd be stunned if we were covering all of his salary but gave them an option to buy as thats extremely unusual. 

I wish this were true, I really do, but even according to RBS' MLS rules quote, "if the team the player is loaned to picks up any or all of the players wages, that is considered loan revenue." Whatever we bought him for years ago is irrelevant. Whatever Danish club paid for this 6 months loan, which I think is very little, is all we get. 50K maybe? 75? Certainly no where near 500K you claim.

 

As far as international slot, agreed this is nice, but wouldn't we get that too if he plays for RB II? And this is assuming Danish club couldn't wait a week.


In Topic: Some people just repeat themselves, over and over and over, and then again an...

17 December 2020 - 01:29 PM

I think you're misunderstanding what I mean by 'transfer fee'. I'm not talking about whatever compensation we might be receiving for the 6 month loan, I'm talking about the fee when we permanently sell his contract to another team.

 

There seems to be reason to believe that Danish soccer circles still think highly enough of Jorgensen that we can recoup at least some of the $2M+ we spent for him. That's Thelwell's goal and his priority over protecting Stroud.

Let's hope you are right, and ultimately we will get the money you speak of and we use it to improve the team. A bit upsetting now though, given loss of Stroud, and the fact Thelwell hasn't really brought anyone in yet who is much better than Jared. But really, from personnel perspective I would rather lose Valot, Davis, or Barlow over him. He is also younger than any of these guys (aside from Jorgey).


In Topic: Cuts!

17 December 2020 - 12:54 PM

Omir has shown flashes of being able to play in the half spaces, and an ability to turn quickly and go towards goal, which is probably going to be more beneficial as a second striker or attacking midfielder in either formation.

His issue is consistency and hes error/turnover prone, but he should get some decent minutes with a lot of the other young attacking options gone.

Also, he is very easy to get off the ball. Just like Mines was a year before, but he improved in that area, is a year younger than Omir, and showed good one v one skills. I would still take him over Omir, but like I said before, I don't think Thelwell had that option. He could have kept both though. Hopefully he didn't because there are some really good midfielders coming in during the transfer window.


In Topic: Jorgensen loaned out to some Danish club

17 December 2020 - 12:48 PM

 

 

 

 

If the team the player is loaned to picks up any or all of the players wages, that is considered loan revenue.

 

  • The club may assign up to $1,000,000 of the transfer/loan revenue as General Allocation Money. (in the case of Designated Players, such assignment of Allocation Money can only take place after the club has received 100% of its out-of-pocket investment).
  • The remaining balance of the club's share (if any), and which cannot be traded, will be available for use by clubs in the following ways:
    • Against the expenses incurred by the club in relation to the costs of an existing or new Designated Player; or
    • With League approval, against an expense that (i) would not otherwise have been incurred by the club; and (ii) reasonably represents an investment in the League or club (e.g., youth development and training facilities).

 

Thanks, if I read this correctly, this would save us a few bucks in GAM indeed. This is 6 months loan, and you'd better believe Metro will still be paying large part of Jorgey's salary. So, it's no where near 500K as Defend claimed. Don't know the exact number, but it cannot be that high. Like I said, saving a few bucks. Which is fine by me, just didn't want to lose Stroud over it.


In Topic: Jorgensen loaned out to some Danish club

17 December 2020 - 12:35 PM

you left off the part where it say unless otherwise agreed to in the Loan agreement. We dont know yet the terms of the loan but I wouldnt be shocked if arhaus is picking up some of the contract

No I didn't. "Under MLS rules, loaning a player provides roster relief but not budget relief" is a paragraph by itself. Nothing is left out, let's not start making up rules just so that they fit your argument. Look at actual data and make up your mind after based on facts.

 

For example, if we really do save 500K GAM/CAP, like Defend claims, I would change my view. Facts however point to different conclusion. Will you agree we should have exposed Jorgey and kept Stroud if indeed "loaning a player provides roster relief but not budget relief"?