Atlanta United in for Latte Lath?

The problem with Lath is that he is both too old and too Ivorian to attract the “English prospect worth a gamble” premium that can lead to some quite eye-watering Premier League transfer bids for some players (including someone like Doak). So we have to accept that he is, to an outsider, just the near his peak leading scorer (and not by that much) for one of the play-off contenders in the championship. He was probably a better sell six months ago.

That also means he might be worth more to us than he would be to anyone we could conceivably sell him to. And in those circumstances, we should obviously fight to keep him.
 
Two things from reading this thread.

So difficult to judge modern transfers.

No proof but I reckon the "20 million" from Ipswich in August included about 10-12 up front and loads of incentives (prem goals, staying up etc).

Atlanta may be offering 18 million dollars up front... which is unusual for modern transfers.

It's not big number vs big number - and we never know the ins and outs.

Secondly, MLS is a growing league. High quality of life for players. Good options for earning outside of football.
 
Secondly MLS is a growing league. High quality of life for players. Good options for earning outside of football.

Not sure about points 1) and 3) (unless you're either playing in Miami or are Messi.... or both!).

I'm also not sure Atlanta is a great place to live either tbh?
 
No proof but I reckon the "20 million" from Ipswich in August included about 10-12 up front and loads of incentives (prem goals, staying up etc).

Atlanta may be offering 18 million dollars up front... which is unusual for modern transfers.
No there’s no proof. There is simply no way we would have even considered selling a goalscorer for 12m guaranteed and the rest in add ons which would unlikely ever happen for an Ipswich team that were guaranteed to struggle. It was clearly a lot more than that guaranteed.

Note, can people not use “up front” when discussing transfers, up front is the payment terms, which might have only been 8m, with 4m in 6m and another 4m in 12 months. We don’t have cash flow issues, so higher up front probably isn’t our concern. How much is guaranteed and how much is add ons is something we are concerned with
 
No there’s no proof. There is simply no way we would have even considered selling a goalscorer for 12m guaranteed and the rest in add ons which would unlikely ever happen for an Ipswich team that were guaranteed to struggle. It was clearly a lot more than that guaranteed.

Note, can people not use “up front” when discussing transfers, up front is the payment terms, which might have only been 8m, with 4m in 6m and another 4m in 12 months. We don’t have cash flow issues, so higher up front probably isn’t our concern. How much is guaranteed and how much is add ons is something we are concerned with
I suppose we are both speculating.

The guaranteed money for Spence, Tav, Akpom, Rogers. Were all 8-15.

I think Lath is in that bracket.
 
I suppose we are both speculating.

The guaranteed money for Spence, Tav, Akpom, Rogers. Were all 8-15.

I think Lath is in that bracket.
Akpom was a straight 10m

The other three were young and being bought on potential growth. Akpom and lath are the finished deal age wise so not likely to improve
 
Transfer fees are often paid in installments e.g £20m could be £12m now, £6m in yr2, and £6m in yr3. This may be done for FFP/PSR, tax or other accounting reasons. These are guaranteed amounts, short of admin/liquidation. 'Add-ons' are conditional payments, usually based on some performance metric. They're neither guaranteed nor equal e.g. a player moving to Ipswich would likely trigger more appearance benchmarks than one who moved to Man City, but fewer EPL appearances if Ipswich are relegated.
 
Transfer fees are often paid in installments e.g £20m could be £12m now, £6m in yr2, and £6m in yr3. This may be done for FFP/PSR, tax or other accounting reasons. These are guaranteed amounts, short of admin/liquidation. 'Add-ons' are conditional payments, usually based on some performance metric. They're neither guaranteed nor equal e.g. a player moving to Ipswich would likely trigger more appearance benchmarks than one who moved to Man City, but fewer EPL appearances if Ipswich are relegated.
Spot on, people seem to conflate this. It’s a common thing, just like when people mix up losses and debt
 
Chuba was £10.5M with bonuses to take it to £12.2M. He was in the last year of his contract.


 
I think we have no relegation worries , and its gonna happen now or the summer, has Scott got a replacement lined up, he should have as we have known it would happen.
 
Not sure about points 1) and 3) (unless you're either playing in Miami or are Messi.... or both!).

I'm also not sure Atlanta is a great place to live either tbh?
Atlanta is a lovely place to live.
It has a lovely climate with 4 distinct seasons.
It has some great parts to it and is also a city that has massive black population and affluence.
I've had the good fortune to spend quite a lot of time in Atlanta with work. I nearly moved out there, but for family considerations.
 
Back
Top