Outgoing? SANDER BERGE ON WAY OUT ?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Yogi said:
Would make zero sense for United. If he’s to leave we need cash as much upfront as possible to rebuild. If he’s to be loaned it need to be with a view to him returning if we were to be promoted like Fulham did with some of their players. Loan to buy is a worst case we don’t get the money we need to rebuild in the short term but still lose our asset. I’d hope that was a very short conversation with Napoli.
Click to expand...
agree yogi worst deal possible for us tell em to do one 35m or no deal
 

Arsenal indecision could pave the way for Aston Villa to complete £35m transfer swoop.
Arsenal are reportedly balking at Sheffield United's demands for Norwegian midfielder Sander Berge.
Berge, 23, only joined the Blades 18 months ago from Belgian club Genk but isn't expected to start the season in the Championship following their relegation.
Numerous Premier League clubs have already been linked with Berge, most notably Arsenal - though Villa are also reportedly interested.
BirminghamLIVE
 
Would prefer him to go to villa, a club with more money than sense when it comes to transfer fees. Could probably squeeze £50m out of them
 
Yogi said:
Would make zero sense for United. If he’s to leave we need cash as much upfront as possible to rebuild. If he’s to be loaned it need to be with a view to him returning if we were to be promoted like Fulham did with some of their players. Loan to buy is a worst case we don’t get the money we need to rebuild in the short term but still lose our asset. I’d hope that was a very short conversation with Napoli.
Click to expand...
Fulham did it with Anguisa to villarreal. Granted they do have a billionaire owner
 
RMBlade said:
Fulham did it with Anguisa to villarreal. Granted they do have a billionaire owner
Click to expand...
Yeah a loan if he’s unhappy playing in the championship makes sense as we’d still keep our asset long term. It’s the loan to buy that’s the worst case.
 
RMBlade said:
True unless the option to buy was only valid if we didn’t get promoted
Click to expand...
Even so if he is to leave permanently then we need the cash now to rebuild. Cash next year helps us less.
 
Yogi said:
Yeah a loan if he’s unhappy playing in the championship makes sense as we’d still keep our asset long term. It’s the loan to buy that’s the worst case.
Click to expand...
Don't know if such a deal exists or if any party would be open to it, but could a caveated/conditional agreement be put in place?

Loan for a year, with a fee, gets wages off bill and keeps Berge happy.

If we get promoted we have option to keep / recall.

If we don't get promoted, they pay the release clause less wages and loan fee and sign him.
 
JonnyD said:
Don't know if such a deal exists or if any party would be open to it, but could a caveated/conditional agreement be put in place?

Loan for a year, with a fee, gets wages off bill and keeps Berge happy.

If we get promoted we have option to keep / recall.

If we don't get promoted, they pay the release clause less wages and loan fee and sign him.
Click to expand...
I’m unsure if a deal like that has ever been done. But the crux is if he’s to go permanently then it should be in a deal which sees us paid this summer. We either need him to play this year and help us up or provide funds to help us buy players to do that.

A loan now but pay later deal would hurt us as we’d lose his on field ability coupled with not having money to rebuild. This would reduce our chances of promotion meaning we’d likely lose other high value assets next year.
 

Yogi said:
Even so if he is to leave permanently then we need the cash now to rebuild. Cash next year helps us less.
Click to expand...
I agree, I guess it depends on the clubs finances and whether there is a viable buyer this summer.

In an ideal world I hope we would keep Berge, I think he would dominate in the championship and is one of the best prospects we have had for a while.
 
RMBlade said:
I agree, I guess it depends on the clubs finances and whether there is a viable buyer this summer.

In an ideal world I hope we would keep Berge, I think he would dominate in the championship and is one of the best prospects we have had for a while.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree in an ideal world I’d keep him.
 
A 5m loan fee strikes me as a very strange deal. in an ideal world he could come back if we are promoted or we negotiate a larger fee if they want him to stay.

but it gives us no financial help this year and There’s also a world where we he doesn’t play well again this year / gets injured and his value plummets. Who’s to say we’d get anything like the same value for him in 12 months, so there’s a huge risk there.
 
know villa are not popular with blades fans but if they come up with the asking price of 35m im sure he will go
 
Slug said:
£5m loan fee from Napoli apparently
Click to expand...
If he wants to go, it wouldn't surprise me if this ended up being the option we have to take. Adding the savings on wages, its worth around £7m to the club. When you see Ruben Neves being touted around for £35m, you can see why clubs aren't willing to pay the same for Berge.
 
Revolution said:
That would be an awful deal.
Click to expand...
Would it? Depends on the cashflow situation at the Lane. £5m covers his amortisation for the season (£22m over 4.5 years) and if Napoli pick up his wages that means he'd cost us nothing next season.

The deal, for me, would hinge on the optional permanent fee and whether he'd come back if we got promoted. The risk is that we don't get promoted, Napoli don't take up their option and we're left with Berge next season...although we'd still probably get £20m for him at that point which would help the cashflow in 2022/23.
 
Yogi said:
I’m unsure if a deal like that has ever been done. But the crux is if he’s to go permanently then it should be in a deal which sees us paid this summer. We either need him to play this year and help us up or provide funds to help us buy players to do that.
Click to expand...

You realise that clubs rarely pay the entirety of a transfer fee up front, right?
 
The club might actually fancy the loan deal.

they worked hard to get a good name through the door in terms of a young lad who has played in Europe, has a good reputation and pedigree. They probably don’t want to give him up without a bit of a fight.

Berge wouldn’t have to spend a year playing outside of the top flight. Which benefits his own career and reputation.

he gets to prove his fitness and ability in a strong team / league.

we can gamble a bit on going back up this season and bring him back in to the squad for another premier league campaign. If we didn’t go back up then hopefully he’ll have had a strong season and we’ll get our asking price.

seems sensible to me if we can’t get our money now. I’d rather do something like this than take a cut price offer this summer - if we can afford to.
 
Balham Blade said:
Would it? Depends on the cashflow situation at the Lane. £5m covers his amortisation for the season (£22m over 4.5 years) and if Napoli pick up his wages that means he'd cost us nothing next season.

The deal, for me, would hinge on the optional permanent fee and whether he'd come back if we got promoted. The risk is that we don't get promoted, Napoli don't take up their option and we're left with Berge next season...although we'd still probably get £20m for him at that point which would help the cashflow in 2022/23.
Click to expand...

It is a consideration but tbh he's more likely to improve his reputation and therefore increase his value whilst playing in Serie A rather than the Champ.

What is doesn't do of course is address the revenue shortfall for Utd next season as much as a sale would. That may result in other assets needing to go, the obvious ones being Ramsdale and Egan.
 

jt64 said:
You realise that clubs rarely pay the entirety of a transfer fee up front, right?
Click to expand...
Yes but in the case of a release clause that would be a lump sum because it isn’t a negotiated deal the 35 million would have to be stump up to trigger the clause. Even in the case of a negotiated deal it’s likely to be 50% plus of the fee paid upfront which would be more than a nominal loan fee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

originaltrueblade
Outgoing? Brewster
7 8 9
Replies
253
Views
34K
FriethBlade
FriethBlade
Super_Dazzler
Sander Berge or Vini Souza?
2
Replies
43
Views
3K
VictoryBlade
VictoryBlade
JOEYDEE
Outgoing? Sneaky Liverpool?
Replies
17
Views
3K
Jimmy Fleck
Jimmy Fleck
Roygbiv
Former Players Update (Part 2)
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
DifferentClass
DifferentClass
Balham
Outgoing? Havenhand to Birmingham
Replies
12
Views
3K
Wards
Wards

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom