Apparently Palace have agreed to pay this lad from Germany £170k a week.

Benteke is on about £50k less from what I've read.

Can anyone shed some light on how good this German lad actually is?

Or has he just got a very good agent?!?

He was a free agent, so on a 4 year deal thats circa 35 mill? Suppose they are another club with piles more than us, just signed Kouyate as well haven't they?

Or they are a club that correctly look at the overall cost of the deal when determining if they can afford it and not just the salary.

If we brought in Woods on £15 million then paid him £40k a week over 4 years, then that is £23 million. Not a massive difference.

WOOD ! FFS

Cue the "they will go bust" brigade, when in fact no clubs have really actually gone bust really.

RocketLawnChair wrote:WOOD ! FFS

It's not difficult to get right, is it?

Much easier than our transfer targets

Think Bakary Sako must have been on a fair old wedge it’s very telling no-ones picked him up yet.

Steddyman wrote:
If we brought in Woods on £15 million then paid him £40k a week over 4 years, then that is £23 million. Not a massive difference.

£12m or about 50% more!! Do you want to buy a car?

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Apparently Palace have agreed to pay this lad from Germany £170k a week.

Benteke is on about £50k less from what I've read.

Can anyone shed some light on how good this German lad actually is?

Or has he just got a very good agent?!?

To be a fly on their dressing room wall,the likes of Benteke won't be happy with some new kid on the block gazumping them,could cause unrest in the camp,especially if he doesn't hit the ground running.

ClaretAndJew wrote:Cue the "they will go bust" brigade, when in fact no clubs have really actually gone bust really.

Plenty been bailed out, dropped divisions, had points deducted, gone into administration etc.

I want us to release the purse strings and I’m sure we are being overly cautious, though I’d prefer that to going the other way.

[quote="tiger76"especially if he doesn't hit the ground running.[/quote]

bet he'll do that alright...in our penalty area!

I watch a lot of footy, far too much tbh and various leagues across Europe - I've never heard of Max Meyer !! Who is he ?

Vegas Claret wrote:I watch a lot of footy, far too much tbh and various leagues across Europe - I've never heard of Max Meyer !! Who is he ?

Really? German "wonderkid" who's career has slowed somewhat over the last season or so. Young enough to fulfil his potential and would think that if he does Palace will make double their £35 million outlay if they decide to cash in on him. Risky move for Palace but should pay off.

For those who understand finance much better than myself, can anyone explain whether there are differences in the way a club can finance and then depreciate an asset if the player is funded like this? i.e. there's no cap-ex in this case as all the outlay will be op-ex, yet the player will surely be an asset to the club.

Are the ins and outs of this the stumbling block for us as a club?

I dont actually know enough about it, hence asking the question to someone who might - or am I completely grabbing the wrong end of the stick as I usually do

Vegas Claret wrote:I watch a lot of footy, far too much tbh and various leagues across Europe - I've never heard of Max Meyer !! Who is he ?

Porn star?

The best signing since Swansea got Renato Sanches last season. Remember that ambition?! That's what it's all about.

If we were to buy a really good player for £25m and put them on a 4 year contract at £60k per year I think the majority on here would be happy and see it as good business. Financial speaking there is little difference between the above scenario and the alleged Max Meyer deal

For a wonder kid his stats aren’t very impressive

2013–2018 Schalke 146 appearances 17 goals

It’s a big gamble for Palace

Devils_Advocate wrote:If we were to buy a really good player for £25m and put them on a 4 year contract at £60k per year I think the majority on here would be happy and see it as good business. Financial speaking there is little difference between the above scenario and the alleged Max Meyer deal

Exactly. That was my point. But because I got frustrated with our crap window earlier than others I am now the clappers new ablueclaret.

To be clear, I am not saying we have missed out by not signing Max Meyer. I know nothing about him so don't know if he is a good signing or not.

What I am saying is we should sign players based on the overall cost, not excluding them on salary alone. I would imagine Mike Garlick's concern with big salaries is what happens if we go down. There are two simple solutions to that:

1. Put in a release clause so they can leave if you get relegated. If there is a minimal transfer fee then there is no loss financially.
2. Put the money aside that you would have otherwise paid as a large transfer fee to pay the salary in future years.

It takes more financial acumen to manage but the overall cost remains the same.

Steddyman wrote:What I am saying is we should sign players based on the overall cost, not excluding them on salary alone. I would imagine Mike Garlick's concern with big salaries is what happens if we go down. There are two simple solutions to that:

1. Put in a release clause so they can leave if you get relegated. If there is a minimal transfer fee then there is no loss financially.
2. Put the money aside that you would have otherwise paid as a large transfer fee to pay the salary in future years.

It takes more financial acumen to manage but the overall cost remains the same.

OK, so Meyer or his equivalent arrives on a weekly wage of £170k. How does that go with the attempts to get Mee to sign a new contract? I think there might be a chance that he would say "you don't pay a transfer fee for me, so I would like the £170k that he's getting". Six first team players have signed extended contract in the last year. How many of them would have done that at that price, if they had seen a new boy coming in and getting four times the wage?

dsr wrote:OK, so Meyer or his equivalent arrives on a weekly wage of £170k. How does that go with the attempts to get Mee to sign a new contract? I think there might be a chance that he would say "you don't pay a transfer fee for me, so I would like the £170k that he's getting". Six first team players have signed extended contract in the last year. How many of them would have done that at that price, if they had seen a new boy coming in and getting four times the wage?

Yes I agree that complicates contract renewals. Perhaps you tell Ben that you aren't really paying him any more because the transfer fee was geared into his payments?

So how does every other Premier League club achieve it? Or do they instantly put every players salary up to £170k when he signs?

Steddyman wrote:Yes I agree that complicates contract renewals. Perhaps you tell Ben that you aren't really paying him any more because the transfer fee was geared into his payments?

So how does every other Premier League club achieve it? Or do they instantly put every players salary up to £170k when he signs?

And Ben knows that isn't true.

I don't think other Premier League clubs do manage to pay that sort of wage to one, and keep the rest of the squad happy. Who else does that?