20 minutes ago, DarkMata said:

Yeah I was thinking we could pay the cost up front then spread it out over the contract length similar to the others transfers thinking the amount we pay up front didn't matter if on the books its distributed over the contract length.   However as pointed out earlier and you mentioned the buyout clause is classed as wage and accounted for in the one year apparently.  

Like you say its only going to happen if Benfica can agree to a fee.  I surmised earlier its more likely going to be above the €120m release clause rather than less, in the same vein as the Nkunku deal as Benfica seem pretty adamant he's staying.  We need to give them an offer they can't refuse.

Can't help but feel 120m or more is just mental though. Rather us test Lyon's resolve about Caqueret while we're buying Gusto.

Edited January 24, 20233 yr by RIP Mourinho

33 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Can't help but feel 120m or more is just mental though. Rather us test Lyon's resolve about Caqueret while we're buying Gusto.

Footballs been mental for years, especially the Premier League.  I've given up caring about how much we or anyone else spends.  £80m seemed ludicrous 5 years ago, now £60-80 million is the standard rate for anyone with a hint of potential.  I remember my head being blown when Shearer went to Newcastle for £15 million now that'll just pay the agents fee!

8 hours ago, evissy said:

So we are basically contemplating on buying either Enzo or Caicedo. At this moment we probably need Caicedo (DM) more than Enzo (CM) but not knowing anything about Caicedo I prefer Enzo.

I am slightly worried about Enzo though. Something about his whitened teeth make me question him. Sort of like: I am Ronaldo already without all that work, skills and goals. 🤣

That or Bobby Firmino with as much goals. 

22 hours ago, dennisbutnotwisey said:

We're not making another bid if we're not paying the full fee, surely not. That would be a complete waste of time.  Might just be happening. 

I expect what's happening is that Benfica are playing hardball for a non-clause fee of well above €120m! This is because, if I have the tax information right, it would cost Chelsea nearly €231m to trigger the clause!!

If I have it right, Enzo pays income tax at 48% of earnings. In order for him to pay Benfica €120m, Chelsea would have to pay him enough so he had €120m after tax at 48%. The gross amount comes to €230,769,230.77! Todd does not need his head examined so there is no way he is paying that. He is probably asking Benfica to agree a transfer fee of around the value of the clause. Benfica, meanwhile, will be saying that their fans will not accept the sale unless it is the clause, which they know the club can do nothing about.  Unless, the fee is significantly above the value of the clause, say €150m. In which case the fans could be persuaded 'understand'. Rui Costa's argument would be that this number still saves Chelsea more than €80m compared to paying the clause.

Benfica's stance is probably encouraged because they know that Chelsea did the same sort of deal with Leipzig which saw us pay a transfer fee above the value of the buyout fee. 

Edited January 24, 20233 yr by OhForAGreavsie

This one gets done IF Benfica agree to accept an offer around the release clause.

If they insist on the legal process of the clause being paid we cannot afford him as it falls to Enzo to play the clause, us to pay Enzo (which is therefore wages) and that is subject to hige tax. Woild cost us more than 200mill euros to follow the clause road.

If they agree to an offer then it can be done. Depends on them.

Im fairly certain all this speculation about release clauses costing more is actually bs guys. 

One of the funnier rumours I have heard is Enzo has asked Benfica to give him a 2mill loyalty payment if they do not sell him as he will be losing out a lot of cash.

depends what portugal law is, the player wouldn't be taxed on the buyout in spain, i believe is capital gain / capital loss - net zero.

I'm really waiting for a good news on this one.

1 hour ago, Wearyourblue said:

depends what portugal law is, the player wouldn't be taxed on the buyout in spain, i believe is capital gain / capital loss - net zero.

That is the law in Portugal and Spain from my googling 

36 minutes ago, hephzibah said:

I'm really waiting for a good news on this one.

If #Chelsea were to trigger Enzo Fernandez's release clause at Benfica, it would cost them a total of €160M - clause and taxes combined.

[@CLMerlo via @AlbicelesteTalk]I’m 

7 minutes ago, JM7 said:

If #Chelsea were to trigger Enzo Fernandez's release clause at Benfica, it would cost them a total of €160M - clause and taxes combined.

[@CLMerlo via @AlbicelesteTalk]I’m 

Enzo + Transfer Ban, here we go!

12 minutes ago, JM7 said:

If #Chelsea were to trigger Enzo Fernandez's release clause at Benfica, it would cost them a total of €160M - clause and taxes combined.

[@CLMerlo via @AlbicelesteTalk]I’m 

There you go all who asked why we don't just trigger his clause.

Cheers @JM7

5 minutes ago, TomCFC85 said:

Enzo + Transfer Ban, here we go!

You mean Enzo +European ban and PL points deduction, here we go! Right?

He's class.

But surely there are other players around Europe / the world that wouldn't cost a kings ransom to that extent? 

How much did City pay for Rodri, Liverpool for Fabinho ? These fees are simply bonkers 

45 minutes ago, BordeauxBlue said:

He's class.

But surely there are other players around Europe / the world that wouldn't cost a kings ransom to that extent? 

How much did City pay for Rodri, Liverpool for Fabinho ? These fees are simply bonkers 

Indeed, our owners believe they have everything in hand though so somehow they can spend such amounts and plan of us making money over the next 10 years too. 

4 hours ago, bisright1 said:

Im fairly certain all this speculation about release clauses costing more is actually bs guys. 

Based on specific information or on your reasoning?

2 hours ago, BordeauxBlue said:

He's class.

But surely there are other players around Europe / the world that wouldn't cost a kings ransom to that extent? 

How much did City pay for Rodri, Liverpool for Fabinho ? These fees are simply bonkers 

There very likely won't be another Enzo anytime soon and even if there is the chances of us attracting him are low.

Same way Hazard and Kante type players didn't crop up every year (yes I believe he is that level of gamechanger).

16 hours ago, RIP Mourinho said:

We don't need one, we bullied UEFA so bad they've had to completely change the rules so no other club can copy this. 

We've literally completed our rebuild in 6 months and no other team is allowed to do the same, Chelsea are absolutely massive. 

Exactly comrade.

If we were half as good on the pitch as we were off it and cooking-the-books we'd be Top!

I don't think we will struck a deal with them if we don't pay the full clause or Enzo himself pays the rest of gap left in his buyout clause. I don't see that happening. He probably wants to come to Chelsea but not that much. He will end up in a top club anyway. 

Benfica don't have time to replace him. I don't think Ruben Loftus-Cheek would sweeten the deal enough. They are also in the last 16 of Champions league and facing a beatable Club Brugge...

It is 25th of January as well...I think this is not happening. 

8 hours ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

Based on specific information or on your reasoning?

http://www.football-news-views.co.uk/football-news-1313-do-you-know-the-difference-between-release-clauses-and-buy-out-clauses.php

But also it's just nonsense. It doesn't make sense. If we effectively had to pay 160m to buyout, there wouldn't be talks. Benfica would tell us clearly, it's buyout or nothing and we know that the buyout would cost 160m and we'd stop talking. 

15 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

http://www.football-news-views.co.uk/football-news-1313-do-you-know-the-difference-between-release-clauses-and-buy-out-clauses.php

But also it's just nonsense. It doesn't make sense. If we effectively had to pay 160m to buyout, there wouldn't be talks. Benfica would tell us clearly, it's buyout or nothing and we know that the buyout would cost 160m and we'd stop talking. 

I`m sure I remember something about most of these kind of transfers end up with the buying club paying a few million on top just to make sure theres no tax hits, so instead of it being a buy out it ends up being an actual transfer, once the selling club accept the player is leaving anyway. 

15 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

http://www.football-news-views.co.uk/football-news-1313-do-you-know-the-difference-between-release-clauses-and-buy-out-clauses.php

But also it's just nonsense. It doesn't make sense. If we effectively had to pay 160m to buyout, there wouldn't be talks. Benfica would tell us clearly, it's buyout or nothing and we know that the buyout would cost 160m and we'd stop talking. 

Benfica have repeatedly said that they wanted the buyout clause or nothing. This actually dates back to during the World Cup when clubs became more aware of Enzo. We were told too at start of January but the narrative was that we maybe able to come to an agreement close to that fee, hence spreading the cost over installments.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1715631/Chelsea-Benfica-Enzo-Fernandez-106m-release-clause-Premier-League-transfer-news

14 hours ago, axman2526 said:

One of the funnier rumours I have heard is Enzo has asked Benfica to give him a 2mill loyalty payment if they do not sell him as he will be losing out a lot of cash.

This is not true.

Benfica president Rui Costa offered Enzo 2 million to stay until summer.

He got salary raise, nothing special.

Brighton might be doing us a huge favour pricing Caicedo at 100m. It just might push us over the edge to get this one done.