It seems I may have got it wrong when going out on a limb to claim that signing of Alphonse Areola was unlikely.
My view was that a goalkeeper was not a priority position and the finances made no sense but in reality I have been told this morning by a club insider that we are indeed in talks with PSG.
The finances still don’t make sense to me, Fulham paid a massive loan fee of five million Euros last season and his wages are said to be £160,000 per week at PSG.
Unless the French outfit are subsidising his wages substantiality it seems hard to understand how manager David Moyes would make Areola the highest paid West Ham player next season.
Reports on social media that West Ham have already signed Alphonse Areola today are untrue but we are told but talks are ongoing and a loan deal still remains a possibility.
All very strange given the urgency surrounding a striker that we are APPARENTLY going big on a stopper. Hmm!
Why not just buy him outright on the same terms as Haller and Anderson. ie, 4 annual payments? Unless the loan fee is going to be deducted from the final price next season, it could work out cheaper.
Afeola was exceptional last year. This would be great business for us as a loan signing with option to buy. With Fabianski nearly 37 years old I could see Areola becoming our new number one goalkeeper in the long term. Doesn’t seem a strange deal to me either. Don’t know why claret and Hugh refuse to believe this could happen.
The deal doesn’t seem strange to me at all – a keeper is a top priority considering firstly, Fab’s age and secondly, his injury record. We also have room to play two keepers with all of the additional games we need to play. An injury to Fab for any period of time leaves us vulnerable.
In addition, what Fulham paid isn’t necessarily going to reflect what we would pay. The player wants to leave, PSG want to sell and get the player off the books and would likely take less then what Fulham were paying as they’re financing Donnarumma’s salary. This is, of course, a Covid market with clubs having had a reduced revenue stream for 18 months.
I imagine we’ll end up paying a reasonable loan fee of a few million, with an obligation to buy which leaves funds for a striker. If we’re also selling Yarmolenko, that’s £115k a week off our own books.
Personally, I think it’s a great signing and feels like it’s part of a larger, long term plan.
Hi all, well, this deal kind of makes sense to me.
I love Fab, but he is not getting any younger, and this is an upgrade on Randolph, and a potential long-term solution for Fabianski. Having him around the first team position for a season is a good thing, as we can ease him in; and he gets familiar with tactics and team-mates. I agree that his wages are high, but if we can get him on a free after the loan (or at a low agreed price); then I think it does make sense. But it should be viewed as a long-term investment, and not as a quick fix (which I agree we probably do not need). I think Moyes has a habit of bringing players in, and not playing them straight away; so in reality this might be a signing for next season as much as this.
Anyway, what do you think – hit or miss? 🙂
I’m here for this deal. Top quality keeper, still under 30, European experience…. Even looked pretty good in an awful Fulham side last year
Fab is 36 and picked up a few injuries over the last couple of years, Randolph is a Championship keeper, and I got the impression Martin’s new deal was more about working with the Academy rather than actually playing