Is Celtic’s transfer model fit for purpose? Part Four – Loan Deals

On Monday I focused on the imminent transfer of Nicolas Kuhn to Como, one where I felt we have failed to get as much for a star player as we should have. On Tuesday I looked at how certain players are now worth a lot more after leaving Celtic, even though they haven’t made much of an impression since leaving to pastures new and yesterday I looked at a few players who could leave this summer and what kind of price Celtic should be looking for them.

Making a rod for our own back

This brings me on to the types of transfer deals that Celtic negotiate and whether we are making a rod for our own back at times. As I have mentioned throughout the past three articles, one of the things that has irked me over the past few seasons is Celtic’s willingness to let good players who unfortunately, for one reason or another, haven’t quite made the grade at Celtic leave on loan deals with an option to buy clause inserted. I feel these clauses rarely work out for Celtic and it gives all the power to the club taking our players on loan.

There are three main options when loaning a player out. It can be a straight loan with no extras attached which will see the player depart for a set amount of time and return to Celtic when the deal expires. Basic and simple.

To me this is usually the best option as it means the player feels they still have a future at Celtic if they can impress on loan but also leaves Celtic holding all the cards if the player impresses and interest in him ramps up. It leaves Celtic free to negotiate with any club that might be interested and if you are lucky enough to have a few suitors, then the transfer fee will only increase.

The dreaded loan with an option to buy

You then have the dreaded loan with an option to buy. This is the one we seem to use the most and it rarely, if ever, pays off. This gives the club taking the player all the power. He turns out to be a flop? No problem off you pop back to Celtic. He plays out of his skin all season? Brilliant we can sign him for the usually rather low transfer fee agreed previously. I know most of the clubs loaning players will want this option but in certain occasions when Celtic feel the player could flourish elsewhere they should try everything to not include an option to buy clause.

A loan with an obligation to buy

The third option is a loan with an obligation to buy which is an option I can’t remember us using in the past but I could be wrong. Certainly nothing springs to mind. What is fresh in my memory however is that it’s a deal that our city rivals have landed themselves in a mess over. They signed Colombian Oscar Cortes on this deal and even though it’s been a disaster from day one with the winger constantly injured, they still have to cough up £4.5m to Lens and sign him permanently.

This is certainly an avenue that Celtic could have used to their benefit in the past, mainly with players you felt wouldn’t have a future at Celtic and one who you felt wouldn’t impress enough to have their loan club begging to sign them. Luis Palma to Olympiakos springs to mind. Odin Thiago Holm at LAFC is another.

Generally I think Celtic would be wise to try and refrain from giving teams an option to buy clause when taking our players on loan, especially ones we feel could thrive elsewhere.

I often think back to the time Jack Hendry went to Oostende on loan, was one of the best players in Belgium that season and had plenty of teams chasing him. Oostende triggered their option to buy for a ridiculously low fee then punted him that same summer to Club Brugge for a much larger fee. At the time Oostende stated that if Hendry hadn’t have been clever enough to insert a release clause at a set price in his Oostende contract, they would have been looking £8m for him. This shows the kind of mistakes that can happen in doing loans this way.

Alexandro Bernabei and Mikey Johnston are good examples of not inserting any clause and it working out well for Celtic. The club would have probably taken a couple of million for either when they went out on loan but after decent spells at their loan clubs their value rose and Celtic were able to get more for them when they eventually left (although not as much as they probably should have).

Another great example of this type of basic loan is when Norwich loaned us Adam Idah. In all honesty he would probably have been valued at around £3-4m at the time but after a fruitful few months in Glasgow we ended up having to pay £9.5m for him. Well played Norwich.

I think it would have been wise for Celtic to have loaned both Tomoki Iwata and Hyeon-Gyu Oh out rather than sell them straight away. As we have seen, both players value has rose considerably since departing, another missed opportunity by Celtic I feel.

Another one that worries me is Maik Nawrocki. I have no doubt that he will impress in Germany and feel like whatever fee we have agreed to make the move permanent with Hannover will be triggered and we will end up seeing the Pole move on to a bigger club for a much higher fee shortly afterwards.

There are definitely improvements we could make as a club when it comes to the loan market and maximising profit for ourselves. As a club which prides itself on being savvy in the transfer market I feel like we often make silly mistakes regarding our own assets and their worth when we are moving them on. In my next article I will look at the deals we have concluded so far this summer and try to figure out what business we will possibly be doing throughout the rest of this transfer window.

Conall McGinty

Help raise funds for Celtic Youth Academy by playing the Celtic Pools Weekly Lottery and you could win up to £25,000. The lottery is £1 per week. Click on image above to join.