Arsenal: The difference between Wilfried Zaha, Kieran Tierney negotiations

Arsenal are in talks with Celtic and Crystal Palace regarding deals for Kieran Tierney and Wilfried Zaha. There is a crucial difference between the two scenarios: the demands of the selling club.

Arsenal are trying to rebuild a somewhat broken and severely lacking squad with rather limited resources. It has been widely reported that Unai Emery has around £40-45 million to spend this summer, a thoroughly measly amount considering the explosion of prices in the modern market.

Find the latest episode of the Pain in the Arsenal Podcast here — The Big Season Review

As a result, it is critical that the club is extremely efficient in the deals that they do complete, ensuring that they first target and acquire the right player at the right position, and second, get them for the right price and wage.

More from Pain in the Arsenal

• 3 standout players from 1-0 victory over Everton
• 3 positives & negatives from Goodison Park victory
• Arsenal vs PSV preview: Prediction, team news & lineups
• 3 talking points from Arsenal’s victory at Goodison Park
• Mikel Arteta provides Gabriel Martinelli injury update after Everton win

That latter process requires strong negotiating skills, something that has been lacking at the Emirates for many years — the ushering in of the new era under new management was meant to aid this shortcoming. But in two different cases this summer, there is a differential that needs to be parsed out to show that negotiating is relative to each individual player and deal.

At this stage in the summer, Arsenal are seemingly chasing two key signings, Celtic’s young left-back Kieran Tierney, who is tipped to lock down the position for the next decade, and Crystal Palace winger Wilfried Zaha, though significant sales will have to be made to fund his transfer.

While official talks with Palace regarding Zaha have not yet been reported, two bids of £15 million and £18 million have already been rejected by Celtic for Tierney. The Scottish champions are holding out for £25 million.

In the case of Tierney, Arsenal are driving a hard bargain, ostensibly wanting to test Celtic’s resolve believing that they can ultimately secure a deal for less than £20 million. That may seem like strong negotiating, but it is risky and it could leave them swinging and missing at a major problem position for a player that is most certainly worth the demands.

Zaha, on the other hand, is valued at £80 million. Even the most vehement of Zaha supporters would not argue that that is a fair price. His true market value is much closer to £50 million, and it seems as though Unai Emery and head of football Raul Sanllehi agree, reportedly hesitant to meet the egregious £80 million demand. In this instance, is perfectly sensible to negotiate hard and not budge on what would be widely believed to be a fair offer.

In these two cases, Arsenal must negotiate differently. While it is obviously sensible to try and sign Tierney for the cheapest possible price, because the demands are fair, the priority should be on simply signing him, even if you have to overpay slightly. For Zaha, overpaying means overvaluing. In this case, keeping the price low and testing Palace’s resolve by driving a hard bargain is the right course of action.

This is the difference between negotiating these two different deals, the demands of the club. Celtic’s price is fair. Palace’s is not. And that changes everything.