Grêmio Se Interessa Por Thiago Almada, Do Atlético De Madrid O clube espanhol avisou que o meia só sairá por uma proposta de 20 milhões de euros (R$ 126 milhões) por 50% dos direitos econômicos.
Executive summary
Grêmio's alleged interest in Thiago Almada is not corroborated by the reporting provided; major outlets document Almada's movement through Atlanta United, Botafogo and Atlético Madrid but include no verified story linking Grêmio to a bid [1] [2] [3]. The specific claim that Atlético has publicly said the midfielder will only leave for a €20 million offer for 50% of his economic rights is likewise not supported by these sources: press coverage records varied fee figures, contractual complexity and ongoing disputes, but no explicit Atlético statement matching that exact condition [1] [4] [5].
1. What the outlets actually report about Almada’s valuation and moves
Recent mainstream reports describe Almada as a player whose transfers have involved fees in the €15–€40 million range depending on the moment and outlet: ESPN reported Atlético reached agreement with Botafogo on a move with a fee reportedly between €15m and €20m as talks progressed [1], Transfermarkt records potential bonus-driven totals that could push earlier moves toward €27m [4], and Eurosport relayed Cadena SER’s version that earlier operations were valued in the region of €40m — illustrating wide public estimates rather than a single, consistent price tag [5].
2. The claim about “€20m for 50% of economic rights” — what’s provable and what isn’t
None of the supplied reporting quotes Atlético Madrid making a public demand that Almada leave only for a €20m bid that buys 50% of his economic rights; the documents instead show clubs and intermediaries negotiating outright transfer fees or complex ownership clauses, and multiple outlets cite different numbers and structures depending on timing and parties involved [1] [4] [6]. Transfer feeds and rumors mention varied proposals — Benfica interest and reported offers, Lyon connections and Eagle Football Group activity — but those items describe negotiations and rejections rather than an Atlético ultimatum for a half-rights sale at €20m [6] [7].
3. Why reports differ and why a “50% rights” framing appears in some markets
South American and Portuguese-speaking markets frequently trade in economic-rights language because of third‑party ownership arrangements and sell-on clause structures that complicate headline fees; Transfermarkt and TransferFeed material show bonus clauses, sell-on percentages and complex ownership discussions that inflate or split headline values [4] [6]. Additionally, the Botafogo–Atlanta dispute and FIFA sanctions over unpaid fees add opacity and leverage that can push reported numbers up or down as clubs seek to protect assets or resolve debts [8] [9].
4. Grêmio: no substantiated link in the provided sources
Among the supplied sources there is no article or reputable report tying Grêmio to a concrete pursuit of Almada; outlets listed focus on Atlético, Botafogo, Benfica, Lyon, Atlanta United and various ownership groups but do not document Grêmio interest or a bid structured as “€20m for 50%” [1] [5] [6]. Absence of reporting here does not prove Grêmio has no interest at all — only that the claim is not corroborated by the materials provided, and major transfer-tracking outlets cited do not report a Grêmio approach [3] [10].
5. Likely reading and what to watch next
Given fragmented figures across reputable sources, the most defensible position is that Almada’s transfer valuation has been reported inconsistently, shaped by bonus clauses, ownership structures and legal disputes [1] [4] [8]; therefore a specific public demand by Atlético that the player only leaves for €20m in exchange for 50% of economic rights is not validated by the supplied coverage, and any claim to the contrary should be treated as unverified until a primary club statement or a reliable report surfaces [1] [5]. Observers should watch official club releases and FIFA/transfer-dispute bulletins for confirmation, and treat media reports that state precise percentages or sudden club ultimatums with skepticism unless backed by direct quotes or documentation [8] [9].