It's alright, what I tried to explain is that your point is perhaps a bit muddled. There's two points being made here I think:
1) That more time could have passed on Asgard than on Sakaar. So, despite there seemingly being about 3 days passing for Thor on Sakaar, when he gets off the planet, a week or two or however long has passed for the rest of the universe. This is possible, because time runs "different" on Sakaar - although, I don't feel like it's likely to have been more than about 3 days personally.
2) That the reason that more time could have passed on Asgard is because when Thor arrives on Sakaar, it's been weeks for Loki. This, however, actually supports the other way around. If this were the rule of correlation, then time would pass much faster on Sakaar - if someone in Asgard had a live camera feed showing Sakaar, it would look like it's on fast-forward, and if someone on Sakaar had a live camera feed showing Asgard, it would look like it's in slow-motion. Weeks on Sakaar = mere seconds elsewhere. By that logic, with Thor spending 3 days on Sakaar, only about 1 second would have passed elsewhere. He'd be arriving on Asgard only just as Hela also arrived like a second after she threw him out of the Bifrost.
But, despite this, more time passing on Asgard is still possible. There is also evidence for time passing slower on Asgard, because the Grandmaster suggests that people can be younger on Sakaar than they should be. While he's being all Goldblum-y and not necessarily telling the truth about himself and his age when he trails off, the implication of the possibility is still there. And, as well as this, is what I was saying about Valkyrie. For her, it's perhaps been only a few hundred years, when outside of Sakaar, it's been over 1000 years. This would suggest that on Sakaar, time actually passes slower - the opposite of the Loki stuff. If someone watched Valkyrie on a live feed from Asgard for the last 1000+ years and the correlation was constant, it would have always look like she was moving in slow-motion at like 0.5x speed, but this is different to the Loki stuff, where he'd be moving in fast-forward at like 200,000x speed.
Basically, there's contradictory evidence, so the conclusion can be reached that there is no constant correlation between the time passing on Sakaar and the rest of the universe. It speeds up and slows down randomly, "Time works real different."
So, the amount of time that passes on Asgard could be less, the same, or more than the 3 days on Sakaar.
Basically, yes - your point is perfectly valid. It's possible more time passed on Asgard than Sakaar. But not because of the Loki Sakaar stuff, which actually suggests the opposite.
And, just personally, I'd say that it doesn't seem like Asgard has been more than a few days - that it seems once Thor lands on Sakaar that time is pretty much in sync with Asgard, with about 3 days passing for both, and that this would make sense as well for why he and Heimdall are in sync when Heimdall shows him what's happening on Asgard.
Hope I've clarified what I meant.
Gotcha. Appreciate you taking the time to discuss. Had a thought in the car, curious what you think. Now it seems to be established through certain ages (Grandmaster and Valkyrie) and Grandmaster's line about how he would look much older that it's possible that time on Sakaar runs slower than everywhere else with the only contradictory evidence seemingly being Loki's line about being there a few weeks. But, what if he was, what if through no speed up or slow down he was actually there for a few weeks? Thor, if I recall correctly, is the only person we see come out of a worm hole. And although I have no knowledge of space time, is it possible that Thor, skipped weeks ahead, arriving in what he thought was a short amount of time, but actually weeks ahead? Just curious.