Why do you always go back to this? It works both ways...yes it’s unlikely we get a cheque for 1m but exactly as you say - we also wouldn’t have paid out the transfer fee up front either?
I expect all transfer fees in and out are in monthly instalments so for all intents and purposes, it’s the same as getting a cheque in and writing a cheque out isn’t it?
You can do better than that
I thought you kept trying to make the point about fees received being in instalments which makes no sense because outgoing fees are often the same.Which is the point isn’t it. Selling a player is less costly than buying one as selling a player attracts a fee buying a player costs a fee, an agents fee and a signing on fee for the player the latter two we have already splurged on Chaplin
Also the budgets for player investment is capped at 60% of revenue - so less a players signing costs and any sell on fee to Portsmouth what profit is there to invest
It isI thought you kept trying to make the point about fees received being in instalments which makes no sense because outgoing fees are often the same.
Anyway, back to your post funny you should say that. I’ve been reading the secret footballer and apparently a lot of players settle on the outstanding value of their contract with the selling club, even though they are getting a new one with the buying club?? Is that right? As long as they don’t request a transfer that is
It is
Two recent examples are Bigi when he came back from Newcastle and Joe Cole when he came from Villa
Their contracts were paid up so they could leave immediately and come here to play football
Generally speaking clubs don't want senior players around the place if they aren't in the manager's plans
CorrectWhich is very unlikely in the scenario we are in
I thought you kept trying to make the point about fees received being in instalments which makes no sense because outgoing fees are often the same.
Anyway, back to your post funny you should say that. I’ve been reading the secret footballer and apparently a lot of players settle on the outstanding value of their contract with the selling club, even though they are getting a new one with the buying club?? Is that right? As long as they don’t request a transfer that is
Might be wrong but the selling club pay up the remainder of players contract or a pre-agreed figure, if a transfer hasn’t been requested and a signing on fee is paid by the buying club not always as a lump sum but alongside wages on a monthly. basis. Agents can get money both ways. Some of the big boys have agents who’s job it is to try and move players on. Nice little earner for someI always thought the signing on fee was the settle up fee.
I remember reading a few years back that players rarely put in formal transfer requests because they forgo that fee.
Both of those are examples of where the departing player is likely to be taking a pay cut, so to me that makes more sense as they wouldn't want to lose out. The way I read it in that book though is that it's often the case (with bigger clubs im sure) regardless of the new wages being offered. Is that right?It is
Two recent examples are Bigi when he came back from Newcastle and Joe Cole when he came from Villa
Their contracts were paid up so they could leave immediately and come here to play football
Generally speaking clubs don't want senior players around the place if they aren't in the manager's plans
Really?Just bumped into Chaplin up the Ricoh
Wasps goal kicker?Just bumped into Chaplin up the Ricoh
Was sorting a phone in carphone warehouse he was sat next to me with his MrsReally?
I always thought the signing on fee was the settle up fee.
I remember reading a few years back that players rarely put in formal transfer requests because they forgo that fee.
I thought a signing on fee was a percentage of the transfer fee ? 10% of £1m = 100k signing on feeYep - that's why I'd demand a formal transfer request and agreement to forego future payments. If they refuse, they clearly don't want to leave that much do they.
There may have been a time where the signing on fee was to cover the settlement of the previous contract. It may even still be the case at lower levels of the game. But higher up and the greed now intrinsic in it, esp by agents, they see it that the player can have both and they then get their share.
Might be wrong but the selling club pay up the remainder of players contract or a pre-agreed figure, if a transfer hasn’t been requested and a signing on fee is paid by the buying club not always as a lump sum but alongside wages on a monthly. basis. Agents can get money both ways. Some of the big boys have agents who’s job it is to try and move players on. Nice little earner for some
I thought a signing on fee was a percentage of the transfer fee ? 10% of £1m = 100k signing on fee
I guess he's still got stuff to move/sort out, and people etc he wants to see/say goodbye toReally?
Probably starts up there from Monday as you say sorting stuff etc here first met him a few times up the ground etc he’s a nice fella all the best to him our system just didn’t suit him I feel we will all never forget that winner at Sunderland.I guess he's still got stuff to move/sort out, and people etc he wants to see/say goodbye to
Although at the Ricoh doesn't make much sense - you'd have thought all our people/stuff would've been gone from there by now
Bale seems to be an extreme case in point. Real Madrid apparently prepared to pay him 25m plus supplement his wages at a new club. An idiosyncrasy of football loanees generally can't play against parent club but can play against clubs still paying them money.Might be wrong but the selling club pay up the remainder of players contract or a pre-agreed figure, if a transfer hasn’t been requested and a signing on fee is paid by the buying club not always as a lump sum but alongside wages on a monthly. basis. Agents can get money both ways. Some of the big boys have agents who’s job it is to try and move players on. Nice little earner for some
That's exactly itBoth of those are examples of where the departing player is likely to be taking a pay cut, so to me that makes more sense as they wouldn't want to lose out. The way I read it in that book though is that it's often the case (with bigger clubs im sure) regardless of the new wages being offered. Is that right?
Is that why Man City were so accommodating in his move to Cardiff? Eg. Paying the bulk of his wages?This is what happened with Craig Bellamy at Man City
It wasIs that why Man City were so accommodating in his move to Cardiff? Eg. Paying the bulk of his wages?
And now he is the new u21 coach at AnderlechtIt was
He caused similar problems at Liverpool before that - remember he hit a team mate with a golf club then made a joke of it?
He's recently been sacked by Cardiff for bullying youth team players
It was
He caused similar problems at Liverpool before that - remember he hit a team mate with a golf club then made a joke of it?
He's recently been sacked by Cardiff for bullying youth team players
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?