Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Clucas deal specifics. 18:24 - Aug 21 with 17344 viewsE20Jack

I read the main Clucas thread and didnt see it clarified anywhere.

£16.5m is the total value of the package it is reported. I read one person say £15m + £1.5m in add-ons.. But where does that leave Kingsley? He is worth a couple of million surely?

£12m + £1.5m add ons + £3m Kingsley? =£16.5m.

Surely it isnt £16.5m AND Kingsley on top.... is it?

EDIT - just saw it in the Kingsley thread funnily enough. Ignore this!
[Post edited 21 Aug 2017 18:25]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 23:00 - Aug 21 with 1496 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 22:54 - Aug 21 by WarwickHunt

The clue is in the title, Einstein. Sell-ON.

Do you think we got him on a free transfer?


No, we got him in a swap deal.

You clearly think sell-on means something different to what it actually means. If I bought a car off you for £1000 and sold it for £900, I would have bought it from you and "sold it on" for £900.

A sell on fee is a fee that is triggered when the player is sold on. Nothing more. Hence why every single report disagrees with you and agrees with me.

Some are done on profit, this one clearly wasnt. Just as Cornelius wasnt in the deal taking him back to Denmark in a cut priced deal that same very season.

I am still awaiting absolutely anything to back your thoughts (misunderstanding) up on this deal. I have provided many and can provide another 20 probably.

Feel free

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 23:17 - Aug 21 with 1455 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 23:00 - Aug 21 by E20Jack

No, we got him in a swap deal.

You clearly think sell-on means something different to what it actually means. If I bought a car off you for £1000 and sold it for £900, I would have bought it from you and "sold it on" for £900.

A sell on fee is a fee that is triggered when the player is sold on. Nothing more. Hence why every single report disagrees with you and agrees with me.

Some are done on profit, this one clearly wasnt. Just as Cornelius wasnt in the deal taking him back to Denmark in a cut priced deal that same very season.

I am still awaiting absolutely anything to back your thoughts (misunderstanding) up on this deal. I have provided many and can provide another 20 probably.

Feel free


lol.

The Evening Standard, Mirror, Express and a two bob website. Authoritative sources there...

If I "sold on" a car you'd bought from me at a loss I wouldn't expect a % of it.
Not even Jenkins is that dim.

Our resident risk analyst (guffaw) thinks no notional value was assigned to a player who was the business end of a £10-12m transfer deal.

Here's something from The Times (couldn't find anything in The Daily Mail )

Chelsea will receive £2.7 million from Roma when Mohamed Salah completes his £39 million move to Liverpool as a result of a sell-on clause agreed with the Italian club when the Egyptian international left Stamford Bridge.

The Times has learnt that Chelsea negotiated a sell-on clause worth ten per cent of Roma’s profit on Salah when they sold him for £12 million last summer following a successful season-long loan in the Italian capital. With Liverpool prepared to break their club record transfer fee to sign the 25-year-old, that profit will be as high as £27 million.
[Post edited 21 Aug 2017 23:35]
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 23:32 - Aug 21 with 1411 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 23:17 - Aug 21 by WarwickHunt

lol.

The Evening Standard, Mirror, Express and a two bob website. Authoritative sources there...

If I "sold on" a car you'd bought from me at a loss I wouldn't expect a % of it.
Not even Jenkins is that dim.

Our resident risk analyst (guffaw) thinks no notional value was assigned to a player who was the business end of a £10-12m transfer deal.

Here's something from The Times (couldn't find anything in The Daily Mail )

Chelsea will receive £2.7 million from Roma when Mohamed Salah completes his £39 million move to Liverpool as a result of a sell-on clause agreed with the Italian club when the Egyptian international left Stamford Bridge.

The Times has learnt that Chelsea negotiated a sell-on clause worth ten per cent of Roma’s profit on Salah when they sold him for £12 million last summer following a successful season-long loan in the Italian capital. With Liverpool prepared to break their club record transfer fee to sign the 25-year-old, that profit will be as high as £27 million.
[Post edited 21 Aug 2017 23:35]


Every single report on the deal suggests that my understanding of this deal is correct and yours is wrong. You are basing it on absolutely nothing at all and as a result cannot provide a single piece of evidence to back up your claims.

If I sold a car on, then I would have "sold it on" regardless of profit. Hence explaining what sell on means and not what your odd thoughts of it meaning are (guffaw). Profit is irrelevant. The "sell on" is the act of "selling a player on" thus causing a trigger payment. Sometimes that is the profit, sometimes it is the whole fee. It depends on the specifics and the negotiations of that deal.

This deal is reported that it is the full fee. Probably due to the fact we didnt actually pay any money, it was a swap deal. We may well have the same deal on Davies. But making up your own conclusions really isn't doing you any favours when every single source you care to look at is telling you catagorically that you are wrong.

I cannot even fathom what you have attempted to do in your last two paragraphs. You are quoting a deal negotiated between Roma and Liverpool for Salah?! Please tell me you are not this thick. Next you will be showing me Neymars £180m+ mive to PSG and claiming we should be getting £180m for Gylfi. They are different deals you utter tool

This is the most reported and most talked about deal of the summer, there are endless reports on it including the sell on fee part. The Tottenham fee is reported everywhere you wish to look.... Yet you bizarrely had to find a report of a completely different transfer for reasons only you can fathom. Funny that, don't you think old chum? Quite telling some may say?

So I await one of these reports backing your (mis)understanding of THIS (important bit highlighted) deal....

Dont be shy now.
[Post edited 21 Aug 2017 23:36]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 23:39 - Aug 21 with 1388 viewsE20Jack

Oh a and as you are quoting the Times regarding the Salah deal, I looked to see what their view on the Gylfi one was. Shock horror they agree with me and think you are wrong like 100% of other reports do...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tottenham-hotspur-in-line-for-gylfi-sigurdsso

"Tottenham Hotspur are set to receive £5 million if Gylfi Sigurdsson completes a £50 million transfer from Swansea City to Everton.

Sigurdsson joined Swansea for a nominal fee as part of the deal in which Ben Davies and Michel Vorm signed for Spurs three years ago, but his former club negotiated a 10 per cent sell-on clause for the Iceland midfielder."




Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 23:41 - Aug 21 with 1382 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 23:32 - Aug 21 by E20Jack

Every single report on the deal suggests that my understanding of this deal is correct and yours is wrong. You are basing it on absolutely nothing at all and as a result cannot provide a single piece of evidence to back up your claims.

If I sold a car on, then I would have "sold it on" regardless of profit. Hence explaining what sell on means and not what your odd thoughts of it meaning are (guffaw). Profit is irrelevant. The "sell on" is the act of "selling a player on" thus causing a trigger payment. Sometimes that is the profit, sometimes it is the whole fee. It depends on the specifics and the negotiations of that deal.

This deal is reported that it is the full fee. Probably due to the fact we didnt actually pay any money, it was a swap deal. We may well have the same deal on Davies. But making up your own conclusions really isn't doing you any favours when every single source you care to look at is telling you catagorically that you are wrong.

I cannot even fathom what you have attempted to do in your last two paragraphs. You are quoting a deal negotiated between Roma and Liverpool for Salah?! Please tell me you are not this thick. Next you will be showing me Neymars £180m+ mive to PSG and claiming we should be getting £180m for Gylfi. They are different deals you utter tool

This is the most reported and most talked about deal of the summer, there are endless reports on it including the sell on fee part. The Tottenham fee is reported everywhere you wish to look.... Yet you bizarrely had to find a report of a completely different transfer for reasons only you can fathom. Funny that, don't you think old chum? Quite telling some may say?

So I await one of these reports backing your (mis)understanding of THIS (important bit highlighted) deal....

Dont be shy now.
[Post edited 21 Aug 2017 23:36]


Fûck me - you're thick...

"Some are done on profit, this one clearly wasnt. Just as Cornelius wasnt in the deal taking him back to Denmark in a cut priced deal that same very season."

That's because he was sold at a fûcking LOSS, you aching simpleton.

ps it's "cut-price", teach.
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 23:50 - Aug 21 with 1350 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 23:41 - Aug 21 by WarwickHunt

Fûck me - you're thick...

"Some are done on profit, this one clearly wasnt. Just as Cornelius wasnt in the deal taking him back to Denmark in a cut priced deal that same very season."

That's because he was sold at a fûcking LOSS, you aching simpleton.

ps it's "cut-price", teach.


What are you talking about? I would stop digging if I were you.

Cardiff signed Cornelius for £8.5m. He was sold back to them for £3m on the understanding that when he was sold on they would receive a % of the fee.

He was sold to Atalanta for 3.25m euros (a loss) with cardiff receiving a % of that fee, with "a large % going to Cardiff". 40% according to some reports.

http://the72.co.uk/79435/cardiff-city-quids-cornelius-transfer-says-danish-media

Stop digging. You quoted The Times for the Salah deal but cannot accept it when the same source tells you that you are wrong regarding your (mis)undurstanding regrding the Gylfi sale.

You are wrong. Admit it. Provide me one (just one) report that agrees with you as opposed to the 20+ that clearly don't.

It was the deal of the summer, there are many to choose from old bean.

Something is telling me you can't. Wonder why... You aching f&cking simpleton.
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:08]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 23:59 - Aug 21 with 1326 viewsE20Jack

More deals structered in the way the Gylfi deal was...


"Barnsley, meanwhile, inserted a 15% sell-on clause into the deal that took John Stones to Everton in 2013. His £47.5m move to Manchester City last summer therefore bagged them around £7.1m, though there were some suggestions that the payment could rise as high as £9m.

Elsewhere, Bournemouth, who were not a top-flight club at the time, received £6.25m from Adam Lallana’s £25m move from Southampton to Liverpool in 2014, having inserted a 25% sell-on clause when he moved along the south coast at the age of 12."
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:00]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 00:09 - Aug 22 with 1294 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 23:50 - Aug 21 by E20Jack

What are you talking about? I would stop digging if I were you.

Cardiff signed Cornelius for £8.5m. He was sold back to them for £3m on the understanding that when he was sold on they would receive a % of the fee.

He was sold to Atalanta for 3.25m euros (a loss) with cardiff receiving a % of that fee, with "a large % going to Cardiff". 40% according to some reports.

http://the72.co.uk/79435/cardiff-city-quids-cornelius-transfer-says-danish-media

Stop digging. You quoted The Times for the Salah deal but cannot accept it when the same source tells you that you are wrong regarding your (mis)undurstanding regrding the Gylfi sale.

You are wrong. Admit it. Provide me one (just one) report that agrees with you as opposed to the 20+ that clearly don't.

It was the deal of the summer, there are many to choose from old bean.

Something is telling me you can't. Wonder why... You aching f&cking simpleton.
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:08]


"Cardiff signed Cornelius for £8.5m. He was sold back to them for £3m on the understanding that when he was sold on they would receive a % of the fee."

Perhaps they negotiated that - desperately offloading a turkey at a massive loss back to the club you bought him from and hoping they'll get a decent price from him one day isn't exactly your run-of-the-mill sell-on clause...

Did Copenhagen get an extra % (sell-on clause ) from Cardiff when they bought him back?
You haven't thought this through have you, Einstein?
0
Login to get fewer ads

Clucas deal specifics. on 00:18 - Aug 22 with 1267 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 00:09 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt

"Cardiff signed Cornelius for £8.5m. He was sold back to them for £3m on the understanding that when he was sold on they would receive a % of the fee."

Perhaps they negotiated that - desperately offloading a turkey at a massive loss back to the club you bought him from and hoping they'll get a decent price from him one day isn't exactly your run-of-the-mill sell-on clause...

Did Copenhagen get an extra % (sell-on clause ) from Cardiff when they bought him back?
You haven't thought this through have you, Einstein?


Again what on God's earth are you babbling on about? Copenhagen didn't have a sell on clause you massive f*cking melt, Cardiff had the sell on clause.

I would hardly call a swap deal normal circumstances either, would you?

Still not one source backing your unfounded claims. Not one. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

There is only one who hasn't thought it through and it is the one squirming that he is wrong on a football forum. Quoting other deals as he cannot find one single report agreeing with him, even his source he quoted for that completely different and unrelated transfer(??) disagrees with him with their own report on this specific deal (link also kindly provided above for added effect).

You certainly were not at the front of the queue when the big man was handing out common sense, but you were first in line for resilience, i am not sure whether it is sheer stupidity or just dumb determination, but your ability to take one of the biggest beatings this forum has seen and to keep coming back takes something truly special

Still waiting on any kind of report that backs your clear misunderstanding of the deal. Even a little tiny weeny one...
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:28]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 00:34 - Aug 22 with 1236 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 00:18 - Aug 22 by E20Jack

Again what on God's earth are you babbling on about? Copenhagen didn't have a sell on clause you massive f*cking melt, Cardiff had the sell on clause.

I would hardly call a swap deal normal circumstances either, would you?

Still not one source backing your unfounded claims. Not one. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

There is only one who hasn't thought it through and it is the one squirming that he is wrong on a football forum. Quoting other deals as he cannot find one single report agreeing with him, even his source he quoted for that completely different and unrelated transfer(??) disagrees with him with their own report on this specific deal (link also kindly provided above for added effect).

You certainly were not at the front of the queue when the big man was handing out common sense, but you were first in line for resilience, i am not sure whether it is sheer stupidity or just dumb determination, but your ability to take one of the biggest beatings this forum has seen and to keep coming back takes something truly special

Still waiting on any kind of report that backs your clear misunderstanding of the deal. Even a little tiny weeny one...
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:28]


Arf.

Copenhagen bought him back at a loss - by your reckoning Cardiff probably should have paid them a % on top of the amount they sold him back for. A "sell-on" clause innit! Capisce now, fûckwit?
Bit of a stretch for you, obviously...

"Elsewhere, Bournemouth, who were not a top-flight club at the time, received £6.25m from Adam Lallana’s £25m move from Southampton to Liverpool in 2014, having inserted a 25% sell-on clause when he moved along the south coast at the age of 12."



Which part of a "25% sell-on clause when he moved along the south coast at the age of 12" are you struggling with?

TWELVE! They paid a few grand in compo...did you think they sold him for £10m?

0
Clucas deal specifics. on 00:47 - Aug 22 with 1215 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 00:34 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt

Arf.

Copenhagen bought him back at a loss - by your reckoning Cardiff probably should have paid them a % on top of the amount they sold him back for. A "sell-on" clause innit! Capisce now, fûckwit?
Bit of a stretch for you, obviously...

"Elsewhere, Bournemouth, who were not a top-flight club at the time, received £6.25m from Adam Lallana’s £25m move from Southampton to Liverpool in 2014, having inserted a 25% sell-on clause when he moved along the south coast at the age of 12."



Which part of a "25% sell-on clause when he moved along the south coast at the age of 12" are you struggling with?

TWELVE! They paid a few grand in compo...did you think they sold him for £10m?



Again, what are you talking about?

Why on earth would Cardiff pay Copenhagen a sell in fee when there wasn't one. You don't get a fee every time a player is sold you massive f*cking queef. Think about what you are saying for one single minute. The sell on fee was negotiated BY CARDIFF for a sell on fee FROM when they (Copenhagen), funnily enough... SELL HIM ON.

Okay hopefully you finally get that, I cannot be any clearer if I was attempting to explain to my 4 year old neice.

So moving on... Nice selective quoting there by my new found favourite floundering fish. Try the sentences above in that quote. I'll help....

"Barnsley, meanwhile, inserted a 15% sell-on clause into the deal that took John Stones to Everton in 2013. His £47.5m move to Manchester City last summer therefore bagged them around £7.1m, though there were some suggestions that the payment could rise as high as £9m."

Now Stones was sold to Everton for £3m. So the profit was £44.5m. Yes? With me?

15% of £47.5m (the whole sum not the profit) works out as £7.125m.... You know, the figure that Barnsley reportedly got as a result. What a coincidence

The umpire has said "Game, set, match E20" long ago. Leave the court gracefully and accept you have been utterly hammered by the better man with the better equipment. You are starting to make a show of yourself and the crowd are getting restless.

Even your own links disagree with you ffs, you f*cking melt (arf)
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:58]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 00:56 - Aug 22 with 1197 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 00:47 - Aug 22 by E20Jack

Again, what are you talking about?

Why on earth would Cardiff pay Copenhagen a sell in fee when there wasn't one. You don't get a fee every time a player is sold you massive f*cking queef. Think about what you are saying for one single minute. The sell on fee was negotiated BY CARDIFF for a sell on fee FROM when they (Copenhagen), funnily enough... SELL HIM ON.

Okay hopefully you finally get that, I cannot be any clearer if I was attempting to explain to my 4 year old neice.

So moving on... Nice selective quoting there by my new found favourite floundering fish. Try the sentences above in that quote. I'll help....

"Barnsley, meanwhile, inserted a 15% sell-on clause into the deal that took John Stones to Everton in 2013. His £47.5m move to Manchester City last summer therefore bagged them around £7.1m, though there were some suggestions that the payment could rise as high as £9m."

Now Stones was sold to Everton for £3m. So the profit was £44.5m. Yes? With me?

15% of £47.5m (the whole sum not the profit) works out as £7.125m.... You know, the figure that Barnsley reportedly got as a result. What a coincidence

The umpire has said "Game, set, match E20" long ago. Leave the court gracefully and accept you have been utterly hammered by the better man with the better equipment. You are starting to make a show of yourself and the crowd are getting restless.

Even your own links disagree with you ffs, you f*cking melt (arf)
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:58]


Keep quoting two bob tabloid football journalists and boring everyone shitless (yet again...) with your pompous drivel.

I'm in London - feel free to carry on this little chat in person anytime. You know the drill.

Edit: or would that be too "risky?"
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:58]
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:03 - Aug 22 with 1184 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 00:56 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt

Keep quoting two bob tabloid football journalists and boring everyone shitless (yet again...) with your pompous drivel.

I'm in London - feel free to carry on this little chat in person anytime. You know the drill.

Edit: or would that be too "risky?"
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 0:58]


Let me translate that for our viewers..

"I initially misunderstood the way these deals were structured and assumed they were all based on profit. Unfortunately due to the nature of the opening post I made I was unable to back down. I have now since learned that these deals are structured in a multitude of ways which is why I have not been able to find a single source to back me up. Even the source I used regarding a completely different deal also disagreed with me when they reported on the Gylfi deal, much to my dismay. Unfortunately I have got myself into a massive mess, misunderstood simple concepts along the way like Cornelius' move and am now stuck. If I could turn back the clock I would, instead I am going to keep on taking the pummeling and hope to win by getting the sympathy vote for my sheer f*cking stupidity.

Yours,

Mr Hunt"

[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:07]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:06 - Aug 22 with 1174 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 01:03 - Aug 22 by E20Jack

Let me translate that for our viewers..

"I initially misunderstood the way these deals were structured and assumed they were all based on profit. Unfortunately due to the nature of the opening post I made I was unable to back down. I have now since learned that these deals are structured in a multitude of ways which is why I have not been able to find a single source to back me up. Even the source I used regarding a completely different deal also disagreed with me when they reported on the Gylfi deal, much to my dismay. Unfortunately I have got myself into a massive mess, misunderstood simple concepts along the way like Cornelius' move and am now stuck. If I could turn back the clock I would, instead I am going to keep on taking the pummeling and hope to win by getting the sympathy vote for my sheer f*cking stupidity.

Yours,

Mr Hunt"

[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:07]


Soppy cûnt.

'Night, John Boy. Big day in The City tomorrow...
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:09]
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:09 - Aug 22 with 1163 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 01:06 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt

Soppy cûnt.

'Night, John Boy. Big day in The City tomorrow...
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:09]


Aren't you just. Added to your inability to understand a simple concept and your overwhelming penchant for displaying your utter thick as pig sh*t approach to debate, I would suggest there is not much going for you tonight.

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:16 - Aug 22 with 1145 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 01:09 - Aug 22 by E20Jack

Aren't you just. Added to your inability to understand a simple concept and your overwhelming penchant for displaying your utter thick as pig sh*t approach to debate, I would suggest there is not much going for you tonight.


Jimjams on now, hotshot. Risks to be analysed in the morning!

The City waits with bated breath for your arrival...

ps do you think Viera would be a good signing?
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:18]
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:20 - Aug 22 with 1139 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 01:16 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt

Jimjams on now, hotshot. Risks to be analysed in the morning!

The City waits with bated breath for your arrival...

ps do you think Viera would be a good signing?
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:18]


Jim jams on long ago.

Consider yourself my very own night cap.

Be careful in my City, someone walking around with your IQ may be hazard for my fellow workers. You are the equivelant of the dunce kid in the football team, don't you go attempting any tackles now you clumsy f*cking oaf.


Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:24 - Aug 22 with 1124 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 01:20 - Aug 22 by E20Jack

Jim jams on long ago.

Consider yourself my very own night cap.

Be careful in my City, someone walking around with your IQ may be hazard for my fellow workers. You are the equivelant of the dunce kid in the football team, don't you go attempting any tackles now you clumsy f*cking oaf.



Nightcap is one word, you dopey cünt.

Be careful out there, Benny.
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:28 - Aug 22 with 1117 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 01:24 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt

Nightcap is one word, you dopey cünt.

Be careful out there, Benny.


And these concepts are still easily understandable to someone of even average intelligence you utter moron

Translation of your post however...

"I am now at a point where I am resorting to picking out someone hitting the space bar, I really wish I didn't get involved in this, my only hope is if I keep posting little uneducated quips I may take it into a 3rd page and my nonsense will be... at least a bit hidden, then I can sleep"

You soft f*cking quim. You are well out of your league
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:29]

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 01:34 - Aug 22 with 1105 viewsE20Jack

Anyway, to bring this nicely back on the topic you are desperately clamouring to distance yourself from, ESPN now clearly stating the deal was 10% of the transfer fee.

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/soccer-transfers/story/3181200/tottenham-set-for-

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 02:26 - Aug 22 with 1064 viewsUplandsJack

Clucas deal specifics. on 23:17 - Aug 21 by WarwickHunt

lol.

The Evening Standard, Mirror, Express and a two bob website. Authoritative sources there...

If I "sold on" a car you'd bought from me at a loss I wouldn't expect a % of it.
Not even Jenkins is that dim.

Our resident risk analyst (guffaw) thinks no notional value was assigned to a player who was the business end of a £10-12m transfer deal.

Here's something from The Times (couldn't find anything in The Daily Mail )

Chelsea will receive £2.7 million from Roma when Mohamed Salah completes his £39 million move to Liverpool as a result of a sell-on clause agreed with the Italian club when the Egyptian international left Stamford Bridge.

The Times has learnt that Chelsea negotiated a sell-on clause worth ten per cent of Roma’s profit on Salah when they sold him for £12 million last summer following a successful season-long loan in the Italian capital. With Liverpool prepared to break their club record transfer fee to sign the 25-year-old, that profit will be as high as £27 million.
[Post edited 21 Aug 2017 23:35]


You are correct Warwick 👍

I have it from two very reliable people, that Spurs will receive 10% of any profit OVER the widely accepted/reported £10 million we paid for him.(swap with Davies value)
I was also informed that we the deal was structured, if I recall correctly £33 million on him signing, and the remaining £12 million paid over an agreed time period.
I was also told Everton are also paying Siggy's loyalty payment that is normally paid by us, taking the deals full value to us to £45 million Clear. if you see where I'm coming from. But obviously we still got to pay Spurs £3.5million out of that.
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 08:44 - Aug 22 with 1000 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 01:28 - Aug 22 by E20Jack

And these concepts are still easily understandable to someone of even average intelligence you utter moron

Translation of your post however...

"I am now at a point where I am resorting to picking out someone hitting the space bar, I really wish I didn't get involved in this, my only hope is if I keep posting little uneducated quips I may take it into a 3rd page and my nonsense will be... at least a bit hidden, then I can sleep"

You soft f*cking quim. You are well out of your league
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 1:29]


Thicker than an elephant's foreskin and a gobby shitehouse as well.

Let's meet for a chat.

Too "risky", big boy?
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 08:51 - Aug 22 with 983 viewsE20Jack

Clucas deal specifics. on 08:44 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt

Thicker than an elephant's foreskin and a gobby shitehouse as well.

Let's meet for a chat.

Too "risky", big boy?


Look at old man Phil getting all angry because he is wrong on a football forum.

You utter melt. You utter completely wrong melt at that. Hopefully this lesson will be of great value to you going forward.

Guffaw. Arf.

Poll: 6 point deduction and sellouts lose all their cash?

-1
Clucas deal specifics. on 09:01 - Aug 22 with 961 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 02:26 - Aug 22 by UplandsJack

You are correct Warwick 👍

I have it from two very reliable people, that Spurs will receive 10% of any profit OVER the widely accepted/reported £10 million we paid for him.(swap with Davies value)
I was also informed that we the deal was structured, if I recall correctly £33 million on him signing, and the remaining £12 million paid over an agreed time period.
I was also told Everton are also paying Siggy's loyalty payment that is normally paid by us, taking the deals full value to us to £45 million Clear. if you see where I'm coming from. But obviously we still got to pay Spurs £3.5million out of that.


Thanks - sell-on clauses are usually just that. A % of the sell-on profit.

Knobchops ( a risk analyst ) has trouble grasping this and relies on equally dim tabloid journos for his FACTS!

I suppose there's a slim chance that Levy pulled fûckwit Jenkins' pants down on the deal but if I doubt if even Gonzo is that dim, unless of course, he took advice from PS's resident City genius...
0
Clucas deal specifics. on 09:02 - Aug 22 with 957 viewsWarwickHunt

Clucas deal specifics. on 08:51 - Aug 22 by E20Jack

Look at old man Phil getting all angry because he is wrong on a football forum.

You utter melt. You utter completely wrong melt at that. Hopefully this lesson will be of great value to you going forward.

Guffaw. Arf.


Shithouse.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2024