Clucas deal specifics. 18:24 - Aug 21 with 17336 views | E20Jack | 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]
| |
| | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:02 - Aug 22 with 863 views | Fireboy2 | Ffs who gives a sh!t how much the sell on cut is I come on this forum to find out if there is anything new to read about my beloved swans Not to watch a playground spat Do us a favour girls Grow the fvck up | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:07 - Aug 22 with 835 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:02 - Aug 22 by Fireboy2 | Ffs who gives a sh!t how much the sell on cut is I come on this forum to find out if there is anything new to read about my beloved swans Not to watch a playground spat Do us a favour girls Grow the fvck up |
Whomever questioned the notion is who it concerns, I would guess. So in short, the ones stamping their feet that they cant find a single reference to help them in their pedantry.. Of course, this was discussed to show how much we have from the deal in order to work out roughly what we have left and how much Llorente will need to be sold for. It is quite on topic unbelievably. But it would certainly help the thread if the other side could muster even the slightest of reference points pointing toward this deal. | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:10 - Aug 22 with 818 views | WarwickHunt |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:07 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | Whomever questioned the notion is who it concerns, I would guess. So in short, the ones stamping their feet that they cant find a single reference to help them in their pedantry.. Of course, this was discussed to show how much we have from the deal in order to work out roughly what we have left and how much Llorente will need to be sold for. It is quite on topic unbelievably. But it would certainly help the thread if the other side could muster even the slightest of reference points pointing toward this deal. |
Oh do shut the fûck up, you tedious cûnt. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:14 - Aug 22 with 812 views | londonlisa2001 |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:07 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | Whomever questioned the notion is who it concerns, I would guess. So in short, the ones stamping their feet that they cant find a single reference to help them in their pedantry.. Of course, this was discussed to show how much we have from the deal in order to work out roughly what we have left and how much Llorente will need to be sold for. It is quite on topic unbelievably. But it would certainly help the thread if the other side could muster even the slightest of reference points pointing toward this deal. |
Nobody knows what the details are. The reports you've linked are all based on the report from the Standard, which is wrong. I'm not talking about sell on clauses, (which are usually profit but it is entirely possible that both Siggy and Ben had a straight 10% of any future fee as it was effectively a swap deal), but other details in that report are wrong. And if other details are wrong, there's every possibility that the sell on bit is also wrong. There are very few journalists that actually have the faintest idea (or interest for that matter) in what goes on at the Swans. The Standard don't employ any of them. [Post edited 22 Aug 2017 10:20]
| | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:19 - Aug 22 with 786 views | DafyddHuw | £15M + add-ons ffs. He only cost Hull £1.3M from Chesterfield and that was only 2 summers ago. Are we spunking money for the sake of it? Brilliant business by Hull, mind. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:19 - Aug 22 with 780 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:14 - Aug 22 by londonlisa2001 | Nobody knows what the details are. The reports you've linked are all based on the report from the Standard, which is wrong. I'm not talking about sell on clauses, (which are usually profit but it is entirely possible that both Siggy and Ben had a straight 10% of any future fee as it was effectively a swap deal), but other details in that report are wrong. And if other details are wrong, there's every possibility that the sell on bit is also wrong. There are very few journalists that actually have the faintest idea (or interest for that matter) in what goes on at the Swans. The Standard don't employ any of them. [Post edited 22 Aug 2017 10:20]
|
That is all well and good Lisa, the point isn't the figures however (I am sure everyone accepts it will be c.£45m). The point being made is regarding the notion of sell on. If you go back to page 1 of this thread (where the debate arose from) it was from me stating that Tottenham will get 10% of the transfer fee. This was argued against. I have since asked for a solitary report to suggest this is not the case. Clearly this was not possible. I went on to show that deals are indeed structured in this way as clubs and players have shown before. So the debate on one side is those that say these deals do not happen and are ALWAYS on profit. Then there is my side which clearly states that it is not always the case, especially in deals that are not the norm. The cornelius one and also our one most certainly can be considered "not the norm". I am glad you are in the camp that sees it perfectly possible that it is on the full transfer fee. [Post edited 22 Aug 2017 10:24]
| |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:21 - Aug 22 with 765 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:10 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt | Oh do shut the fûck up, you tedious cûnt. |
Not a chance old timer. You got me those links yet? Hop to it and make sure you dont trip over your stupid stick while you are at it | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:22 - Aug 22 with 761 views | one_upmanship |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:07 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | Whomever questioned the notion is who it concerns, I would guess. So in short, the ones stamping their feet that they cant find a single reference to help them in their pedantry.. Of course, this was discussed to show how much we have from the deal in order to work out roughly what we have left and how much Llorente will need to be sold for. It is quite on topic unbelievably. But it would certainly help the thread if the other side could muster even the slightest of reference points pointing toward this deal. |
F*ck what a tedious c*nt you are. Myself & others are telling you to leave it there & get back on topic but you can't do it. Move on. Why does Llorente need to be sold? I'd imagine he would only be sold if he could be replaced with Bony, no doubt to make a small profit but nothing that would be earmarked for other incoming players. Team adjustments could include Clucas for Kingsley, Bony for Llorente, Chadli for Montero. I can see some of Gylfi fee being used in this way but that would be it. Arias/Yiadom should also be signed aswell but can't see it happening. | | | | Login to get fewer ads
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:22 - Aug 22 with 757 views | airedale |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:19 - Aug 22 by DafyddHuw | £15M + add-ons ffs. He only cost Hull £1.3M from Chesterfield and that was only 2 summers ago. Are we spunking money for the sake of it? Brilliant business by Hull, mind. |
And that Viera bloke from Las Palmas only cost them a small amount too (I think I read somewhere). [Post edited 22 Aug 2017 10:24]
| | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:26 - Aug 22 with 736 views | londonlisa2001 |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:19 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | That is all well and good Lisa, the point isn't the figures however (I am sure everyone accepts it will be c.£45m). The point being made is regarding the notion of sell on. If you go back to page 1 of this thread (where the debate arose from) it was from me stating that Tottenham will get 10% of the transfer fee. This was argued against. I have since asked for a solitary report to suggest this is not the case. Clearly this was not possible. I went on to show that deals are indeed structured in this way as clubs and players have shown before. So the debate on one side is those that say these deals do not happen and are ALWAYS on profit. Then there is my side which clearly states that it is not always the case, especially in deals that are not the norm. The cornelius one and also our one most certainly can be considered "not the norm". I am glad you are in the camp that sees it perfectly possible that it is on the full transfer fee. [Post edited 22 Aug 2017 10:24]
|
I said it was perfectly possible due to the swap bit of the deal that we'd agreed a straight percentage about a week or two ago, It's also perfectly possible that it's on profit, and perfectly possible that there isn't a sell on at all. One Spurs biased newspaper saying something which is then jumped on by a hundred other sources doesn't mean anything other than one journalist has speculated and others have copied it. Anyway, I thought the point of the thread was to talk ins and outs. You're arguing constantly about the difference in a million on the Siggy sell on (while assuming there is one when no one knows), but have ignored the fee we received for Gomis, which is multiples of that million. So many of our deals are undisclosed, no one knows what is going on. Clucas will also be undisclosed I imagine. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:27 - Aug 22 with 735 views | one_upmanship |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:19 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | That is all well and good Lisa, the point isn't the figures however (I am sure everyone accepts it will be c.£45m). The point being made is regarding the notion of sell on. If you go back to page 1 of this thread (where the debate arose from) it was from me stating that Tottenham will get 10% of the transfer fee. This was argued against. I have since asked for a solitary report to suggest this is not the case. Clearly this was not possible. I went on to show that deals are indeed structured in this way as clubs and players have shown before. So the debate on one side is those that say these deals do not happen and are ALWAYS on profit. Then there is my side which clearly states that it is not always the case, especially in deals that are not the norm. The cornelius one and also our one most certainly can be considered "not the norm". I am glad you are in the camp that sees it perfectly possible that it is on the full transfer fee. [Post edited 22 Aug 2017 10:24]
|
I read Lisa's post totally different to you. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:27 - Aug 22 with 734 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:22 - Aug 22 by one_upmanship | F*ck what a tedious c*nt you are. Myself & others are telling you to leave it there & get back on topic but you can't do it. Move on. Why does Llorente need to be sold? I'd imagine he would only be sold if he could be replaced with Bony, no doubt to make a small profit but nothing that would be earmarked for other incoming players. Team adjustments could include Clucas for Kingsley, Bony for Llorente, Chadli for Montero. I can see some of Gylfi fee being used in this way but that would be it. Arias/Yiadom should also be signed aswell but can't see it happening. |
Tedious? Absolutely. Continuing to explain to morons that cannot grasp a subject must be painful reading to say the least. Thankfully I am here to teach nit entertain. As for the topic, it is my topic, my thread. If you don't like it then create another. Easy. Llorente needs to be sold as he is in the last year of his contract and with a value of £15m (roughly) a club like ours needs to sell in order to replace. | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:28 - Aug 22 with 725 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:27 - Aug 22 by one_upmanship | I read Lisa's post totally different to you. |
That doesn't surprise me in the slightest | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:31 - Aug 22 with 715 views | londonlisa2001 |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:27 - Aug 22 by one_upmanship | I read Lisa's post totally different to you. |
If you read it as 'no one knows including the journalist so for the love of God shut up' then you'd be right. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:31 - Aug 22 with 711 views | WarwickHunt |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:21 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | Not a chance old timer. You got me those links yet? Hop to it and make sure you dont trip over your stupid stick while you are at it |
You'd shit pineapples if we met, cûntpipe. Shitehouse. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:33 - Aug 22 with 703 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:31 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt | You'd shit pineapples if we met, cûntpipe. Shitehouse. |
And you would argue they were strawberries no doubt old timer, regardless of what everyone is telling you | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:35 - Aug 22 with 697 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:31 - Aug 22 by londonlisa2001 | If you read it as 'no one knows including the journalist so for the love of God shut up' then you'd be right. |
That is certainly how you wanted it to come across as I am sure, however by stating that it is perfectly possible that the deal was structured on the whole fee is where you entered the realm of my side, unfortunately for yourself that is. That is my point in a nutshell. | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:36 - Aug 22 with 691 views | WarwickHunt |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:33 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | And you would argue they were strawberries no doubt old timer, regardless of what everyone is telling you |
Shitehouse. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:37 - Aug 22 with 682 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:36 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt | Shitehouse. |
Moron | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:38 - Aug 22 with 670 views | DafyddHuw |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:36 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt | Shitehouse. |
Get aroom, girls. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:40 - Aug 22 with 659 views | WarwickHunt |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:37 - Aug 22 by E20Jack | Moron |
The "Evening" Standard will be out soon. Get busy, lad. We're all waiting for the latest FACTS. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:40 - Aug 22 with 658 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:38 - Aug 22 by DafyddHuw | Get aroom, girls. |
Quick put a space in between "a" and "room", his viagra may kick in. | |
| |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:43 - Aug 22 with 638 views | one_upmanship |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:31 - Aug 22 by londonlisa2001 | If you read it as 'no one knows including the journalist so for the love of God shut up' then you'd be right. |
I'm glad I was on the right track. I did try the same but it fell on deaf ears. | | | |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:43 - Aug 22 with 638 views | E20Jack |
Clucas deal specifics. on 10:40 - Aug 22 by WarwickHunt | The "Evening" Standard will be out soon. Get busy, lad. We're all waiting for the latest FACTS. |
As opposed to you making it up on the spot? And posting a link to the Salah deal which showed it was on the profit where as the same source also stated that it was on the full fee of the Gylfi deal you mean? What a moron As you have been told many times by a few now. Sell on deals steuctured on the full fee are perfectly possible. Get stocking up on those pineapples now. | |
| |
| |