Chelsea's CL 2011/12 payments: â¬59.935m total consisting of â¬29.9m in participation, match and performance bonuses & â¬30.035m from TV As a result of winning the CL, Chelsea received â¬9m. The above info comes directly from UEFA. Hazard £32m Marin £6.5m De Bruyne £6.5m So that's £45m. That money almost covers the three transfers + wages. Factor in FA Cup money and that should cover it. We will make about £60m from PL money this season alone so I don't know why people are sweating. Even if we buy a few more players we won't even have touched any money we haven't "earnt" (in the famous words of United fans).
That's not really how it works as you get a fair chunk of that money each season anyway so the full 60mill euros doesn't account that it was only an increase in the revenue.
That's not actually true as his compo was clearly conditional. Roman wouldn't have been able to add conditions without losing a chunk of it upfront.
Do you have any proof of this? because what i gather, we negotiated with AVB to pay his £100,000 PW wages until he found a new job, rather than a huge pay off. When we sacked Carlo he got a severance payment, which meant he coudn't get a job until after his contract would of been over. That's probably why AVB took this option because he didn't want to wait 2-3 years until he could get a job again.
Not true. Ancelotti took the PSG job atleast 6 months before his Chelsea deal would be up and he said as soon as he was sacked that he planned on taking time out. Sacking a manager is essentially breaking the contract which is why compensation is negotiated in the first place. A sacked manager then has power and the opportunity to either hold the club to their contract and make the club pay them until they chose to break it, as you say, but crucially the player has the power which allows them to negotiate their own deal. Every manager in the top flight gets a one off compensatory fee as well as extra payable depending on how long they remain unemployed. The sacked manager's power comes from the club's desire to get minimum total compensation possible(ie less than the contract value), as well as adding clauses on their next job, waving their ability to sue the club, gagging them from talking about certain details in the press and virtually anything else you can think of. It all comes at a cost and even your basic sackings will include some clauses on the manager. I might only be able to speculate on the clauses that AVB would've had but it's in no way unreasonable to take it as fact that AVB's sacking cost Chelsea a sizable amount and more than his contract up to 1st July was worth.
That's it, you don't know what clauses chelsea put in the contract upon AVB signing the contract. The only people who know would probably be the agents, AVB and chelsea. Reports were saying that AVB signing with tottenham would cost Chelsea 10Million.
Have to agree with you Yid. His contract would have been iron clad and almost certainly had a pay out clause. Can't imagine any Legal company allowing their client to sign for Chelsea without this !!!!!!!! They may have done a deal on top, but for sure he would have got a lump sum on top.
Those reports were at the time he was sacked and not when we signed him, I beleive and were lazy journalists guessing at the value of his contract. You suggested that he was only paid his wage, however, which is unrealistic as I was explaining. Ruling it out being a significant amount is the same as reporters saying it was £10mill to sack him.
CP,Yid is wrong here. Whilst AVB was relieved of his duties he was not 'sacked' as it were. He stayed on the payroll. He did get a payoff but it was much much less than his entire contract,something close to 10M less.
Got a link for that then? I never said he was paid his full contract value, infact, I explained why that wouldn't be the case.
