Saint Gaston!

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure that sell-on clause is a great idea. Didn't we agree a fee of £1.5m or something for that? You don't need to be a genius mathematician to see that a 30% sell-on clause will cost us significantly more than that.

Unless we never sell him of course...
 
Not sure that sell-on clause is a great idea. Didn't we agree a fee of £1.5m or something for that? You don't need to be a genius mathematician to see that a 30% sell-on clause will cost us significantly more than that.

Unless we never sell him of course...

Well we don't really know the outcome, we'll have to suss out from our Uruguayan friend again.
 
Great work from Cortese. We clearly don't have all the cash here and now. The £40-£50 million earned this season is paid over installments to us and following the Pompey fiasco I doubt banks will lend against future income. So to balance our books still and renegotiate with Penarol is a great move. Shows that his old club have great faith in him to do well in the premier league and get a bigger sale in the future.

Just because Cortese has played hard ball, we can't assume that we don't have the cash up front to pay the total lump sum. Anyone with half decent business acumen would unless they've got a silly bank balance, push for the best possible payment deal, short of alienating the sellers. I'm thinking about the remaining two years worth from the five year plan and the sale of AOC that in terms of £££ we're still looking fairly healthy.
 
Not sure I am too convinced that reports of a 30% sell on clause are true. We supposedly had already agreed terms with Penarol and it was just Bologna who we needed to sort it with. If we had agreed terms, why would we then back track and agree to a deal that will cost us more in the future? You may think it is as we are paying more upfront, but the fee to Penarol was only minor in terms of the transfer, so I don't see why it would be a problem.
 
Not sure I am too convinced that reports of a 30% sell on clause are true. We supposedly had already agreed terms with Penarol and it was just Bologna who we needed to sort it with. If we had agreed terms, why would we then back track and agree to a deal that will cost us more in the future? You may think it is as we are paying more upfront, but the fee to Penarol was only minor in terms of the transfer, so I don't see why it would be a problem.

Yep, as I just said it doesn't ring true for me either. Only way it could be this way is that we can't afford to pay Bologna up-front and also pay the small fee to Peñarol, which doesn't sound likely considering we're supposed to be in for loads of other players. Maybe just journalists adding 2+2 and getting 5.
 
That is definitely glass half empty!

Its not negativity its just realism. Tadanari was injured on his what 3rd appearance? Only just recovering.

The lesson of the story is that theres an element of risk and we shouldnt pin all our hopes on Ramirez to carry us. We need to improve as a team aswell.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.