A couple of weeks ago somebody somewhere said theres an 18m buy out clause in bonys contract.can anyone remind me who told us this, and how do they know? Is this fact or yet more media crap, or is it an agent letting all an sundry knowing the details of his clients contract, if so surely this has got to be against the rules.
Don't remember where that number originated but I would expect there to be a non disclosure clause in a contract. I would insist on one as a club exec. Any leak of that information would render the trigger null and void. I would also float the buy out number based on recent market valuations of other players - in much the same way that would value and price your house based on an appraisal relative to the local market. Anything se carries too much exposure for the Club.
Thanks for that yankee, so in a nutshell, if the 18m is correct, and proved to be leaked, its worthless?
Can anyone clarify. I thought a buy out clause only allowed other clubs to be able to talk to players with the permission of the parent club. I am sure it doesnt mean you have to sell though.
I have always been suscpious of the "£19m" buyout clause. It is the figure of £19M that doesn't look right. How would a negotiation come up with £19M? £20M? OK I can understand that, £15M, £16M, £18M I can understand all of those. The only way I can get £19M is that Swansea insisted on £20M but said "OK £19M" after a long argument when Bony's side insisted on less. Two problems with that, firstly it suggests a much more fractious negotiation than it would seem to have been from reports at the time, and the difference between £19M and £20M in the buyout clause being a sticking point in the negotiation is barely credible. Second, if I was Bony I wouldn't like it. Makes him look sort of like "the striker from Poundland", are we sure the buyout figure isn't supposed to be £19,990K? The £19M figure doesn't fit with anything expressed in Euros either. On the other hand, if you are Bony's agent and you want to get big clubs thinking about your man, you could use a rumour about a low value buy out clause to get publicity for the idea that he is available to a big club and not too expensive. A figure of £19M fits that purpose admirably. Only after they have looked at him, thought about him, will your targets discover that it's not £19M, it's a lot more, but then after their analysis they might still be interested at a higher price. It's called getting the buyer hot and sexy before you tell them the real price and it is a very common technique in B2B sales. I have no inside knowledge, I am only suggesting possibilities from my long experience of companies, negotiations and the game of business. But it must be said that we have no real information about the actual value of the buyout clause on Bony, or if there is any buyout clause. There probably is one, because such clauses are useful in fending off predatory bids, but what it is, and how it is structured (very important), seems to be nothing more than rumour.
It's players that insert buy out clauses not the club, it obviously allows them to leave if other clubs meet the valuation. Most buy clauses are based on the transfer fee paid plus a percentage. The leaks primarily come from the players camp, but difficult to prove. At the end of the day once the buy out clause is attained and the player wants to leave then it is inevitable that he'll go. So if the buy out clause is reached then legally they have to allow the player to leave. What Huw could do is insist on a cash deal with all monies up front, most clubs will not or can't afford this option.
These forums are awash with "rumour" and speculation that is so funny on occasions,with different scenarios being thrashed out.most of which never actually amounts to anything.. All fuelled by the media looking to sell their product to a gullible public.
I've been making the same point repeatedly Lib but posters seem to love the speculation. Whatever. Agents have been known to leak trigger clauses but I'm not suggesting that here. As far as I'm aware the 'trigger' usually allows a player to talk to another club but I suspect it depends on the wording of the contract. From what I understand that's a standard clause. As for its leaking making it null and void it again depends on the terms of the contract. How does one prove a leak? If it's printed in the papers it may well be an educated guess - journalists tend to be fond of doing that in case you haven't noticed. In the case of Bony and Liverpool I've met Rodgers and I have to say that charming as he was I've also met many people like him over the years and I pegged him right away. Affable and easy going, he tends to put people at ease so you tend to believe anything and everything he says - some call it blarney. To me (and this is only a personal opinion and yes I'm joining in the spirit of speculation that pervades the site lol) it may well be that Rodgers, being the arch blarney merchant that he is has an insider at our Club and he is therfore is well aware of what it will take to get Bony to talk to Liverpool.
I was stating what I would do, not what has been done. I have no idea what language goes in these contracts or why a club would agree to take on the risk of a player not being successful in a higher level of football only to expose themselves to lose that player for less than market value if proven successful.
@sbulby "It's players that insert buy out clauses not the club". That is a common misconception. See http://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/01/29/atletico-buyouts . There is also some doubt about what the Courts will eventually decide about Football contracts, specifically the ECJ is likely to decide at some stage that Bosman didn't go far enough if it is asked to rule on the matter. The German employment lawyer I worked with a few years ago thought this a near certainty, I agree that is just one view. On the other hand, if the contract has clear temination provisions it will be seen as more 'reasonable' by a Court. What they are unlikely to accept is a club standing firm on a three year contract, refusing resonable offers when the guy desperately wants to be away. The buy out clause defines what is a 'reasonable' offer and protects the club.
But it's sometimes the club that wants to sell a player, so leaking the buy-out figure is a way of letting other clubs know the player is available without actually saying so. No real reason it needs to be secret, as every player has his price and clubs could probably guess the figure anyway. All clubs do these deals, so they know roughly where the figure is going to be set.
There is a buy out clause in place to protect the club not the player. In bony's case it was set at £19m and anyone can get that information at any time as it's not a secret and not meant to be a secret. It is there to inform clubs that £19m is the least he will go for and the starting point of any bid. The problem with that is if bony has agreed that he wants to join a certain club and that club makes an official bid that triggers his release from his contract then £19m is all that club has to pay and it don't matter if another club is offering £25m because if bony dont want to go there then there is not a lot we can do about it. This is where clubs use their representatives to tap up players and offer them a deal they cant refuse. Tapping up players is wrong and immoral but when it goes on with most clubs and everyone knows it's happening then sadly nothing is done because the player and the club don't actually meet at the beginning and it's their own reps discussing terms and deals and there is no law against that....
Dai - how does it protect the club? Buyout clauses are inserted into contracts at the players behest as a means of escape from it. The club does not benefit other than it puts a decent price tag on his head. If there wasn't a buyout clause, a club wouldn't have to release a player at all if it were their choice. Both parties commit themselves to a period employment subject to contractual clauses that can terminate it prematurely. These include a relegation clause that can work both ways as player's wages can drop dramatically, and buyout clauses that are soley there for the benefit of the player insofar that he can move on to another club. The reasons could involve a higher level of football, or simply a better wage package. Rarely would a player want to leave for the opposite. Unless there's a more complictaed mutual benefit codicil that allows the club some input in the decision making, once the buyout release figure is triggered, the club generally has no option other than to release the player to a club of his choice. However, if the player doesn't want to leave, there is no need for him to accept a move - he has the upper hand in the matter unless his contract stated that he had to go if the figure was offered (very unlikely). No purchasing club need pay any more - it's normally down to the player to chose the club of his choice. Though usually contract wages negotiated would be the obvious deciding factor, a player may chose to join a club where he 'd have a greater chance of first team football rather than just a backup otion - that would be down to him. I have no idea about the Bony buyout figure, but you are correct in saying the media reported it a couple of weeks back at £19M - but what do they really know?
'how do we know about the release clause?' its been leaked by bony's agent who wants his client to move again so he can get his next pay cheque……. simple as that……..
