He’s a championship player. This is his level. He has very little end product and he drifts in and out of games. We’d do well to get 2.5m for the lad.
Interesting. I am not sure reducing potential future sell on clauses suit us at all. There is no guarantee we trigger any. We also should want a cash only deal, a big one, to get this so called model rolling. No point getting a lower fee now but rubbing our hands about potentially getting more money later. If they want him, need to cough up now for me.
Imo it definitely would help us because if rumours are true Clarke has anywhere up to a 50% sell on clause owed to Spurs. If Ekwah was to have similar then that’s a lot of money we’re missing out on twice. We probably can’t change Clarke’s but if we negotiate a few million off the price to potentially gain twice that from Ekwah (and Alese further down the line although he’s not really played to have any interest in him) it’s good business. This is my issue with selling Clarke because £20m looks good on paper but closer to £10m after spurs take their cut doesn’t seem so great
50% would be a ridiculous sell on clause. Never heard it was so much. In that case I probably wouldnt sell him unless there is a release clause, in a January window at all. As it stands I am looking at Ekwah and Alese and not really seeing players that will bring in big money, time to be proven wrong of course. Tricky one to me, glad I am not involved trying to make transfers work tbh.
that would be an interesting window, if Clarke and Roberts went but it brought in a New Striker, DM and Full back would that be considered a good window?
I googled it and you're correct ref blew for freekick so had to bring it back when he scored a few seconds later.
No idea if its as high as that, most deals that include a sell on % is on the profit we make on a player rather than on the fee received. So for example, if we bought him for 10 million n we sell for 20 we will be due spurs 5 million, if its a 50% sell on clause
Pure speculation. A few sources have said the reason we are able to get these young premiership lads is because we are offering big sell-on clauses. I imagined that would be around the 30% mark, which is pure speculation on my part. 50% seems excessive.
Do you know mate, if we did write off any sell on clauses on Ekwah and Alese, for example, and reduced the Clarke fee by say £3m, would that £3 reduction still be factored into the % of profit Spurs got?
Speculation I have no idea just saying if rumours are to be true it’s anywhere UP to that. As mentioned it’s quite common now and how I imagine we’ve been able to pick up so many young players with potential without really paying much up front edit - just googled and this is the first article that popped up. Maybe fuelling the rumours https://www.thespurs.news/transfers...pur are said to,if the winger leaves Wearside.
Put the ball into the buying club's court. We want to clear twenty million. If you want to speak to Spurs and haggle them down on their sell on clause, go for it. If not, it's twenty million plus the sell on percentage or we'll keep him thank you come again.
I haven’t really worked it out but surely it’s better for us long term to do what they’re doing if true. Any fee from Clarke is halved so whilst we get less it means we pay spurs less whilst keeping more of Ekwahs fee. It’s spurs who miss out really. On paper we might get £3m less for Clarke but if we’re losing 50% of that anyway then we’re £1.5m worse out at the minute to keep for arguments sake an extra 20% of Ekwahs fee later down the line which if it’s anything over £10m means we’re better off.
No it wouldnt, ideally we would reduce the fee slightly n remove the sell on clauses on ekwah n alese If we knocked 3 million off it, that potentially would be 1.5 less going to spurs and we are likely to sell alese n ekwah for more than that Again an example would be selling clarke for say 15 million n removing the sell on clauses Would mean spurs would get 2.5million (if we have spent 10 million, which i dont think we did) n we would get 12.5 million. Say we then sell ekwah n alese for 7.5 million combined that would be 20 million to us which would be q cracking return. Obviously all depends on all the % clauses tho
The deals with West Ham are irrelevant to our deal with Tottenham. The difference between what we bought Jack for and what we sell him for, is all the matters. Unless I’ve read you wrong? If we bought Jack for 1 million and reduced his transfer fee to say 15 million. Spurs would get 30% of 14 million.
