Jump to content
IGNORED

Luke Freeman to Sheff Utd (Merged)


CyderInACan

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, hodge said:

Sky have just said on air £5m plus add ons... so potentially around £900,000 ish plus a part of whatever they get in add ons, not bad business that

Surely we must be in line for something from Mansfield for Maynard as well!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, hodge said:

Sky have just said on air £5m plus add ons... so potentially around £900,000 ish plus a part of whatever they get in add ons, not bad business that

15% allegedly, but that’s £700-900k. Good business. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yep but does that come in a lump sum or does that come in instalments over his contract at sheff U? 

Depends on the structure of the deal with Sheffield Utd.  If up front they’ll give us our cut in one go.  If staged payments, we’ll get our appropriate cut of each payment.  We will know the terms and add into our budget plans appropriately.

1 hour ago, Tangle Foot said:

That'll cover the Sammie Szmodics transfer, if true. Thank you very much Sheff U! 

COYR

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tangle Foot said:

Our net spend, in this transfer window, is approx. minus £0.5M ?

Rough money flow.

Players out, money in.

Kelly- £15m in (per KITR)

Freeman sell on- 700k-900k (rough)

Eisa- £1m ish in? (Posh's record transfer wasn't it?)

Players in, money out

DaSilva- £2m out

Kalas- £7m out (also per KITR)

Szmodics- £750k ish out

Bentley- £2m-£4m out

Rowe and Gilmartins both free.

Cundy- £50k ish if anything? Out

 

Using smallest numbers for incoming fees and largest numbers for outgoing fees (where a range is applicable) our net spend is a profit of £2.9m so far.

So I used 700k as the incoming number for Freemans sell on, and £4m as the outgoing spend for buying Bentley.

Of course if the Freeman deal isn't done yet then we're only £2.2m up so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Just thinking about it....I suspect Stevenage might be due a cut too?  Would they get 15% of our 15%?

You'd have to assume so. Lots of legacy in these sell on clauses now they are so common. 

Lets hope QPR have one on the sale to Sheff Utd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Robbored said:

The sale of Freeman to QPR included a 15% sell on clause and now the Blades have bought him for £5m so that’s a tidy sum coming into the City coffers.

Good bit of business from MA on that..........

15% of £5m is £750k not £675k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/07/2019 at 12:39, Riaz said:

There's still nothing conformed on the OS of SU or QPR and the deal is not listed on the Sky Sports transfer centre. According to their report,  the deal was suppose to be completed yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Robbored said:

15% on any profit made..........not the entire £5m........Jeez.....what’s up with some posters today?............:dunno:

 

That's not what you said...

Maybe you should write what you mean and not make people guess what it is you meant 

:facepalm:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, hodge said:

Think it was £300,000, rumour at the time was that Holloway buying Freeman off us basically funded the transfer for Matty Taylor

 

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Tbh it was the Bristol Post so- and I always thought it was £300,000 so £720k it'd be.

I was using Knobbored's numbers, as we all know he wouldn't ever speculate or comment something that isn't factual, else he'd be a massive hypocrite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

That's not what you said...

Maybe you should write what you mean and not make people guess what it is you meant 

:facepalm:

I wrongly assumed  that other posters would understand what a ‘sell on clause’ entails. Obviously I’ll have to explain my posts in the most basic fashion from now on........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I wrongly assumed  that other posters would understand what a ‘sell on clause’ entails. Obviously I’ll have to explain my posts in the most basic fashion from now on........

A sell on clause can be EITHER...

A percentage of future sales.

OR

A percentage of profit on future sales.

 

'Tis you who needs to do the learning, though sadly I am unable to put things anywhere near as basic enough as is needed for you to be unable to misconstrue what was said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I wrongly assumed  that other posters would understand what a ‘sell on clause’ entails. Obviously I’ll have to explain my posts in the most basic fashion from now on........

Once again by trying to prove your intellectual superiority you show yourself up as the uninformed tit you really are. 

Just for your own understanding - sell on clauses can be based either on the sale price or the profit on the sale, there’s no standard way this works and it’s very much down to the terms negotiated by the parties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Once again by trying to prove your intellectual superiority you show yourself up as the uninformed tit you really are. 

Just for your own understanding - sell on clauses can be based either on the sale price or the profit on the sale, there’s no standard way this works and it’s very much down to the terms negotiated by the parties. 

There'll be an attempt at a condescending response B86. Or if he fails to come up with another excuse which attempts to distract from his ignorance you'll get a 'laugh' reaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

There'll be an attempt at a condescending response B86. Or if he fails to come up with another excuse which attempts to distract from his ignorance you'll get a 'laugh' reaction.

Nah he’ll just stop responding and ignore anything he hasn’t got an answer for like he does in the multitude of other threads that he ends up completely derailing with his unoriginal trolling. 

Literally anyone else would have been banned years ago for the persistent trolling. He must have more on the admins than Pato has on LJ!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...