Jump to content
IGNORED

Josh Brownhill signs for Burnley; CONFIRMED


REDOXO

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

I’d take any fee mentioned With a pinch of salt,

 

£6m +   salt.jpg.8f45f692abdc6926bfc50aa5d8ad421a.jpg          Doesn't seem much of a deal!. Lucky for us  it's MA negotiating and not you Monkeh! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, downendcity said:

£6m +   salt.jpg.8f45f692abdc6926bfc50aa5d8ad421a.jpg          Doesn't seem much of a deal!. Lucky for us  it's MA negotiating and not you Monkeh! :)

But once you have thrown some of the salt over your shoulder the fee will magically increase to 10 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me this shows a lack of ambition by the club again, if the club are genuinely looking to reach the promised land why sell off your best players (when LJ keeps telling us we don't need to)  LJ always says that JB is the driving force in midfield and he is always the 1st name on the team sheet makes no sense to me to get rid at the moment

If JB really wants to play in the Prem then why doesnt he knuckle down and try his hardest with us as we are so close to the play offs who know the outcome. If we do not make it then he can leave us at the end of the season.  Perhaps he is not confident in our team ?

There could be a scenario where we went up via the play offs and Burnley came down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, NOTBLUE said:

But once you have thrown some of the salt over your shoulder the fee will magically increase to 10 million.

Ah, the Matty Taylor effect!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, westonred said:

To me this shows a lack of ambition by the club again, if the club are genuinely looking to reach the promised land why sell off your best players (when LJ keeps telling us we don't need to)  LJ always says that JB is the driving force in midfield and he is always the 1st name on the team sheet makes no sense to me to get rid at the moment

If JB really wants to play in the Prem then why doesnt he knuckle down and try his hardest with us as we are so close to the play offs who know the outcome. If we do not make it then he can leave us at the end of the season.  Perhaps he is not confident in our team ?

There could be a scenario where we went up via the play offs and Burnley came down.

Lack of ambition doesn’t come into it,

its about balancing the books and trying to run the club in a sustainable manner,

like it or lump it, we have to sell to survive (meet ffp commitments)

we aren’t in a position to refuse reasonable offers for our players if they come from prem clubs or are of a stupid amount ala kodja 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Lack of ambition doesn’t come into it,

its about balancing the books and trying to run the club in a sustainable manner,

like it or lump it, we have to sell to survive (meet ffp commitments)

we aren’t in a position to refuse reasonable offers for our players if they come from prem clubs or are of a stupid amount ala kodja 

Well why are we told by LJ and MA constantly that we do not need to sell our players.  if we are ambitious then keep hold of our best players and really go for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JonDolman said:

No but people in the past say prices have been so high because of sell on fees, and Josh doesn't have one.

I've read that there might have been one as part of the settlement. We signed him on a free but there will have been some settlement because of his age, offered contract etc.

Maybe @pnefcok or @Mortis could shed some light.

@Coppello also- is it possible for a player who has left on a tribunal/free or however it was, as he was a free but we surely had to settle in 2016 as he was under 24, to have a sell on clause?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, westonred said:

Well why are we told by LJ and MA constantly that we do not need to sell our players.  if we are ambitious then keep hold of our best players and really go for it

Quite useful to analyse the accounts, the FFP position and where things are or were at a point in time.

In a way, holding on to Flint, Bryan and Reid in Jan 2018 was going for it. The lack of sales that season and the loss was proof enough!

Our position now is better so the need to sell isn't there- whereas Jan 2018 and to an extent possibly, Jan 2019 we needed to be mindful.

Do we need to sell this January? No IMO. Less than 2 years ago with Flint, Bryan and Reid definitely!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Could be the release  figure written into his contract . We didn’t pay anything for JB so 7 million pound profit is decent. No fee to claw back and no selling on fee to nobody. Decent player but IMO a good deal all around. 

That's certain, is it?

Remember we got him on a free but he was under 24 and was offered a contract by Preston...

Definitely none put in at tribunal or however it works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Not certain to be honest. But don’t recall it be mentioned. But could easily be wrong 

Yeah, it's unclear tbh.

I wouldn't have thought sell on clauses in that scenario but who knows. Certainly doesn't seem common.

At worst if there was one, it'd probably only be £1.5m on a £7m fee, we're talking upper end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I've read that there might have been one as part of the settlement. We signed him on a free but there will have been some settlement because of his age, offered contract etc.

Maybe @pnefcok or @Mortis could shed some light.

@Coppello also- is it possible for a player who has left on a tribunal/free or however it was, as he was a free but we surely had to settle in 2016 as he was under 24, to have a sell on clause?

I'd be surprised if we agreed to a sell on clause. He was out of contract. It would have just been small fee if it had gone to tribunal anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we understand it JB was offered a new contract by PNE and therefore received compensation. It is very likely that the tribunal setting that compensation also agreed a series of add-ons, typically appearance based and future sell-on based.

I very much suspect we will owe PNE 10-20% in that case.

If we didn’t go to tribunal and agreed separately with PNE, again I suspect a sell-on percentage was agreed.

It is a bit of a myth that there are no future add-ins if a player u24 leaves for free, having been offered a contract to stay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, westonred said:

Well why are we told by LJ and MA constantly that we do not need to sell our players.  if we are ambitious then keep hold of our best players and really go for it

We were also told not to get attached to players and any offer meeting our valuation will be accepted

also when has the coo and head coach said this? Care to link it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering recent transfers out of the club, anything short of £12million would be a bit of a joke really without anybody coming our way in exchange. 

Josh is still a young player, when you consider the price Kelly, Kodjia and Webster went for then anything less than £12mill shouldn’t be considered. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Would a tribunal have the power to award a sell on fee for an out of contract player? 

Unlikely but not impossible IMO.

Don't know. Just thought it would be the usual 500k-1 million kind of settlement like Szmodics.

But Davefevs says a tribunal can which I wasn't aware of.

Makes 6 million even worse business for us.

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...