Jump to content
IGNORED

Palmer signs for Coventry


redpole
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

They can say what they want but terminating a contract for no valid reason is a breach of employment law

If they mutually agree to terminate his contact and is done legally then is a possibility 

pretty sure same scenario has happened before 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, joshbristol said:

If they mutually agree to terminate his contact and is done legally then is a possibility 

pretty sure same scenario has happened before 

Yes but it's never ever free, money will be paid to the player whether that's by a club he's joining or his current club to get him off the wage bill,

It's never free

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, joshbristol said:

If they mutually agree to terminate his contact and is done legally then is a possibility 

pretty sure same scenario has happened before 

Didn't something like that happen when Aubameyang left Arsenal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely city won’t pay his remaining wages a whole seasons worth to get him a move when they can just keep him as back up until his contract expires 

Just now, chinapig said:

Didn't something like that happen when Aubameyang left Arsenal?

Ye pretty sure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, joshbristol said:

Surely city won’t pay his remaining wages a whole seasons worth to get him a move when they can just keep him as back up until his contract expires 

He is under a legally binding contract, he is entitled to that money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever the situation may be financially, I will just be glad for this deal to be done. 

It puts us in a better position moving forward. We will no longer be tied to paying him crazy money to not even make the matchday squad. 

Potentially gives us room to manoeuvre this summer. 

It's been a bad deal all round, but we can't begrudge Palmer for the contract that we gave him. 

At least we can now move forward with a more even wage scale amongst the squad. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, joshbristol said:

That is what I am saying why would city pay him 25 a week for another year to terminate his contract 

That's the point, we can't just terminate his contract ie sack the player for no valid reason,

We ether pay him off similar to making him redundant or Coventry agree to pay the remainder of his contract

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, AshtonRobin21 said:

Coventry fans seem to think that we will rip up his contract in order to allow him to sign for them. 

I would assume that means that they pick up all of his wages, albeit on new reduced terms?

@Davefevs is that correct? Or would we continue to be tied to him financially? 

 

First of all, the world has moved on from the days when a transfer was a compensation payment for the remainder of the contract value.  The transfer fee was the amount of the remaining contract, e.g. £20k p.w, Cov would pay £1m to City to buy him out of the contract.  But that’s old skool!

Today the transfer fee is more a “trading value” than contract buy out.  But as a result, it is expected that the buying club will offer the player the same / greater than they’re currently on the make it worth their while to cancel their existing contract and start a fresh one at the new club.

Contractually we are obliged to pay KP his full contract until it’s end date.

If we were trying to mutually cancel his contract we’d have to reach a position where KP would be happy to get “an amount” to go now rather than be tied to City for the rest of the season with little hope of playing.  Bit like Lansbury last season.

However we now have an interested party, Coventry.  There are now multiple permutations.

Let’s just throw in a few options.

Option 1 - Coventry want their cake and eat it!

They don’t want to pay a transfer fee and only want to pay half his wages for a 3 year deal.  If KP wants his £20k p.w from City, we’d have to stump up the other half (£10k p.w) for his final year.  For years 2 and 3 he will get £10k p.w from Coventry, our obligation ends next summer.

Option 2 - money bags Cov!

They offer us £500k transfer fee and £20k p.w for 3 years.  As the wage offer is the same as what City pay him, then he can cancel his contract with us and pick up the new one with Cov.  This option is very unlikely.

Option 3 - 3-way compromise!

Coventry offer us £250k fee, they offer KP £10k p.w for 3 years, and we pay the £5k p.w for the final year.  City have compromised a bit on the fee and KP’s wages, Cov are giving us a transfer fee, KP has compromised a bit on his wages this year and more in years 2 and 3.

Option 4 - Silly buggers - no compromise!

KP stays at City, earns his £20k p.w, Coventry don’t get their man, City don’t reduce their costs next season, KP potentially ruins his career.

 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

Is this something that happens? A player leaves on a permanent and the old club still puts in on wages? I understand if it’s a loan but that’s a crap position to find yourself in if they’re gone permanently!

Jet. Ipswich were still paying (or paid him a bulk) of the loss of of wages he had for when he signed for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

First of all, the world has moved on from the days when a transfer was a compensation payment for the remainder of the contract value.  The transfer fee was the amount of the remaining contract, e.g. £20k p.w, Cov would pay £1m to City to buy him out of the contract.  But that’s old skool!

Today the transfer fee is more a “trading value” than contract buy out.  But as a result, it is expected that the buying club will offer the player the same / greater than they’re currently on the make it worth their while to cancel their existing contract and start a fresh one at the new club.

Contractually we are obliged to pay KP his full contract until it’s end date.

If we were trying to mutually cancel his contract we’d have to reach a position where KP would be happy to get “an amount” to go now rather than be tied to City for the rest of the season with little hope of playing.  Bit like Lansbury last season.

However we now have an interested party, Coventry.  There are now multiple permutations.

Let’s just throw in a few options.

Option 1 - Coventry want their cake and eat it!

They don’t want to pay a transfer fee and only want to pay half his wages for a 3 year deal.  If KP wants his £20k p.w from City, we’d have to stump up the other half (£10k p.w) for his final year.  For years 2 and 3 he will get £10k p.w from Coventry, our obligation ends next summer.

Option 2 - money bags Cov!

They offer us £500k transfer fee and £20k p.w for 3 years.  As the wage offer is the same as what City pay him, then he can cancel his contract with us and pick up the new one with Cov.  This option is very unlikely.

Option 3 - 3-way compromise!

Coventry offer us £250k fee, they offer KP £10k p.w for 3 years, and we pay the £5k p.w for the final year.  City have compromised a bit on the fee and KP’s wages, Cov are giving us a transfer fee, KP has compromised a bit on his wages this year and more in years 2 and 3.

Option 4 - Silly buggers - no compromise!

KP stays at City, earns his £20k p.w, Coventry don’t get their man, City don’t reduce their costs next season, KP potentially ruins his career.

 

Thanks dave,

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, joshbristol said:

If palmer and kalas both end up leaving that is  potentially 11 million pound we have parted with to receive possibly 1 million back from kalas .

Plus the 5m+ for Diedhiou, couple of million on Nagy . Big lose on just 4 players in a year or so 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

In that sense we could make a one off payment where we pay the difference between what Coventry are offering and what he was on with us or an agreed amount to make make him a free agent to make the move happen. If we can afford the one off payment it would help our wage bill on a per week basis.

⬇️⬇️⬇️

16 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Yes which generally means paying up the remainder of his contract or getting Coventry to pay that up, which is over a million quid or a mutually beneficial sum that benefits both parties 

The key word is “mutual”.  If as @joshbcfcstates KP is willing to terminate his contract with us to allow his registration to be transferred to Coventry, then as long as City are happy too, then it can happen.  It’s mutual, consideration is £0.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, joshbristol said:

Can only blame Lee Johnson I suppose 👀👀

Mark Ashton and steve/Jon lansdown

Little Lee was the manager he didn't negotiate the contract or transfer fee

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, joshbristol said:

Ye agree but I also imagine Lee Johnson had a lot of input 

Not in terms of money no, he'd have zero input

He'd identify a player he wanted or more then likely a position he wanted, the recruitment team would identify said player names would be passed to johnson then any negation would have nothing to do with him,

Any money side of things is not in the managers remit in the modern game,

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Monkeh said:

Not in terms of money no, he'd have zero input

He'd identify a player he wanted or more then likely a position he wanted, the recruitment team would identify said player names would be passed to johnson then any negation would have nothing to do with him,

Any money side of things is not in the managers remit in the modern game,

 

I disagree mate 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Monkeh said:

Mark Ashton and steve/Jon lansdown

Little Lee was the manager he didn't negotiate the contract or transfer fee

Agree.  As long as LJ understood the ramifications on his budget of each signing, then it’s down to MA to execute the transfer.

Its pretty clear than Nige is clear on the financial impacts of his squad, and Gould does the deal within the parameters of the agreement to sign said player(s).  If Gould cannot sign player x within the sums agreed, they move on or they understand it might mean they can’t get another player as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, joshbristol said:

Surely city won’t pay his remaining wages a whole seasons worth to get him a move when they can just keep him as back up until his contract expires 

If we can afford the payment (ie we sell Kalas, Massengo or Semenyo and are willing to use a portion) we can then reinvest the wages on one or more new players, a player we want vs one we know we won't use for essentially what is a transfer fee in paying off Palmer.

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

⬇️⬇️⬇️

The key word is “mutual”.  If as @joshbcfcstates KP is willing to terminate his contract with us to allow his registration to be transferred to Coventry, then as long as City are happy too, then it can happen.  It’s mutual, consideration is £0.

Well then its an 'agreed' amount as I mentioned 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

They can say what they want but terminating a contract for no valid reason is a breach of employment law

This is broadly what happened with nagy as far as i know, mutually agreeing to tear up a contract to allow both parties to move on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

⬇️⬇️⬇️

The key word is “mutual”.  If as @joshbcfcstates KP is willing to terminate his contract with us to allow his registration to be transferred to Coventry, then as long as City are happy too, then it can happen.  It’s mutual, consideration is £0.

Is this your understanding of the nagy to pisa transfer dave?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever the end result is with Palmer, from my perspective; he will go down as the worst signing ever in financial terms since I started supporting the club (1978).

His lack of end product on the pitch just exemplifies what a truly awful deal it was.

Even before his permanent signing, we must have been paying his wages, and a loan fee to Chelsea.

By the end of his loan he wasn't even in the first team reckoning. Absolute madness to then buy him, and put him on those wages.

That crazy summer of 2019, just keeps coming back to bite us financially.

 

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

Is this your understanding of the nagy to pisa transfer dave?

Pretty much.  Free transfer, no ongoing commitment to his wages for his final year.  It wouldn’t surprise me if we put a couple of clauses in too, e.g. sell-on percentage, promotion bonus, or similar.

From a annual accounts perspective we wrote off the remaining £775k of amortisation due in 21/22 by impairing it is 20/21’s accounts, so that the loss was included the 20/21 set of accounts which were halved and added to 19/20 halved amount too.  A bit of clever accounting possibly!

It’s what was reported at the time, and the accounts back it up…so that’s how it’s entered into my spreadsheets! 😝

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to Palmer signs for Coventry

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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