Jack Grealish

[chesterbells]

You have to pay a release clause in one big go usually. Obviously it's better for accounting reasons to be able to spread that payment over years.

So I believe (based on intuition) that City are courteously bidding above the clause so that they can pay over multiple years, and also pay with bonus clauses at a later date. Villa are open to discussion because they know if they don't accept this offer we'll just undercut them and pay the clause. At least this way they get more money.

I have limited knowledge of how this accounting works and I haven't taken amortisation into account, so I could be completely wrong with my reasoning. But until I'm corrected I think I might be right. I have no reason to doubt that there is a release clause considering that there's been enough legitimate noise that there is one.

Thanks for the full reply mate. I had no idea that release clauses needed paying in one lump sum. The way you put it, it kinda makes sense.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

You have to pay a release clause in one big go usually. Obviously it's better for accounting reasons to be able to spread that payment over years.

So I believe (based on intuition) that City are courteously bidding above the clause so that they can pay over multiple years, and also pay with bonus clauses at a later date. Villa are open to discussion because they know if they don't accept this offer we'll just undercut them and pay the clause. At least this way they get more money.

I have limited knowledge of how this accounting works and I haven't taken amortisation into account, so I could be completely wrong with my reasoning. But until I'm corrected I think I might be right. I have no reason to doubt that there is a release clause considering that there's been enough legitimate noise that there is one.

Grealish would be accounted for under amortisation regardless. There would be cash flow permutations if the deal is to pay in instalments as opposed to 1 lump sum.

 

[Romeo_451]

i really dont think we'd bid 100 fucking millions without Grealish giving us the okay, the club would never do that

 

[mattcity5]

£100m is silly money for Grealish.

I don't want him if it means we can't afford Kane.

But I do want him overall, and I know we're rich as fuck. Just gotta sit back and enjoy the ride.

I think this is the of the show where the Villa fans start to accept that this might just be a good deal for them.

Then a few days later when it is finalised it comes out as £80m plus add-ons and that's when we're all pleased by it.

 

[argyle]

Ian comes out with some right clangers at times.

Tbf I understand the 1st part. I'd prefer it in an ideal world if we could find hidden gems but in reality if we want to stay the best we have to pay for it.

I'm really, really looking forward to the media and twitter meltdown if/when we get Grealish and Kane.

 

[Wembley99]

Ian comes out with some right clangers at times.

yep, just you Ian.

 

[argyle]

Penny seems to be finally dropping on VillaTalk.

 

[Tugay One Cup]

A shot has been fired. From a Villa viewpoint, Percy is as solid as it comes.
If Jack wants the move, it’s a lot of money, I think this is happening.
I think it’s time for me to duck out from here, I’m feeling pretty devastated tbh.
I appreciate the friendliness to an opposing supporter lads, all the best!

No slight on Jack and I know it will be of no consolation to you but I would be astonished if your team don't improve dramatically next season, with or without Grealish.

Best of luck.

 

[Phil1]

Cheesman is still bitter as fuck for losing his access to the ground I see.

 

[ancoats]

manchester city need a boost and something for the fans to give us hope and a chance

champions league final was a taste of what can happen given a fully fit squad and a striker fully fit bang in form
we have a great squad but are missing 2 key players. forget the amount of money it about having that right person for the job