New Contracts (Kompany signs until 2019 - page 52)

[CityMasta]

Re: New Contracts

I'm sure it was shown above how my point makes sense.

So you want a real life scenario...figo was bought by Madrid for 45m$ from barca.
Barca didn't want to sell him but had to after his clause was met.

How did figo's buy out clause benefit barca?

Barcelona got the money they wanted for him. That's how they benefited.

Jesus christ this a very simple concept I really don't see why people can't get it...

If Figo didn't have a release clause Barcelona could have insisted on a higher fee OR forced Figo to stay!!

How does that release clause benefit Barcelona??

Also simple to understand....

The release clause is always set at a much higher amount.
Almost every contract has a relase clause when becoming complex and serious (large amounts)
The benefit of the release clause is to protect the contract, so that the selling club can benefit for lost years of procured income of that player.
It's like; My investment is going to give me X5 times the money, if you want it now the price for you is X4 times the money.


At that time Figo was worlds most expensive player for a period. Basically It was like 100 mil EUR is today.

Cheers

 

[CityMasta]

Re: New Contracts

Barcelona got the money they wanted for him. That's how they benefited.

Jesus christ this a very simple concept I really don't see why people can't get it...

If Figo didn't have a release clause Barcelona could have insisted on a higher fee OR forced Figo to stay!!

How does that release clause benefit Barcelona??

Because 9 times out of 10 you put in a release clause that is much higher than his market value.

The release fee is designed to protect both the player and the club. If a club is daft enough to put a release fee on a player which is less or the same as his market value then its their own fault when they lose the player.

Yepp Yepp correct...

 

[117 M34]

Re: New Contracts

We are going round in circles here. You qualify your argumeent by saying Stockport are skint and use Zidane ( another made up scenario ).

If they didnt want to sell at 25k then they would not have to. So therefore it benefits the club not wishing to sell.

I'm sure it was shown above how my point makes sense.

So you want a real life scenario...figo was bought by Madrid for 45m$ from barca.
Barca didn't want to sell him but had to after his clause was met.

How did figo's buy out clause benefit barca?

Barcelona got the money they wanted for him. That's how they benefited.

They didn't want to sell him.
They are Barca, they don't sell to real Madrid.
If there was no buy out clause, barca would not have accepted 100m offer from Madrid.

And if the 'buy our clause is always set much higher than the value' then it is a nonsense clause.
If a player is worth 10m and his clause is for 50m then nobody would pay it when the selling club wanted to sell so they would sell for 10m meaning his buy out clause is pointless (in this case it benefits nobody but would be included for legal purposes only)

 

[johnson28392]

Re: New Contracts

I'm sure it was shown above how my point makes sense.

So you want a real life scenario...figo was bought by Madrid for 45m$ from barca.
Barca didn't want to sell him but had to after his clause was met.

How did figo's buy out clause benefit barca?

Barcelona got the money they wanted for him. That's how they benefited.

They didn't want to sell him.
They are Barca, they don't sell to real Madrid.
If there was no buy out clause, barca would not have accepted 100m offer from Madrid.

And if the 'buy our clause is always set much higher than the value' then it is a nonsense clause.
If a player is worth 10m and his clause is for 50m then nobody would pay it when the selling club wanted to sell so they would sell for 10m meaning his buy out clause is pointless (in this case it benefits nobody but would be included for legal purposes only)

Generally a buyout clause benefits the selling club.

 

[NQCitizen]

Re: New Contracts

Nasri, Milner and Dzeko should be close to getting their names on this list now.

 

[Ric]

Re: New Contracts

Nasri, Milner and Dzeko should be close to getting their names on this list now.

All three should probably get new deals. I'd be surprised if they don't.

 

[NQCitizen]

Re: New Contracts

Nasri, Milner and Dzeko should be close to getting their names on this list now.

All three should probably get new deals. I'd be surprised if they don't.

You seem a knowledgeable fella Ric, I'm suitably relieved.

Also Kolarov too - all those assists.

 

[117 M34]

Re: New Contracts

Barcelona got the money they wanted for him. That's how they benefited.

They didn't want to sell him.
They are Barca, they don't sell to real Madrid.
If there was no buy out clause, barca would not have accepted 100m offer from Madrid.

And if the 'buy our clause is always set much higher than the value' then it is a nonsense clause.
If a player is worth 10m and his clause is for 50m then nobody would pay it when the selling club wanted to sell so they would sell for 10m meaning his buy out clause is pointless (in this case it benefits nobody but would be included for legal purposes only)

Generally a buyout clause benefits the selling club.

So tell me then why clubs in England don't put them in contracts?
Why are they only put in contracts in countries where it is the law to do so?

 

[kupest]

Re: New Contracts

There is no way in hell that a buyout clause benefits a selling club ! Look at Alcantara, he got sold at 28 million because of his buyout clause. Pretty sure Barca would have rejected any approaches for him and even if they would have sold him they would have looked to get more than 28 considering United and Munich were both in for him. A buyout clause limits a club to have no say.

 

[Stuuuuuu]

Re: New Contracts

I would have thought that buyout clauses were negotiated on behalf of the player, as a back door exit, should their time at the club prove undesirable. If the clause is met, the ball is then in the player's court.