Thiago Alcantara

[Daz_Blue]

Talkshite hailing Thiago as Moyes's Cantona :)

 

[EricBrooksGhost]

3 Things with the release clause

1 they are between Spanish clubs only

2 the selling club can insist on VAT on top equal to 21%

3 The selling club can insist it's the player who buys themselves out of the contract, meaning the buying club would have to give the player the money pluss income tax on top 45%

If Barca dig their heels in could be a long one

Like Martinez last year

 

[Claytop]

still cant get over the fact we paid 32m for fernandinho and wont pay like 17m for thiago

I'm sure if this had arose last year we would have been all over it, unfortunately we bought Garcia and to an extent Rodwell so without shifting a couple of players i don't think we'll go for him.

 

[Rammyblues]

I don't care about Rodwell, Garcia and Barry to some extent, this lad is quality I understand what a previous poster has said about the release clause being only for Spanish clubs if that is the case as someone has alluded to this won't be done in days this could be weeks. If you want to think about how we would look with this player in just build the team round Isco and Acantara and take it from there the rest is immaterial. We might not have thrown our hat in the ring but he clearly was on the list provided by Goal.com and up to now they have been right with 2 of the six Isco making 3 of the six and with the Cavani links 4 of the six, that isn't bad for journalists before all the transfer mayhem started.

I believe we will get Isco done this week or find out at least he ain't joining us and then we will go all out for this lad, whether that is too late or not I don't know.

 

[taconinja]

My understanding of how Spanish release clauses work is as follows...

* A team and player can negotiate a contract with a release clause. Let's say 20 million Euros for example.

* If a club outside of Spain activates the release clause, they have to pay the release clause. There might or might not be taxes on the clause; however, there appears to be recompense on that front.

* If a club inside Spain activates the clause, the club who owns the player's contract may opt to either allow the purchasing club to pay the clause OR force the player to pay the clause meaning the player is also on the line for taxes if the new club gives him the money to pay the clause.

This makes triggering most release clauses inside Spain prohibitive. Not so much for outside clubs.

 

[Grieffymcfcctid]

still cant get over the fact we paid 32m for fernandinho and wont pay like 17m for thiago

I'm sure if this had arose last year we would have been all over it, unfortunately we bought Garcia and to an extent Rodwell so without shifting a couple of players i don't think we'll go for him.

there is always room for players like thiago, and if that means getting rid of garcia, who actually does nothing for us, just takes up places and rodwell, never will be good enough to start for us and is injury prone anyway

 

[Del_Bosque]

3 Things with the release clause

1 they are between Spanish clubs only

2 the selling club can insist on VAT on top equal to 21%

3 The selling club can insist it's the player who buys themselves out of the contract, meaning the buying club would have to give the player the money pluss income tax on top 45%

If Barca dig their heels in could be a long one

Source for this?

Article from when Chelsea wanted Aguero from Madrid pasted the important bits

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sid_lowe/01/29/atletico.buyouts/index.html

Spain's buyout clauses have often been set up as a deterrent -- symbolic, gigantic figures to warn off suitors. Sergio Busquets has just renewed his deal with Barcelona for example and his buyout clause is now €150M ($204M). But they do also have a practical use. They form part of a legal framework and also a gentleman's agreement between clubs. Which is why the price is not always the price. Because clubs are not always gentlemanly about it.
Under the terms of that basic agreement, clubs accepted that another club which paid the buyout clause could sign a player without resistance. If it's €45M, you pay €45M and you take your player, no mess and no fuss. It is, essentially, a price set at which you say you will sell.
But you don't necessarily have to sell at that price; that agreement has a legal foundation that is a little different. At an informal level, the modus operandi has been altered since Real Madrid walked off with Luis Figo for the symbolic but just about manageable figure of 10,000M pesetas. The buyout clause remains, but the application of it is different.
Now most clubs are saying: this is the buyout clause, sure, but if you make a hostile bid, a bid that we do not welcome, we will force you to apply the clause legally. And when you apply the law legally, that is a different issue. When you apply the law legally, it is a different price.
That means one of two things, both of which increase the price. Firstly, it can mean adding the VAT at 18 percent. In the past, clubs have agreed to include VAT in the invoice for a player's transfer (which of course can be claimed back from the state). Now, if the bid is hostile, they will not. In other words, the buying club will have to pay the clause plus the 18 percent. So, Aguero's price rises from €45M to €53.1M ($72M).
The other option is for a club to simply refuse to sell -- until, that is, it is forced to. That's where the legal buyout clause kicks in, Decreto Real 1006/1985. But that decree is exactly what it says it is: a buyout clause. A player (not the club) deposits the money, the value of the buyout clause, at the Spanish league and unilaterally breaks his contract. That money, of course, would be given to him by the buying club in order to buy himself out. The problem is that as soon as that money hits his account it counts as income -- even if it is then deposited elsewhere. And so it is liable to taxation at 44 percent. In other words, the €45M is the amount left after taxation. That is to say that Aguero's overall cost is €80.2M ($109M).
The other factor that's significant is that the buyout clause is a Spanish agreement. When it comes to international transfers -- to bids from aboard like the one supposedly from Chelsea -- it is irrelevant. Except as a symbolic price, a reference point from which you can negotiate.


Read More: <a class="postlink" href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sid_lowe/01/29/atletico.buyouts/index.html#ixzz2Wr7d67O0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/w ... z2Wr7d67O0</a>

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Does anyone else fear the Rags significantly less with Moyes at the helm? I mean, this is going to be such a interesting season.

Which is why the likes of Camelgob and Van Rapist have come out in the rag lvong media saying they are 100% behind the new gaffer blah blah blah..

Yeah.keep kidding yourselves...

 

[Ray78]

3 Things with the release clause

1 they are between Spanish clubs only

2 the selling club can insist on VAT on top equal to 21%

3 The selling club can insist it's the player who buys themselves out of the contract, meaning the buying club would have to give the player the money pluss income tax on top 45%

If Barca dig their heels in could be a long one

Source for this?

Article from when Chelsea wanted Aguero from Madrid pasted the important bits

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sid_lowe/01/29/atletico.buyouts/index.html

Spain's buyout clauses have often been set up as a deterrent -- symbolic, gigantic figures to warn off suitors. Sergio Busquets has just renewed his deal with Barcelona for example and his buyout clause is now €150M ($204M). But they do also have a practical use. They form part of a legal framework and also a gentleman's agreement between clubs. Which is why the price is not always the price. Because clubs are not always gentlemanly about it.
Under the terms of that basic agreement, clubs accepted that another club which paid the buyout clause could sign a player without resistance. If it's €45M, you pay €45M and you take your player, no mess and no fuss. It is, essentially, a price set at which you say you will sell.
But you don't necessarily have to sell at that price; that agreement has a legal foundation that is a little different. At an informal level, the modus operandi has been altered since Real Madrid walked off with Luis Figo for the symbolic but just about manageable figure of 10,000M pesetas. The buyout clause remains, but the application of it is different.
Now most clubs are saying: this is the buyout clause, sure, but if you make a hostile bid, a bid that we do not welcome, we will force you to apply the clause legally. And when you apply the law legally, that is a different issue. When you apply the law legally, it is a different price.
That means one of two things, both of which increase the price. Firstly, it can mean adding the VAT at 18 percent. In the past, clubs have agreed to include VAT in the invoice for a player's transfer (which of course can be claimed back from the state). Now, if the bid is hostile, they will not. In other words, the buying club will have to pay the clause plus the 18 percent. So, Aguero's price rises from €45M to €53.1M ($72M).
The other option is for a club to simply refuse to sell -- until, that is, it is forced to. That's where the legal buyout clause kicks in, Decreto Real 1006/1985. But that decree is exactly what it says it is: a buyout clause. A player (not the club) deposits the money, the value of the buyout clause, at the Spanish league and unilaterally breaks his contract. That money, of course, would be given to him by the buying club in order to buy himself out. The problem is that as soon as that money hits his account it counts as income -- even if it is then deposited elsewhere. And so it is liable to taxation at 44 percent. In other words, the €45M is the amount left after taxation. That is to say that Aguero's overall cost is €80.2M ($109M).
The other factor that's significant is that the buyout clause is a Spanish agreement. When it comes to international transfers -- to bids from aboard like the one supposedly from Chelsea -- it is irrelevant. Except as a symbolic price, a reference point from which you can negotiate.


Read More: <a class="postlink" href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sid_lowe/01/29/atletico.buyouts/index.html#ixzz2Wr7d67O0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/w ... z2Wr7d67O0</a>

Thanks for clearing it up. So it isn't as straightforward as people are suggesting.

 

[Del_Bosque]

Far from it, it's a hostile bid really.

Barca are a tw@t of a club when it comes to transfers they won't take this lying down, unless they actually want rid