| Sell-on clauses 12:29 - Jul 15 with 2124 views | KensalT |
I put this question on the Kolli thread but I think it's worth it's own thread.
Whenever there's a discussion about selling one of our players I keep reading that a large sell-on clause should be a condition in any player sale we make.
It sounds like it makes sense. But does it really help the selling club?
Five years ago we sold Eze with a decent sell-on clause.
And we're still waiting...........
Given where we are now, trying to get back on track as a development/selling club, wouldn't be better off waiving the sell-on for our next few sales in favour of a bigger up front fee?
It would mean more money to play with now and someone else can take the risk of developing that player's potential.
I wonder how much the sell-on for Sinclair Armstrong was? And will we ever see any of it!? |  | | |  |
| Sell-on clauses on 12:34 - Jul 15 with 1816 views | ActonExile |
If the sell-on clause is slightly prohibiting Palace selling Eze, i wonder if the club has ever offered to settle on a fee to waive it.
20% of say £50m is £10m, maybe the clubs could settle on £8m-£10m and we can then waste quicker (only joking for the last bit). | |
| |
| Sell-on clauses on 12:37 - Jul 15 with 1793 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 12:34 - Jul 15 by ActonExile |
If the sell-on clause is slightly prohibiting Palace selling Eze, i wonder if the club has ever offered to settle on a fee to waive it.
20% of say £50m is £10m, maybe the clubs could settle on £8m-£10m and we can then waste quicker (only joking for the last bit). |
If Palace ever came to us with an offer like that we would immediately think that they were intending to sell and wanted to short-change us! | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 12:47 - Jul 15 with 1743 views | BrizR |
It depends, basically. It comes down to opportunity cost and the club's estimate of how likely a player is to succeed - you'd be seething if we'd taken £21m instead of £20m and then Eze goes for £100m to someone and we'd have more than doubled our money, but equally if someone was offering £30m and we took £20m for a sell-on that never happened that also sucks. The club basically has to evaluate:
1) How much will we get and how likely are we to get it?
2) Are there realistic alternative offers to pick from? There's not necessarily one club offering a lot more money than the other, instead you might have a lot of similar offers and one stands out because they're willing to offer the sell-on
3) Where does the player want to go? It doesn't matter if Bournemouth offer £40m and Liverpool offer £30m if the player has no interest in going to Bournemouth [Post edited 15 Jul 12:47]
| | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 12:52 - Jul 15 with 1717 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 12:47 - Jul 15 by BrizR |
It depends, basically. It comes down to opportunity cost and the club's estimate of how likely a player is to succeed - you'd be seething if we'd taken £21m instead of £20m and then Eze goes for £100m to someone and we'd have more than doubled our money, but equally if someone was offering £30m and we took £20m for a sell-on that never happened that also sucks. The club basically has to evaluate:
1) How much will we get and how likely are we to get it?
2) Are there realistic alternative offers to pick from? There's not necessarily one club offering a lot more money than the other, instead you might have a lot of similar offers and one stands out because they're willing to offer the sell-on
3) Where does the player want to go? It doesn't matter if Bournemouth offer £40m and Liverpool offer £30m if the player has no interest in going to Bournemouth [Post edited 15 Jul 12:47]
|
I would add a fourth question to your list:
4) How long will we have to wait to see the money?
The one and only time we have hit the jackpot with a sell-on is Raheem Sterling. And even then we had to wait five years before Liverpool sold him to Man City. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 13:38 - Jul 15 with 1578 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Sell-on clauses on 12:52 - Jul 15 by KensalT |
I would add a fourth question to your list:
4) How long will we have to wait to see the money?
The one and only time we have hit the jackpot with a sell-on is Raheem Sterling. And even then we had to wait five years before Liverpool sold him to Man City. |
Not until the selling club get paid!
If it's a structured payment, then it might be incremental. Whereupon CPFC might offer to pay less now but in full and final settlement. QPR get a bulk of the cash now to spunk as opposed to waiting. If they decide to wait to be paid in full, they can borrow against future earnings, but will pay interest of course. |  |
| |
| Sell-on clauses on 13:46 - Jul 15 with 1531 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 13:38 - Jul 15 by PlanetHonneywood |
Not until the selling club get paid!
If it's a structured payment, then it might be incremental. Whereupon CPFC might offer to pay less now but in full and final settlement. QPR get a bulk of the cash now to spunk as opposed to waiting. If they decide to wait to be paid in full, they can borrow against future earnings, but will pay interest of course. |
I think you might have missed the point of the question.
Would we be better off waiving the sell-on (which even if we get lucky we might have to wait several years for) in favour of a bigger up front fee when we sell players?
As per my original post:
"Given where we are now, trying to get back on track as a development/selling club, wouldn't be better off waiving the sell-on for our next few sales in favour of a bigger up front fee?
It would mean more money to play with now and someone else can take the risk of developing that player's potential." | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:01 - Jul 15 with 1473 views | Landshark |
I read today that Manchester United just made £7.6 million on a 20% sell on clause for a player. With the original sales fee from last year of £5 million they made a total of £12.6 million on a player that never even played a game for United.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/clyzpdr4e8no
I am not sure the maths would add up on not taking a sell-on fee. Take Eze for example, how much did we originally get for him? £16-18 million? What could we have got extra out of Palace, an extra £3-5 million? If Eze goes for £50 million we could get a potential £10 million extra. Granted, if he sees down his contract we get nothing but it's a risk the club should be taking. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:03 - Jul 15 with 1470 views | kensalriser |
The issue with Eze is not the sell on percentage but the release clause.
That aside, you’re assuming only one party to an agreement can set or waive a sell on. The sell on has become standard because it’s generally acceptable to both sides. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Sell-on clauses on 14:18 - Jul 15 with 1443 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:03 - Jul 15 by kensalriser |
The issue with Eze is not the sell on percentage but the release clause.
That aside, you’re assuming only one party to an agreement can set or waive a sell on. The sell on has become standard because it’s generally acceptable to both sides. |
I take your point that sell-on clauses have become standard practice. And it would probably need some tough negotiating to get a buyer to waive the sell-on and pay more up front.
But do sell-on clauses really benefit both sides?
The only time we have benefitted from a sell-on is Raheem Sterling. We sold him to Liverpool in 2010. And we had to wait five years for him to be sold-on.
Based on our experience I think sell-on clauses have been benefitting the buying clubs far more than the selling club.
With a three year P & S cycle does it really help us to wait five years for a sell-on clause to be triggered? Assuming it ever gets triggered before the player gets too old and starts to lose value. [Post edited 15 Jul 14:34]
| | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:23 - Jul 15 with 1412 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:01 - Jul 15 by Landshark |
I read today that Manchester United just made £7.6 million on a 20% sell on clause for a player. With the original sales fee from last year of £5 million they made a total of £12.6 million on a player that never even played a game for United.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/clyzpdr4e8no
I am not sure the maths would add up on not taking a sell-on fee. Take Eze for example, how much did we originally get for him? £16-18 million? What could we have got extra out of Palace, an extra £3-5 million? If Eze goes for £50 million we could get a potential £10 million extra. Granted, if he sees down his contract we get nothing but it's a risk the club should be taking. |
"If Eze goes"
That in a nutshell is the problem.
We have no control over the situation.
If Eze decides he is very happy where he is thank you very much then we will never see a penny.
Effectively we're buying a lottery ticket every time we sell a player. If we hit the jackpot then happy days. But if we don't then we're effectively robbing ourselves. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:35 - Jul 15 with 1376 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Sell-on clauses on 13:46 - Jul 15 by KensalT |
I think you might have missed the point of the question.
Would we be better off waiving the sell-on (which even if we get lucky we might have to wait several years for) in favour of a bigger up front fee when we sell players?
As per my original post:
"Given where we are now, trying to get back on track as a development/selling club, wouldn't be better off waiving the sell-on for our next few sales in favour of a bigger up front fee?
It would mean more money to play with now and someone else can take the risk of developing that player's potential." |
With respect, be more specific. Your question is effectly asking: How long is a piece of string? Ask yourself this, if Eze hadnt been out injured for a period of time, would the matter have already been sorted? What if Palace were in schtuk and were happy to take £40m? What if Eze had been a Taylor Richards?
You just need to apply common sense to work out the variables in play while being aware of imponderables and realise it's all about negotiation. | |
| |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:47 - Jul 15 with 1350 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:35 - Jul 15 by PlanetHonneywood |
With respect, be more specific. Your question is effectly asking: How long is a piece of string? Ask yourself this, if Eze hadnt been out injured for a period of time, would the matter have already been sorted? What if Palace were in schtuk and were happy to take £40m? What if Eze had been a Taylor Richards?
You just need to apply common sense to work out the variables in play while being aware of imponderables and realise it's all about negotiation. |
With respect to you, you're making this all about Eze.
My point is that since selling Raheem Sterling in 2010 we have only once had any benefit from a sell-on clause.
So my real point is do sell-on clauses benefit the buyer or the seller?
Are we just kidding ourselves when we say that players can only be sold "with a big sell-on" - which I've been reading a lot across this forum.
Once the player is out the door we have no control over that player's future.
Wouldn't it be better to cash-in for as much as we can at the point of sale instead of hoping that the player continues to progress and then gets moved on for a big fee? | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 15:23 - Jul 15 with 1224 views | wombat |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:47 - Jul 15 by KensalT |
With respect to you, you're making this all about Eze.
My point is that since selling Raheem Sterling in 2010 we have only once had any benefit from a sell-on clause.
So my real point is do sell-on clauses benefit the buyer or the seller?
Are we just kidding ourselves when we say that players can only be sold "with a big sell-on" - which I've been reading a lot across this forum.
Once the player is out the door we have no control over that player's future.
Wouldn't it be better to cash-in for as much as we can at the point of sale instead of hoping that the player continues to progress and then gets moved on for a big fee? |
i see coventry took a reduced fee for the lad who arsenal are signing this week they took 10 million would have got 15 million if they held out for the full amount . |  |
| |
| Sell-on clauses on 15:28 - Jul 15 with 1218 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:47 - Jul 15 by KensalT |
With respect to you, you're making this all about Eze.
My point is that since selling Raheem Sterling in 2010 we have only once had any benefit from a sell-on clause.
So my real point is do sell-on clauses benefit the buyer or the seller?
Are we just kidding ourselves when we say that players can only be sold "with a big sell-on" - which I've been reading a lot across this forum.
Once the player is out the door we have no control over that player's future.
Wouldn't it be better to cash-in for as much as we can at the point of sale instead of hoping that the player continues to progress and then gets moved on for a big fee? |
And as I said...there are many variables and imponderables that I'm sure you can work out if you try. | |
| |
| Sell-on clauses on 15:34 - Jul 15 with 1207 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 15:28 - Jul 15 by PlanetHonneywood |
And as I said...there are many variables and imponderables that I'm sure you can work out if you try. |
If you take as much as you can up front and waive any sell-on you don't have to worry about someone else's variables and imponderables. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 15:42 - Jul 15 with 1182 views | TK1 |
| Sell-on clauses on 15:23 - Jul 15 by wombat |
i see coventry took a reduced fee for the lad who arsenal are signing this week they took 10 million would have got 15 million if they held out for the full amount . |
Coventry had a 15% sell-on fee for Gyokeres, but sold 5% back to Sporting Lisbon for one million euros last summer. They will still get 10% when he signs for Arsenal. Definitely worth it. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 16:16 - Jul 15 with 1106 views | colinallcars |
If they hang on 'til Xmas, they'll be Santa Clauses… [Post edited 15 Jul 16:17]
|  | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 16:56 - Jul 15 with 1037 views | Match82 |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:47 - Jul 15 by KensalT |
With respect to you, you're making this all about Eze.
My point is that since selling Raheem Sterling in 2010 we have only once had any benefit from a sell-on clause.
So my real point is do sell-on clauses benefit the buyer or the seller?
Are we just kidding ourselves when we say that players can only be sold "with a big sell-on" - which I've been reading a lot across this forum.
Once the player is out the door we have no control over that player's future.
Wouldn't it be better to cash-in for as much as we can at the point of sale instead of hoping that the player continues to progress and then gets moved on for a big fee? |
If Eze goes for sometime close to his release clause I think I'm right in saying that two of our top five "transfer fees" received will have been from sell on clauses. Two of the top four if you don't include the ridiculous Chris Samba/Redknapp dodgy dealings. Remy and Eze himself being the others.
That's both incredibly damning of our ability to conduct transfer business healthily and also suggests that these are something we'd want to keep doing |  | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 17:07 - Jul 15 with 1018 views | JamesB1979 |
Given all the discussion on his transfer, it might be worth selling our sell-on for 5m now. At least we and the club can plan and move on. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 17:12 - Jul 15 with 1006 views | BrizR |
| Sell-on clauses on 14:47 - Jul 15 by KensalT |
With respect to you, you're making this all about Eze.
My point is that since selling Raheem Sterling in 2010 we have only once had any benefit from a sell-on clause.
So my real point is do sell-on clauses benefit the buyer or the seller?
Are we just kidding ourselves when we say that players can only be sold "with a big sell-on" - which I've been reading a lot across this forum.
Once the player is out the door we have no control over that player's future.
Wouldn't it be better to cash-in for as much as we can at the point of sale instead of hoping that the player continues to progress and then gets moved on for a big fee? |
You seem to be under the impression that the club is turning down better offers to get sell-on clauses which may or may not pay off. It's far more likely that the club is getting a lot of very similar offers and a favourable sell-on is what tips the balance one way or the other. We might like to try and ask for more money up front instead, but there's no guarantee a buyer would go for it, and even if they did how much more would they willing to pay - an extra £1m? An extra £5m? There really isn't any definite answer and it's not as easy as saying it would be "better to cash in for as much as we can" because there might not be any more money to be made on the initial sale. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 17:28 - Jul 15 with 964 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 17:12 - Jul 15 by BrizR |
You seem to be under the impression that the club is turning down better offers to get sell-on clauses which may or may not pay off. It's far more likely that the club is getting a lot of very similar offers and a favourable sell-on is what tips the balance one way or the other. We might like to try and ask for more money up front instead, but there's no guarantee a buyer would go for it, and even if they did how much more would they willing to pay - an extra £1m? An extra £5m? There really isn't any definite answer and it's not as easy as saying it would be "better to cash in for as much as we can" because there might not be any more money to be made on the initial sale. |
With respect I haven't made any assumptions about the club at all.
I made an observation about comments that appear on this forum whenever the question of selling a player comes up.
The phrase "but there must be a good sell-on" seems to be obligatory.
That suggests to me that many on here feel that sell-ons are a good thing.
What I am saying is that in the last 15 years we have only once benefitted from a sell-on clause - and that was when Liverpool sold Raheem Sterling to Man City.
I have lost count of the number of threads on this forum discussing Eze and how much we will make when he is sold. But the problem for us is that we have absolutely no control over that, and we might never get to see any sell-on money from Eze.
I completely understand that buyers like these clauses and we might not have the bargaining power to insist on a money up front sale.
But that's essentially my whole point. Theses clauses favour the buyer, not the seller. [Post edited 15 Jul 17:39]
| | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 18:00 - Jul 15 with 882 views | terryb |
I understand your point & have often thought that "add ons" are of little (or any) value, but that applies whether you are the seller ot buyer. It is one of the reasons why they can't be included in the accounts. For instance, in Rangers case, we might not receive any extra for Eze, Armstrong etc, but we're not likely to be paying out more for Celar or Madsen either.
The one thing I would query is whether the buying club would increase their initial offer if "add ons" were not included. If they currently value player x at £2 million, why would they offer more than that amount to purchase them? [Post edited 15 Jul 18:10]
| | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 18:14 - Jul 15 with 854 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 18:00 - Jul 15 by terryb |
I understand your point & have often thought that "add ons" are of little (or any) value, but that applies whether you are the seller ot buyer. It is one of the reasons why they can't be included in the accounts. For instance, in Rangers case, we might not receive any extra for Eze, Armstrong etc, but we're not likely to be paying out more for Celar or Madsen either.
The one thing I would query is whether the buying club would increase their initial offer if "add ons" were not included. If they currently value player x at £2 million, why would they offer more than that amount to purchase them? [Post edited 15 Jul 18:10]
|
I think that's a fair question.
But if you look at TK1's earlier post on this thread he does cite Coventry and Sporting reaching precisely that sort of compromise:
"Coventry had a 15% sell-on fee for Gyokeres, but sold 5% back to Sporting Lisbon for one million euros last summer. They will still get 10% when he signs for Arsenal. Definitely worth it."
Admittedly it was after the sale of the player to Sporting but it shows that it can be done. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 19:25 - Jul 15 with 722 views | francisbowles |
As I said on the other thread. You get the price you want or are willing to accept and then you negotiate a sell on on top.
If Palace had been prepared to pay £16 million or whatever the fee was, they are not going to turn down a sell on if we insist on one to seal the deal.
It is all about negotiation though. | | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 00:20 - Jul 16 with 548 views | CiderwithRsie |
It's a very sound question, but I think the issue is over the probability of getting that bigger up-front payment.
We're a middling (at best) Championship club, even our best players aren't going into the 1st team at Man City or Liverpool - either they're sold before they've even made it into our first team (Sterling or, back in the day, Bowler) or they go to, at best, lesser Premiership sides like Palace (and even then Eze wasn't first choice for a fair bit.)
Prices are going to reflect that. If we'd held out for, say, an extra couple of million from Palace for Eze then I'm not sure we'd have got it, because I'm not sure Palace had got it.
Eze's sell-on fee is basically about getting money from the sale to Palace that Palace don't have to find. We were confident hat Eze would be a success, that Palace were getting a player worth more than they were paying, but unless someone else actually came on for him we had to allow for Palace's budget. The sell-on fee reflected our confidence that, some day, Eze (and, previously, Sterling) would get a really big move and I reckon with Eze eventually we will.
In the Kolli example, much as I like him, the evidence that he is even Championship level is limited: I don't think we'd gett a big fee for him (so I wouldn't sell) but of we did I'd expect him to go to a club with a bigger budget than ours (if only because he'll want to be stepping up, not going sideways.) So I'd rather have the up-front money than gamble on him making a big money move later. (And look at BOS - I reckon you'll be waiting a long time before any club gets a sell-on fee for him.) | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
