| Sell-on clauses 12:29 - Jul 15 with 2114 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 01:16 - Jul 16 with 254 views | Match82 |
| Sell-on clauses on 17:28 - Jul 15 by KensalT |
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]
|
"I completely understand that buyers like these clauses and we might not have the bargaining power to insist on a money up front sale."
I've always assumed that it's the selling club rather than the buying club that insists on this. Buying team isn't really saving much on the up front and if they are including the clause they're basically gambling that the player won't increase in value, feels weird.
For us, I think we are in a weird spot and I can see either angle. For the league 1, 2 clubs sell on fees are hugely important. It's the only chance for a real windfall, you won't get many clubs willing to pay more than £2M for one of your players, but if you sell them for say £1.5M and 20% sell on to a Brentford circa 2020 type club you could be in line for an extra £5M down the road if they do the thing and flip the player to a PL team for £25M |  | | |
| Sell-on clauses on 09:24 - Jul 16 with 156 views | KensalT |
| Sell-on clauses on 01:16 - Jul 16 by Match82 |
"I completely understand that buyers like these clauses and we might not have the bargaining power to insist on a money up front sale."
I've always assumed that it's the selling club rather than the buying club that insists on this. Buying team isn't really saving much on the up front and if they are including the clause they're basically gambling that the player won't increase in value, feels weird.
For us, I think we are in a weird spot and I can see either angle. For the league 1, 2 clubs sell on fees are hugely important. It's the only chance for a real windfall, you won't get many clubs willing to pay more than £2M for one of your players, but if you sell them for say £1.5M and 20% sell on to a Brentford circa 2020 type club you could be in line for an extra £5M down the road if they do the thing and flip the player to a PL team for £25M |
Maybe you're right.
But we've still only seen one profit from a sell-on clause in the last 15 years!
And if you flip that on its head. How many times have we bought a player, developed them, sold for a profit and shared some of that profit with the club we signed the player from.
Off the top of my head I can only think of:
- Sinclair Armstrong
- Charlie Austin
- Luke Freeman
- Alex McCarthy
- Adel Taarabt
That's not many considering we've spent the last decade talking about being a development club.
On the other hand we've had a few flops who might have cost us a good bit more if we hadn't included a sell-on clause:
- Macauley Bonne
- Jordan Cousins
- Lyndon Dykes
- Conor Washington
And I'm sure there's plenty more. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
