[calvin plummers socks]

dtp, on 20 July 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Should the same idiot be given any credit then for negotiating a fee reputed to be £1.3m for a player we purchased for less than £100k the previous year?

At the time, I thought that figure to be excellent business so even if we only have a 5% sell on it is not to be sneezed at.

No because it's demand and supply.
It's the going rate and perceived value of the buying club which dictates sales

[moondog]

MDCCCLXVI, on 20 July 2017 - 01:19 PM, said:

'Ok'?

A player we sold could be now moving for several million and the sell on's just 'ok'?

Perhaps Ashley could clarify exactly what 'ok' actually means...

He now has, its 5% of Hull's profiit (fee received less fee paid to us) he can't see that the contract provides for any further payment to Mansfield

[Cartman]

there are many things we can rightly question CT for - getting £1.3 million for someone we signed for 100k is not one of them (despite the very small sell on)

if we'd have sold for 250k and a 25% sell on there would have been no guarantee that he'd have gone for a big fee and people would have complained about that

[Spireite-Karl]

moondog, on 20 July 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

He now has, its 5% of Hull's profiit (fee received less fee paid to us) he can't see that the contract provides for any further payment to Mansfield

So the Staggies do get a share then

This post has been edited by Spireite-Karl: 20 July 2017 - 02:57 PM

[Siberian Spireite]

moondog, on 20 July 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

He now has, its 5% of Hull's profiit (fee received less fee paid to us) he can't see that the contract provides for any further payment to Mansfield

So somewhere around a third of a million to CFC, if Clucas goes for 8m?

[azul]

Siberian Spireite, on 20 July 2017 - 03:02 PM, said:

So somewhere around a third of a million to CFC, if Clucas goes for 8m?

The best news is that it will all go to Uncle Dave

Spireite-Karl, on 20 July 2017 - 02:52 PM, said:

So the Staggies do get a share then

That'll be one to come out the woodwork at a later date

This post has been edited by azul: 20 July 2017 - 03:08 PM

[dim view]

moondog, on 20 July 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

He now has, its 5% of Hull's profiit (fee received less fee paid to us) he can't see that the contract provides for any further payment to Mansfield

Maybe the last few pages of the contract have got lost. I'd be amazed if Mansfield aren't due a further payment if they have already received one. It's normally a very simple matter: that Mansfield would be due a %age of the total money we get from Hull. The matter stops there if Hull do not negotiate a sell on with whoever buys Sam. If they do, then we get some and so do Mansfield.

Can he please confirm that Turner, having left our employ, will not receive any commission?

[Spireite-Karl]

dim view, on 20 July 2017 - 03:11 PM, said:

Can he please confirm that Turner, having left our employ, will not receive any commission?

From my calculations I make it about £333,333.33

[Snowflake McBedwetter]

JonB, on 20 July 2017 - 02:17 PM, said:

Wasnt this a deal where we took a bigger up front fee and smaller sell on compared to deals like Darikwa etc where the fee was slightly smaller in favour of a bigger sell on. Its a bit of a lottery as to what players go on and do and what you make from sell ons.

To some degree I'm with you.

But Clucas was always a better bet than Darikwa, Davies, Doyle, Morsy, Bowery, Aryibi etc. etc to succeed. So maybe the deal/sell on could have been framed accordingly.

That said, we made good money at the expense of the Troglodytes, so still a good bit of business.

This post has been edited by KevinArnottsGoldenBoot: 20 July 2017 - 03:39 PM

[Sammy Spireite]

dim view, on 20 July 2017 - 03:11 PM, said:

Can he please confirm that Turner, having left our employ, will not receive any commission?

Has that been confirmed yet?

[dtp]

Cartman, on 20 July 2017 - 02:52 PM, said:

there are many things we can rightly question CT for - getting £1.3 million for someone we signed for 100k is not one of them (despite the very small sell on)

if we'd have sold for 250k and a 25% sell on there would have been no guarantee that he'd have gone for a big fee and people would have complained about that

Fully agree Cartman.

With "some" I'm beginning to understand it's a question of "Heads", "some" win, and "Tails" CFC loses.

[dtp]

moondog, on 20 July 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

he can't see that the contract provides for any further payment to Mansfield

Surely, this depends on the words of the Contract between CFC and MTFC and not between Hull and CFC.

[azul]

dtp, on 20 July 2017 - 04:23 PM, said:

Surely, this depends on the words of the Contract between CFC and MTFC and not between Hull and CFC.

Exactly

Hopefully our plonker of a club secretary knows that and they haven't filed the CFC/MTFC contract in the bin

[ELTON 2020]

Siberian Spireite, on 20 July 2017 - 03:02 PM, said:

So somewhere around a third of a million to CFC, if Clucas goes for 8m?

I take it some of this will go to reducing the debt ad nauseam .....and the rest to signing of players - maybe the two Caldwell wants but can't afford?

[moondog]

azul, on 20 July 2017 - 05:06 PM, said:

Exactly

Hopefully our plonker of a club secretary knows that and they haven't filed the CFC/MTFC contract in the bin

He's looked at this contract too and run it by an EFL Council member he knows, who shares the view the Stags aren't due anything

[moondog]

dim view, on 20 July 2017 - 03:11 PM, said:

Maybe the last few pages of the contract have got lost. I'd be amazed if Mansfield aren't due a further payment if they have already received one. It's normally a very simple matter: that Mansfield would be due a %age of the total money we get from Hull. The matter stops there if Hull do not negotiate a sell on with whoever buys Sam. If they do, then we get some and so do Mansfield.

Can he please confirm that Turner, having left our employ, will not receive any commission?

Yes he confirms that nothing is due to Turner

[dim view]

Steve Kendall 1982, on 20 July 2017 - 05:17 PM, said:

I take it some of this will go to reducing the debt ad nauseam .....and the rest to signing of players - maybe the two Caldwell wants but can't afford?

we need a new statement from the owner about what he would do with a large windfall.

This post has been edited by dim view: 20 July 2017 - 05:42 PM

[Norton Blue]

KevinArnottsGoldenBoot, on 20 July 2017 - 03:38 PM, said:

To some degree I'm with you.

But Clucas was always a better bet than Darikwa, Davies, Doyle, Morsy, Bowery, Aryibi etc. etc to succeed. So maybe the deal/sell on could have been framed accordingly.

That said, we made good money at the expense of the Troglodytes, so still a good bit of business.

Really? Was always?? Morsy and doyle were in the same league and doing much better. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but can cloud judgement

This post has been edited by Norton Blue: 20 July 2017 - 05:57 PM

[Webster]

dtp, on 20 July 2017 - 04:23 PM, said:

Surely, this depends on the words of the Contract between CFC and MTFC and not between Hull and CFC.

Correct imo

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

moondog, on 20 July 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

He now has, its 5% of Hull's profiit (fee received less fee paid to us) he can't see that the contract provides for any further payment to Mansfield

Okay, thank him from me for this and other responses.

And for no four letter words, too.

I guess we can only wonder if Allen's 70/30% split still applies to any sell-on wedge...

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 20 July 2017 - 06:51 PM