A little puzzle about 'release clauses' for you all.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

Ok. All ready?

A player we sign for 500,000 signs a 4-year contract. He''s 23 with potential for significant improvement and a future release clause is negotiated which says that if a Prem/equivalent club comes in with a bid for 1,500,000 we have to sell him if he wants to move.

Now, what happens if his market value increases to 4,500,000 during the second year of his contract. We realise what is happening and offer him a new, improved contract with a higher release clause - but he refuses to sign it.

Must we then transfer the player for 1,500,000 when he is now worth 4,500,000?

Does anybody know the answer?

OTBC

 

[Grando 260]

yes, you have to sell him for the lower amount - it''s in the contract.

Decent contract negotiators should plan for this eventuality and set the fees high enough in the first place so that fans and footballing staff feel they''ve got a more-than-adequate amount for a want-away player.

[Indy_Bones 441]

The simple answer is unfortunately - Yes.As long as the terms of the clause are met, we cannot refuse the player.The only chance of avoiding this is to get them on a new contract with a re-negotiated clause, but if they refuse to sign it''s tough luck...

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]Now, what happens if his market value increases to 4,500,000 during

the second year of his contract. We realise what is happening and offer

him a new, improved contract with a higher release clause - but he

refuses to sign it.

Must we then transfer the player for 1,500,000 when he is now worth 4,500,000?[/quote]

His release clause is set at 1.5 million.  If a buyer knows this, then all they have to do is lodge a bid at that price.  It''s down to the agent to either keep schtum to encourage a bidding war, or to make this player a loss leader for future favours.

As for market values - they''re not set in stone.  The value of anything is the amount someone is willing to pay for it.The Waghorn / Myfootballwriter site covers release clauses here.

[ricardo 7,336]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Ok. All ready?

A player we sign for 500,000 signs a 4-year contract. He''s 23 with potential for significant improvement and a future release clause is negotiated which says that if a Prem/equivalent club comes in with a bid for 1,500,000 we have to sell him if he wants to move.

Now, what happens if his market value increases to 4,500,000 during the second year of his contract. We realise what is happening and offer him a new, improved contract with a higher release clause - but he refuses to sign it.

Must we then transfer the player for 1,500,000 when he is now worth 4,500,000?

Does anybody know the answer?

OTBC

 

[/quote]

I would assume we would have to honour the original contract.

Perhaps thats why we were trying to give Dickson a new contract

[GMF 735]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Ok. All ready?

A player we sign for 500,000 signs a 4-year contract. He''s 23 with potential for significant improvement and a future release clause is negotiated which says that if a Prem/equivalent club comes in with a bid for 1,500,000 we have to sell him if he wants to move.

Now, what happens if his market value increases to 4,500,000 during the second year of his contract. We realise what is happening and offer him a new, improved contract with a higher release clause - but he refuses to sign it.

Must we then transfer the player for 1,500,000 when he is now worth 4,500,000?

Does anybody know the answer?

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Simply, it''s one of his contract conditions, so, unless you''re suggestion the Club breaks a legally enforceable contract condition, if the offer is received and he wants to go to the Club in question, then you have to sell. The then market value is irrelevant to the selling club and only really relevant to the buying club.

[KidCanary 0]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Ok. All ready?

A player we sign for 500,000 signs a 4-year contract. He''s 23 with potential for significant improvement and a future release clause is negotiated which says that if a Prem/equivalent club comes in with a bid for 1,500,000 we have to sell him if he wants to move.

Now, what happens if his market value increases to 4,500,000 during the second year of his contract. We realise what is happening and offer him a new, improved contract with a higher release clause - but he refuses to sign it.

Must we then transfer the player for 1,500,000 when he is now worth 4,500,000?

Does anybody know the answer?

OTBC

 

[/quote]I think BlyBly is using this to highlight the connundrum our Manager/Board face guys as opposed to wanting to know the anwser.Nice try mate but i fear you''re trying to get blood from a stone with some people on this board, they will argue that they should have negotiated better etc etc.... you can''t negotiate unless you have the upper hand... which is what the player has i.e. he wont sign unless you do it

[Stevo 0]

[quote user="KidCanary"]

I think BlyBly is using this to highlight the connundrum our Manager/Board face guys as opposed to wanting to know the anwser.

Nice try mate but i fear you''re trying to get blood from a stone with some people on this board, they will argue that they should have negotiated better etc etc.... you can''t negotiate unless you have the upper hand... which is what the player has i.e. he wont sign unless you do it
[/quote]

Exactly. If a player''s value goes up, the presence of a low sell-on clause gives the player and his agent a very strong hand. As Earnie''s agent, I could approach a club and say "are you aware you could buy him for £3.5 million when at today''s prices he''s obviously worth far more? He will sign for you but we''re expecting an increased signing on fee. Even with this, you will still be paying less than the ''market value''."

The buying club pay the same money. It''s the selling club that lose out and the player plus his agent that benefit. Hence the reason that agents are demanding these clauses and setting the values.