Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jacko

Ricky van Wolfswinkel

Recommended Posts

"My sincere apologies dpit. I did read both threads through quickly late last night - but didn''t take notes before posting.

I won''t let it happen again - I''ll go sit on the naughty step and think about my behaviour. I hope there won''t be legal action?

;) "

Not this time you naughty boy. Although Sheldon would not have approved of your slipshod behaviour. Consider yourself chastised...

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="The Great Drinkell"]Where are all the poets and songster on this board? let me help you along a little and tell you his name rhymes with a previous "great" canary centre-forward. we must be able to get a song out of that [D][/quote]

First we had Drinkell, now we have Wolfswinkel...da da da hey da da da hey! [8]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Lets be aving you"]

"Can''t work out the economics of the last paragraph though, obviously something to do with a sell-on clause."

 

It translates as follows:

 

"Van Wolfswinkel, it will be recalled, was bought for 5.075 million euros in 2011. Since then, Sporting have sold 50% of the economic rights to the Dutchman, for 2.537 million euros, and, subequently, another 15% for 975,000 euros. The Lions would therefore receive only 35% of the value of any potential sale to Norwich. Find out more in the Friday (25 January) edition of the DN."

[/quote]

Er.....that''s what I cut''n''pasted from Google translate myself and the translation leaves a lot to be desired. You gave the impression that you can understand Portugese from an earlier post, can you translate that paragraph properly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joanna Grey, your machine-translated doggerel needs significant editing, so not surprised you cannot make sense of it:

 

"Van Wolfswinkel, remember, was acquired by for 5.075 million

euros in 2011, and although the Sporting have since

sold 50% of the economic rights of to the Dutchman, by

for 2.537 million euros, and then another 15% for 975 000 euros. The Lions would

therefore receive only 35% of the any possible sale to

Norwich."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh good, the Pink Un does not support strike-through mode.

 

Second go:

 

"Van Wolfswinkel, remember, was acquired for 5.075 million euros in

2011, although Sporting have since sold 50% of the economic rights to the

Dutchman, for 2.537 million euros, and then another 15% for 975 000 euros. The

Lions would therefore receive only 35% of any possible sale to Norwich."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we can but hope that the suggestion we have made a bid is correct - if it is then this is a real step change in quality.   The suggestion that they are prepared to sell is also encouraging.

 

Except for those that feel we are making bids for show with no intention of making a signing of course [;)]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "selling" of the rights sounds odd - I assume back to the player but suggests that SL need the cash...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Van Wolfswinkel, it will be recalled, was bought for 5.075

million euros in 2011. Since then, Sporting have sold 50% of the

economic rights to the Dutchman, for 2.537 million euros, and,

subequently, another 15% for 975,000 euros. The Lions would therefore

receive only 35% of the value of any potential sale to Norwich. Find out

more in the Friday (25 January) edition of the DN."5.075 mil they paidsold 50% for  2.537 millsold 15% for
975,000 k65% sold for 3, 512, 000So they own 35% of him for 1563000sold for 10m euro50% 5mil                     Profit 246300015% 1.5mill                 Profit 52500035% 3.5mill                 Profit 1937000Is it fair?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most other leagues allows the club to sell their players economic rights, which allows them to cash in earlier to buy other players or pay off the fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The ''selling'' of the rights sounds odd - I assume back to the player but suggests that SL need the cash..."

 

Might this be to do with third-party ownership? Others like Bethnal might be more clued up on this.

 

I found this quote from the internet, though it may well be unreliable: "Only a small % of the rights of most players in big clubs in Portugal (and other countries) belongs to the respective clubs. Investment funds (some of unknown and dubious origins) own the majority of the players'' rights."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this would be the best signing NCFC has ever made IMO, but the trouble I see now is if we have indeed put an offer in is that it is now out in the open and any other clubs could come in and get ahead of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Offer has been received by Sporting and they are weighing it up regarding Norwich''s low (lower than expected) bid. Has informed City they are waiting for more bids before they accept or negioate further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Che''s right hand man wrote the following post at 25/01/2013 10:52 AM:

"Van Wolfswinkel, it will be recalled, was bought for 5.075 million euros in 2011. Since then, Sporting have sold 50% of the economic rights to the Dutchman, for 2.537 million euros, and, subequently, another 15% for 975,000 euros. The Lions would therefore receive only 35% of the value of any potential sale to Norwich. Find out more in the Friday (25 January) edition of the DN."

5.075 mil they paid

sold 50% for 2.537 mill
sold 15% for
975,000 k

65% sold for 3, 512, 000

So they own 35% of him for 1563000

sold for 10m euro

50% 5mil Profit 2463000
15% 1.5mill Profit 525000
35% 3.5mill Profit 1937000

Is it fair?

Sorry " quote " has stopped working for me and I am having to recreate it myself. - Help somebody!

No think you are reading too much into it.

I would interpret it that they "own" if that is the right word just 35% of him. As such they would receive 35% of any fee.

Which of course does raise an interesting question as to who makes the decision on any sale and for what value. If I owned 65% of something I think I would want final say in any sale. But then I do not profess any knowledge on such sales of economic rights. Anybody else able to help?

If the player owns 65% of his own rights I can well understand that he might want to cash in on his own profit. If SL have been selling such rights it does suggest that financially they have got themselves up a well known creek without a paddle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It turns out that, according to Wikipedia, Quality Sports Investments own 50% of Wolfswinkel, while Sporting Portugal Fund owns 15%.

 

So Wolfswinkel does not apparently "own" any rights over himself.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So we are having to negotiate with five people here - the three owners of the player, his agent and the player himself.  Christ, fat chance of getting that sorted before next Thursday especially as its will beb done across the Bay of Biscay!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="YellowBlood"]this would be the best signing NCFC has ever made IMO, [/quote]

Better than Huckerby for £750k + £250k add on?

 

[/quote]

 

Not to mention Martin Peters, the only player who''d ever been approaching world class to play for Norwich City, for £50,000 or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="YellowBlood"]this would be the best signing NCFC has ever made IMO, [/quote]

Better than Huckerby for £750k + £250k add on?

 

[/quote]

 

Not to mention Martin Peters, the only player who''d ever been approaching world class to play for Norwich City, for £50,000 or so.

[/quote]

Price wise not. But the potential of Wolf would make it so I believe, time would tell. Also we are talking about different times now. so much money being thrown about nowadays.

Hucks will always be a legend but we have not really had anyone since him who makes you sit on the edge of your seat and marvel at their skill.

I just hope the board pushes the boat out a bit and take a small gamble price wise. I would rather see us have a good go since staying up is worth so much, and atm we are in a decent position. Would rather this that not buy anyone or panic buy some who wont improve much on what we have.

Just my thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s the economic rights only. I would think the club has the final say on the sale of him.

Not a perfect comparison but i think it''s basically gambling. These third parties have put down x amount on this player for x%. The club takes the Bet on to cover their costs. But the third parties are just outsiders from there on. Obviously the club would want to avoid the third partieslosing money ad they may no longer invest. But the final say comes down to the club

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="shefcanary"]So we are having to negotiate with five people here - the three owners of the player, his agent and the player himself.  Christ, fat chance of getting that sorted before next Thursday especially as its will beb done across the Bay of Biscay![/quote]

No, I believe you still just deal with the club who has the player, despite just having 35% ownership.

Think of it more like a floating charge over a business, the lender has rights to any profit from the sale of the good (equitable ownership) but has no say over how the item is dealt with (legal ownership).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone know when the press conference today is? Pete usually makes a thread with details of what was said in it. Would like to hear Hughton''s comments on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="YellowBlood"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="YellowBlood"]this would be the best signing NCFC has ever made IMO, [/quote]

Better than Huckerby for £750k + £250k add on?

 

[/quote]

 

Not to mention Martin Peters, the only player who''d ever been approaching world class to play for Norwich City, for £50,000 or so.

[/quote] Price wise not. But the potential of Wolf would make it so I believe, time would tell. Also we are talking about different times now. so much money being thrown about nowadays. Hucks will always be a legend but we have not really had anyone since him who makes you sit on the edge of your seat and marvel at their skill. I just hope the board pushes the boat out a bit and take a small gamble price wise. I would rather see us have a good go since staying up is worth so much, and atm we are in a decent position. Would rather this that not buy anyone or panic buy some who wont improve much on what we have. Just my thoughts.[/quote]

 

I have no idea about this particular player, but I don''t disagree in general terms - about transfer fees. And from those McNally comments of a couple of days ago, when he was acknowledging rather than jibbing at inflated fees, I think we may be prepared to pay over the odds. But not for wages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50% the 35% and 15% just get the divided selling fee plus later clauses if are negotiated for example a percentage of the selling profits if we sell him on.Lisbon sells him, the profits will go to the investees.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Darren Lamb"]Anyone know when the press conference today is? Pete usually makes a thread with details of what was said in it. Would like to hear Hughton''s comments on this.[/quote]Pre-match press conferences are on Thursdays now.Here''s what was said yesterday:www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/no_stone_unturned_in_transfer_window_for_norwich_city_boss_chris_hughton_1_1807123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="spencer 1970"]I don''t do replica shirts let alone names and numbers on the back, but WOLFSWINKEL 10* could be too amusing to resist.

*IF simmo goes.[/quote]You forgot the ''v.'' add another quid.Tried the personaliser on the online canary store and the name won''t fit.  So it''s back to Hooper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...