Transfer fees

[alex1982]

This summer seems to be the most dodgy for transfer dealings ever(apart from Wet spam last summer).

What is it with so many undisclosed fees and clubs being forced to sell. With the Heinze saga, surely if he has a buy out clause and Liverpool have met it then the player can speak to Liverpool., and now Real Madrid trying to force Chelsea to sell Robben. Surely if Chelsea want to keep him they just say no, not like they need to sell.

Just all seems fishy to me.

[Andy M]

alex1982 said:

This summer seems to be the most dodgy for transfer dealings ever(apart from Wet spam last summer).

What is it with so many undisclosed fees and clubs being forced to sell. With the Heinze saga, surely if he has a buy out clause and Liverpool have met it then the player can speak to Liverpool., and now Real Madrid trying to force Chelsea to sell Robben. Surely if Chelsea want to keep him they just say no, not like they need to sell.

Just all seems fishy to me.

Heinze doesn't have a buy out clause, he simply has a letter from Scum's chief executive, David Gill, saying that they'll allow him to leave if a bid of £6.7m is received. Liverpool have bid £6.8m, but Scum aren't happy and so are dragging their heels. They want to sell him, but not to Liverpool.

The Robben situation looks different from what I can see; Chav$ki want to sell Robben, and want to sell him to Real Madrid, but want more £££ and so are messing about.

[Glassman]

Chelski also need to look at how to get out of paying Ballack for the rest of his contract. Not exactly set the Premierleague on fire has he?

[Dula]

Andy M said:

Heinze doesn't have a buy out clause, he simply has a letter from Scum's chief executive, David Gill, saying that they'll allow him to leave if a bid of £6.7m is received. Liverpool have bid £6.8m, but Scum aren't happy and so are dragging their heels. They want to sell him, but not to Liverpool.

I'm not sure how old Hienze is but I seem to remember that a buy-out clause can be activated by the player themselves if they are 27+ years old? They buy out the rest of their contract and are then free to move of their own accord. Set up to prevent clubs from letting players rot on the bench towards the end of their career. Totally agree with the sentiments above Utd do not want to sell to Liverpool I don't think they have done that since the 60's.

[Percy Flage]

AFAIK
If the club is a PLC it must disclose details of the deal, including fees and wages. Stock exchange requirements.

If the club is privately owned, there is no requirement.

How much did you pay for you house/car/the hooker you had last weekend?

[Andy M]

Dula said:

Andy M said:

Heinze doesn't have a buy out clause, he simply has a letter from Scum's chief executive, David Gill, saying that they'll allow him to leave if a bid of £6.7m is received. Liverpool have bid £6.8m, but Scum aren't happy and so are dragging their heels. They want to sell him, but not to Liverpool.

I'm not sure how old Hienze is but I seem to remember that a buy-out clause can be activated by the player themselves if they are 27+ years old? They buy out the rest of their contract and are then free to move of their own accord. Set up to prevent clubs from letting players rot on the bench towards the end of their career. Totally agree with the sentiments above Utd do not want to sell to Liverpool I don't think they have done that since the 60's.

Yeah, if they're within the last couple of years of their contract BUT the player must give notice of their intention to do so within 2 weeks of the end of the season.

Everything in this case appears to hinge on the letter from Gill to Heinze's agent.

[Tycho]

Surely the reluctance to sell Heinze to Liverpool is a restriction on the ability to choose employment? Surely the ECR would have something to say about that?