Ethan Ampadu

[burtiew]

Ethan started last night for Chelsea against Bohemians. This is his breakthrough year ... Ker-Ching!!

That was meant to say 'starred' but both are true of course!!!

 

[Angus]

With the likes of Noah Smerdon on our books and the fact Chelsea are keeping an eye on him, would you say Chelsea have burnt a bridge with us for any future transfers with the way they've gone around this whole Ampadu saga? Personally I hope we don't sell to them unless it's for an over inflated fee.

 

[grecian-near-hell]

Chelsea have to get over their transfer embargo first. At the end of the day money talks

 

[Angus]

That's true. But they'll be over the embargo come next season, all I'm saying is that if two clubs come for the same player with very similar offers, I'd like to think Chelsea would-be written off.

 

[grecian-near-hell]

Not going to happen - similar offers would be down to the player

 

[Hants_red]

Off on loan to Aston Villa? https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49000905

As far as I know these count towards his appearance numbers. Anyone able to confirm?

 

[andrew p long]

Off on loan to Aston Villa? https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49000905

As far as I know these count towards his appearance numbers. Anyone able to confirm?

My understanding is different. I thought that appearances out on loan don’t count. However any loan fee paid to Chelsea counts toward transfer fees on which we get a share of profit. So any loan fee up to the £1.3m already paid means we get nothing now.

Unfortunately I don’t have chapter and verse on this. T’would be good if someone could point us back to the ruling when it was published, doubtless somewhere on this thread!

 

[John William]

My understanding is different. I thought that appearances out on loan don’t count. However any loan fee paid to Chelsea counts toward transfer fees on which we get a share of profit. So any loan fee up to the £1.3m already paid means we get nothing now.

Unfortunately I don’t have chapter and verse on this. T’would be good if someone could point us back to the ruling when it was published, doubtless somewhere on this thread!

No-one other than the two clubs and the authorities have ever seen the actual decision. But my understanding is also that loan appearances don't count. The Club and BBC reports both say "for Chelsea". But we could possibly make a little bit from any loan fee, depending on the amount.

Ethan Ampadu compensation fee revealed

Exeter City have received a decision from the Professional Football Compensation Committee (PFCC) regarding Ethan Ampadu’s move to Chelsea and are disappointed by the verdict given.

www.exetercityfc.co.uk

Exeter 'disappointed' by Ampadu fee ruling

Exeter City say they are "disappointed for football" as a tribunal orders Chelsea to pay them up to £2.5m for Ethan Ampadu.

www.bbc.co.uk

I think we will be shafted (again).

 

[Pobbop]

As a player, and if he fulfills his potential that's where we'll make the cash, a loan has to be good for him, he needs games in the same position, whatever that is decided to be, his versatility meant a few Chelsea managers wanted him on the bench, but what is the point of that for long term development?

 

[ianaplincorners]

No-one other than the two clubs and the authorities have ever seen the actual decision. But my understanding is also that loan appearances don't count. The Club and BBC reports both say "for Chelsea". But we could possibly make a little bit from any loan fee, depending on the amount.

Ethan Ampadu compensation fee revealed

Exeter City have received a decision from the Professional Football Compensation Committee (PFCC) regarding Ethan Ampadu’s move to Chelsea and are disappointed by the verdict given.

www.exetercityfc.co.uk

Exeter 'disappointed' by Ampadu fee ruling

Exeter City say they are "disappointed for football" as a tribunal orders Chelsea to pay them up to £2.5m for Ethan Ampadu.

www.bbc.co.uk

I think we will be shafted (again).

So if I understand this correctly, if he was sold for £22.5m for example and Chelsea had already coughed up the £2.5m then City would get another 20% of the difference, ie £22.5m less £2.5m = £20M @ 20% = £4m, does that sound right?