Fun Prediction - Which Club is Matt Grimes off too ?

[mdg]

which ever club he goes to, and what ever the fee- lets make sure that it does not go into the pockets of the SUITS

 

[Antony Moxey]

There's no such thing as a 'realistic' appearance clause. I'd rather we had a smaller, guaranteed fee up front rather than all this nonsense abut appearance clauses as invariably the player is moved on one appearance before the next payment is scheduled. We've been caught out by this before - Grimes is th most bankable asset we've produced in decades, lets not sell ourselves short with stupid clauses that might (but probably won't) net us additional cash some time in the future.

Also, let's be a bit realistic if we're going to have a sell on clause. If we want decent cash we're not going to get a 25% sell on fee - why would his new club agree to something that could cost them so much? I'd rather have more now and less of a sell on, it might be donkey's years before we see a return so let's have a bigger slice now and invest that wisely instead.

 

[flackyISmydadHONEST]

I'll have £5 on Swansea at 5/1

Cheeky £1 on Arsenal at 12/1 I'm a high roller.

Derby well worth a punt at 30/1.

 

[IndoMike]

There's no such thing as a 'realistic' appearance clause. I'd rather we had a smaller, guaranteed fee up front rather than all this nonsense abut appearance clauses as invariably the player is moved on one appearance before the next payment is scheduled. We've been caught out by this before - Grimes is th most bankable asset we've produced in decades, lets not sell ourselves short with stupid clauses that might (but probably won't) net us additional cash some time in the future.

Also, let's be a bit realistic if we're going to have a sell on clause. If we want decent cash we're not going to get a 25% sell on fee - why would his new club agree to something that could cost them so much? I'd rather have more now and less of a sell on, it might be donkey's years before we see a return so let's have a bigger slice now and invest that wisely instead.

Agree totally. If a club wants him badly enough, cough up - in advance. If they just want to take a cheap punt and don't treat the player properly, possibly screwing up his career and screwing us as well, they can ****** off. Anything less than 1 million up front - they can go take a ride.

 

[richard_portland]

There's no such thing as a 'realistic' appearance clause. I'd rather we had a smaller, guaranteed fee up front rather than all this nonsense abut appearance clauses as invariably the player is moved on one appearance before the next payment is scheduled. We've been caught out by this before - Grimes is th most bankable asset we've produced in decades, lets not sell ourselves short with stupid clauses that might (but probably won't) net us additional cash some time in the future.

Also, let's be a bit realistic if we're going to have a sell on clause. If we want decent cash we're not going to get a 25% sell on fee - why would his new club agree to something that could cost them so much? I'd rather have more now and less of a sell on, it might be donkey's years before we see a return so let's have a bigger slice now and invest that wisely instead.

I agree the most important part is what we get up front, and that we may need to settle for 10 or 15% sell on although we should insist on one imo.

I get what you mean re the appearances, worth noting however that when Stevenage moved Dunne on to Pompey one game short we got a pro rata add on. Don't know if this was just because the clause was set by tribunal or whether it would apply to a tf agreed between the two clubs as well?

 

[fordysutton]

real madrid.

Fcat.

everton.fc

 

[LOG]

There's no such thing as a 'realistic' appearance clause. I'd rather we had a smaller, guaranteed fee up front rather than all this nonsense abut appearance clauses as invariably the player is moved on one appearance before the next payment is scheduled. We've been caught out by this before - Grimes is th most bankable asset we've produced in decades, lets not sell ourselves short with stupid clauses that might (but probably won't) net us additional cash some time in the future.

Also, let's be a bit realistic if we're going to have a sell on clause. If we want decent cash we're not going to get a 25% sell on fee - why would his new club agree to something that could cost them so much? I'd rather have more now and less of a sell on, it might be donkey's years before we see a return so let's have a bigger slice now and invest that wisely instead.

Bournemouth had a 25% sell on clause for Adam Lallana which got them £5.75m. Just saying, like.

I agree with the gist of what you're saying but, depending on where he goes and how his career develops, the real value of the deal could be in the add-ons.

 

[fordysutton]

everton.fc

850.grand up front??????

 

[The Studded Boot]

Swansea £1.5m with 10% to player.

 

[Antony Moxey]

Bournemouth had a 25% sell on clause for Adam Lallana which got them £5.75m. Just saying, like.

I agree with the gist of what you're saying but, depending on where he goes and how his career develops, the real value of the deal could be in the add-ons.

Yes I know. Like I've said elsewhere every time someone posts something almost immediately someone finds one example to debunk it straight away.

However, how long did Bournemouth have to wait for that fee? Perhaps at a lib like ours where we're usually scrambling down the back of the sofa for every last penny it might be better to have £50 and 10% of £100 five years later than £40 and 25% of £100 in five years' time, especially as there's no guarantee it'll be a percentage of £100 or it'll be within the next five years, or even that it'll happen at all.