Dacky | Page 5 | Vital Football

Dacky

Gillingham45 said:
Does anyone actually have a source for this 20% sell on fee? Because I've looked around and can't find a thing.
Click to expand...

You probably wouldn't find anything on the internet about it, but sell on clauses have become pretty standard clauses, even for big clubs.
I'd be very shocked if Scally had not included one, given the money we got from the Bertrand deal with Chelsea.

I think that if Blackburn are not within touching distance of the top six come January, Dack will be seen as fair game by the big championship clubs and maybe a few Premier clubs.
I always thought that maybe Bournemouth would be a good fit for his style of play, and their manager is happy to give English players a chance.
They don't mind spending a bit on the right player. They spent £20 million on Ake and £25 million for Lerma.

It's all a bit weird really as when we were in the same divisions as them, I never considered them a big club.
Shows what a bit of money and ambition can do.
 
shotshy said:
I always thought that maybe Bournemouth would be a good fit for his style of play, and their manager is happy to give English players a chance.
They don't mind spending a bit on the right player. They spent £20 million on Ake and £25 million for Lerma.

It's all a bit weird really as when we were in the same divisions as them, I never considered them a big club.
Shows what a bit of money and ambition can do.
Click to expand...

I've wondered what's the go with Bournemouth.

As you say, same size club as us and still only getting what, 12k? in the Prem. Now, I know they are bankrolled for squillions by some backers. But I thought the fair play rules meant you could only pay wages/fees as a percantage of your turnover? Is that not right? Or do they now sell millions in merchandise in Malaysia or something?
 
OneSirKeefy said:
I've wondered what's the go with Bournemouth.

As you say, same size club as us and still only getting what, 12k? in the Prem. Now, I know they are bankrolled for squillions by some backers. But I thought the fair play rules meant you could only pay wages/fees as a percantage of your turnover? Is that not right? Or do they now sell millions in merchandise in Malaysia or something?
Click to expand...

TV money will probably equate for 90% of their turnover
 
OneSirKeefy said:
I've wondered what's the go with Bournemouth.

As you say, same size club as us and still only getting what, 12k? in the Prem. Now, I know they are bankrolled for squillions by some backers. But I thought the fair play rules meant you could only pay wages/fees as a percantage of your turnover? Is that not right? Or do they now sell millions in merchandise in Malaysia or something?
Click to expand...
Are the financial fair play rules ever actually enforced?
I have a vague memory of Man City being penalised but I think all they got was a fine? Kind of defeats the object doesn’t it?
 
Man City were fined £49m BUT got £33m back after agreeing to stick to the rules in future. So basically they got a £16m fine which is a drop in the ocean for them.
There were other sanctions involved but it hardly seems to have hindered them. I'd hazard a guess that a less desirable club would have been punished more heavily.
 
Nobby_66 said:
Man City were fined £49m BUT got £33m back after agreeing to stick to the rules in future. So basically they got a £16m fine which is a drop in the ocean for them.
There were other sanctions involved but it hardly seems to have hindered them. I'd hazard a guess that a less desirable club would have been punished more heavily.
Click to expand...
Yes you would think that points deductions on first instance and maybe a demotion if it happened again would cause the clubs to think twice about doing it, rather than fining a club that can basically print money!
 
Nobby_66 said:
Man City were fined £49m BUT got £33m back after agreeing to stick to the rules in future. So basically they got a £16m fine which is a drop in the ocean for them.
There were other sanctions involved but it hardly seems to have hindered them. I'd hazard a guess that a less desirable club would have been punished more heavily.
Click to expand...

In early FFP there were about a dozen smaller clubs who broke the rules and were banned from the next season's Europa Cup. Or it might have been the next time they qualified. I'm not sure. Quite a few also had their prize money withheld and given as a bonus to the other clubs who had not broken the rules.

Generally if a team breaks the rules, the following punishments happen:

a) Reduction of the playing squad for the following tournament. I read that the number of allowable squad members named is based upon the most number of players that could be picked and still fall under a certain % of turnover.

b) A fine that is supposed to be a percentage of the overspend.

Beyond reading articles in the newspapers, it is difficult to work out what the formulas used by UEFA actually is, but apparently there is some hidden maths that should be used when punishing. There does seem to be a certain level of punishment being on suspended basis with the full punishment only kicking in if the club reoffends.
 
Hmm I doubt those directors found it light and £20M of real money is serious for a championship club. I think it's light when you look at the treatment of smaller clubs but that has always been the case.
 
DurhamGills said:
Regardless - dont get to excited about the money as most of it will just go into the day to day running of the club
Click to expand...
How do those maths work? Let’s say £3.75 mill over 3-4 seasons. Next summer we surely won’t have the level of debt (which we don’t have/debt to Three Directors). We won’t have court fees. The conference/banqueting will be making a profit if you believe Scally’s words at last season’s Forum. We’ll have a portion of the Egan fee.

That’s all whilst predicting no other fees incoming.
 
Trev_GFC said:
How do those maths work? Let’s say £3.75 mill over 3-4 seasons. Next summer we surely won’t have the level of debt (which we don’t have/debt to Three Directors). We won’t have court fees. The conference/banqueting will be making a profit if you believe Scally’s words at last season’s Forum. We’ll have a portion of the Egan fee.

That’s all whilst predicting no other fees incoming.
Click to expand...

The key word on my statement is "most".

May get a increase of 10 or 15% in the players budget but no more - dont forget you have to be able to sustain that budget for years to be able to afford the players salary and bonuses for the length of his contract.
 
DurhamGills said:
The key word on my statement is "most".

May get a increase of 10 or 15% in the players budget but no more - dont forget you have to be able to sustain that budget for years to be able to afford the players salary and bonuses for the length of his contract.
Click to expand...
Any chance of us getting up to £3m playing budget?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.