CONFIRMED Kean bryan

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

The new signing videos are like sumat a school student makes for an ICT project.

 

[Enigmatic]

Even if we don't want to sell? So a good few months and they could buy him back in January?

Yep. The clause lets them purchase him back at any given time for a set price.

But given that it's a free transfer initially, and they own the sell-on clause, whatever the agreed fee is would effectively be pure profit for us.

Suppose it happens, they buy him back in two years time, and the clause is ~ £8 million. They would effectively have sent him on a 2 year loan deal to us and paid us handsomely for the privilege.

 

[Maidenhead]

They can buy him during any transfer window for the pre-agreed price.

I would think they have a first option at a fixed price if we want to sell.

I can't see that they can legally force us to sell if we don't want to, or we may be looking at a very dodgy contract which is effectively an unlimited loan agreement unless there is a minimum/maximum time stipulation in the buy back clause.

Whatever the case the lad will have to be absolutely brilliant for City to want him back in competition with Real, Barca etc because if he aint at that standard, City won't want him.

 

[Plymouthblade]

Welcome keen Brian UTB

 

[sitwell]

Typical United fans ,we have an unbelievable week of transfers ,yet all some want to do is moan about the managers mate going on twitter ,the fucking music on the signing on video and a few spelling mistakes or grammatical errors. Get a fucking life or a different hobby.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Welcome keen Brian UTB

Keith Bryan.

 

[Houso]

While the free transfers with hefty sell-on is relatively unusual, first refusal is far from it.

Obviously just got to hope it's not too low an agreed price.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Typical United fans ,we have an unbelievable week of transfers ,yet all some want to do is moan about the managers mate going on twitter ,the fucking music on the signing on video and a few spelling mistakes or grammatical errors. Get a fucking life or a different hobby.

Sitters - go and have a cuppa and chill for 10 minutes

You should know by now what Blades are like.

UTB

 

[Sean Thornton]

Great news. With this being a free it means all the proceeds from the JOC sale can be re invested..........................
.

The full twenty million?

 

[Rusty view]

The full twenty million?

Yep. Sod the debts, the up keep, the gas and "leccy, Bills etc. Lets blow the lot!

 

[DazBlade88]

Even if we don't want to sell? So a good few months and they could buy him back in January?

What Enigmatic said.

I would think they have a first option at a fixed price if we want to sell.

I can't see that they can legally force us to sell if we don't want to, or we may be looking at a very dodgy contract which is effectively an unlimited loan agreement unless there is a minimum/maximum time stipulation in the buy back clause.

Whatever the case the lad will have to be absolutely brilliant for City to want him back in competition with Real, Barca etc because if he aint at that standard, City won't want him.

They'll have a first option too I would imagine.

The buy back clause is very popular with the top clubs. We agree the price now (and it won't be low) and it'll have an expiry date too.

Barcelona have them on the likes of Deulofeu, Adama Traore and Chelsea will have them on Chalobah and Ake. It's very rare that they get taken up but as you say, he'd have to be unbelievable for us for them to want him back in a few years.

 

[Deadbat]

The new signing videos are like sumat a school student makes for an ICT project.

They are not even that good. Year 7 kids in my school could make far better...that music!

 

[Ricky]

The problem with a buy back clause is that they're likely to buy him back if they can make a profit on him. Which would leave us helpless and forced to sell for much less than he's worth.

He could prove to be worth £8m but we could be forced to sell for £3m for example.

If his value exceeds the agreed buy back price, there's no doubt Man City will activate it.

 

[Keef Chedwyn]

Typical United fans ,we have an unbelievable week of transfers ,yet all some want to do is moan about the managers mate going on twitter ,the fucking music on the signing on video and a few spelling mistakes or grammatical errors. Get a fucking life or a different hobby.

This kid is going to be shitter than Jasper Johns.

 

[sitwell]

The problem with a buy back clause is that they're likely to buy him back if they can make a profit on him. Which would leave us helpless and forced to sell for much less than he's worth.

He could prove to be worth £8m but we could be forced to sell for £3m for example.

If his value exceeds the agreed buy back price, there's no doubt Man City will activate it.

If he proves his worth to be 8 million we will have had a hell of a couple of seasons from a centre half who cost nothing ,hardly a problem.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

If he proves his worth to be 8 million we will have had a hell of a couple of seasons from a centre half who cost nothing ,hardly a problem.

Wonder how the players contract works in this situation. Surely he's in a position to say - nah, I'm happy staying here etc. Unless the contract is with the club and player.

 

[Bristol Blade]

I would think they have a first option at a fixed price if we want to sell.

I can't see that they can legally force us to sell if we don't want to, or we may be looking at a very dodgy contract which is effectively an unlimited loan agreement unless there is a minimum/maximum time stipulation in the buy back clause.

Whatever the case the lad will have to be absolutely brilliant for City to want him back in competition with Real, Barca etc because if he aint at that standard, City won't want him.

I think it’s quite common practice. Real Madrid buying back Morata from Juve, and Barcelona buying back Deulofeu from Everton are the highest profile examples I can think of from recent years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40461183

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/jun/21/real-madrid-alvaro-morata-juventus-buy-back

And even if he’s never good enough for Man City, they could still buy him back knowing that they could then immediately sell him on at a higher price. Edit: see Ricky’s post above.

 

[DazBlade88]

The problem with a buy back clause is that they're likely to buy him back if they can make a profit on him. Which would leave us helpless and forced to sell for much less than he's worth.

He could prove to be worth £8m but we could be forced to sell for £3m for example.

If his value exceeds the agreed buy back price, there's no doubt Man City will activate it.

Don't forget we'll be heavily involved in agreeing the price. It'll be substantial.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

They are not even that good. Year 7 kids in my school could make far better...that music!

I thought we’d upped our social media game a little a year ago, but I think at some point this year we’ve gone in a bit of a different (and shitter) creative direction, which is a bit of a shame.

 

[Ricky]

If he proves his worth to be 8 million we will have had a hell of a couple of seasons from a centre half who cost nothing ,hardly a problem.

A nice problem, but one you'd prefer not to have.

Depends how much it would've cost to get him without these clauses.

Looks like a good deal for both clubs. City have been smart I think.

 

[ZoneManWilf]

Yep. The clause lets them purchase him back at any given time for a set price.

But given that it's a free transfer initially, and they own the sell-on clause, whatever the agreed fee is would effectively be pure profit for us.

Suppose it happens, they buy him back in two years time, and the clause is ~ £8 million. They would effectively have sent him on a 2 year loan deal to us and paid us handsomely for the privilege.

Exactly, it's basically a 2 year loan deal. Where we probably get to keep him at the end, but city might pay to take him back if they deem him worth big money or if he might be part of their squad.

 

[Steve Mackan]

I hope this lad is the defensive anchor man that can play as a one, meaning we could vary our predictable midfield triangle a touch.

 

[Esablade]

I thought we’d upped our social media game a little a year ago, but I think at some point this year we’ve gone in a bit of a different (and shitter) creative direction, which is a bit of a shame.

Who does this work?
Is it all ‘in-house’??

The new one’s do look shit...

 

[BigBed]

PACE PACE PACE....looks quite spritely, and I can see Stevens having to battle for his starts after watching n listening to this lad!

 

[SuperDuperBlades]

Just an extra striker then we will piss this League.

 

[Geordie Blade]

Can we have some wild speculation on the sell-on fee? I'm going 50%

I heard it's 110%.

The problem with a buy back clause is that they're likely to buy him back if they can make a profit on him. Which would leave us helpless and forced to sell for much less than he's worth.

He could prove to be worth £8m but we could be forced to sell for £3m for example.

If his value exceeds the agreed buy back price, there's no doubt Man City will activate it.

Can we have some wild speculation on the sell-on fee? I'm going 50%

It would be interesting if there's a buy-back clause and a sell-on fee. It would mean that, for Ricky's suggestion to work out, the profit (after all expenses, etc.) would have to be more than the sell-on fee in order to tempt them to trigger the buy back. Say the buy back fee is £4m, and the sell on is 25%. That would mean that, if he's eventually worth £6m, I doubt that they'd bother with the buy back. They'd get £1.5m from the sell on, but would make £2.0m minus agents' fees (twice) from the buy back, so almost certainly not worth it.

If [P(W) - P(BB)] - [p(SO) x P(W)] > 2 x [F(A)], then they'd activate the buy back

Where:
P(W) = Price player is worth
P(BB) = Agreed buy back fee
p(SO) = Proportion as sell on fee
F(A) = Agents' fees

Actually, when I say "It would be interesting...", it isn't.

 

[BushBlade]

A nice problem, but one you'd prefer not to have.

Depends how much it would've cost to get him without these clauses.

Looks like a good deal for both clubs. City have been smart I think.

City are run by the blokes who ran Barca when they were outstanding, Begiristain etc. They’re very smart. By having a good sell on clause and a buy back option, they can’t really lose out. But providing the buy back is reasonably high, we won’t either.

Say the buy back fee is £10m and he ends up being rated at £15m, they could re-sign him and sell him on. But if they get, say 30% of the transfer fee, they’d be getting close to £5m anyway, even if he went to Spurs or Bournemouth. And either way, we’d still get around £10m for developing him.

 

[blackydog]

Exactly, it's basically a 2 year loan deal. Where we probably get to keep him at the end, but city might pay to take him back if they deem him worth big money or if he might be part of their squad.

Are you using this as an example or have you seen 2 years written into the deal officially?

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Who does this work?
Is it all ‘in-house’??

The new one’s do look shit...

A lot of clubs outsource it these days. I’d be surprised if this current offering wasn’t an in-house job...

 

[Topplayersleave]

Dont know much about him but heard good things.
Man City must be very confident that we'll sell him for a massive fee in the future otherwise they'd sell him now.

Just one thing though
It could get a bit messy if City want him back ?