Brooks sell-on fee?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?




they value him at £40m so if it's £8m we get it will pay for some of the players
 
Well that's a more decent amount than I'd imagined.

If Bournemouth hadn't gone down they probably would have got double that for him :( (maybe not quite, and maybe they wouldn't have sold)
 
Read an article t'other week that was sort of suggesting 10%, but it read as if he was like me................................guessing
 
Anything on top of our transfer budget is a nice bonus and could be the difference in us being able to get our targets. Hopefully there will be a bidding war amongst the clubs who want him.
 
AdamSufc1997 said:
they value him at £40m so if it's £8m we get it will pay for some of the players
Click to expand...
If they sell for £40m that will be £28m profit. 20% of that is £5.6m.

I would be surprised if they get £40m all up front for him. We might get £2.5m from the up front fee. Better than a kick in the teeth but nothing game changing.
 



A couple of years ago in League one we were looking at these sell-on clauses as game-changing.

Now we're in the Premier league we're treating them with far less interest.
 
If they sell Brooks, we could be buying ramsdale (do we also have a % in?) at a major cut price. Maybe why they’re holding out for much more
 
Where’s the £40m bit come from? It just said clubs were interested. They might be interested for £10m.
 
If we buy Brooks back, what happens to the sell on clause? Discounted from the agreed purchase price I should imagine.
 
1066blade said:
If we buy Brooks back, what happens to the sell on clause? Discounted from the agreed purchase price I should imagine.
Click to expand...
Yup, but we won't be spending that kind of money on someone who currently has significant injury concerns and doesn't fit our system anyway.
Without those, and the relegation we could have been looking at a much more significant return.
I seriously doubt Liverpool will be looking at him, particularly at £35m as they just don't have that money, especially given the squad they have and kids like Elliott pretty much ready to come through.
Spurs? He is a Jose kinda player? I can't see it.
Everton, Newcastle, Palace if Zaha goes is most likely his level, but I can only see Everton paying as much as £35M. Dark horses maybe Leicester if they lose a couple of players but again I can't see them paying £35M for him.
 
Last edited:
Ranmoorblade said:
Think it would be 20% on the profit, so £5.6million with a profit of £28 million.
Click to expand...

I see this mentioned quite a bit on here, and only on here, as though sell-on clauses aren’t any longer based on the overall fee. A % of the profit from everything I can gather from what I’ve read on transfer deals is the much rarer version of the two – I think we had this for Maguire for example re: 10% of any profit. We got £4.5m from the Walker deal which was in contrast 10% of the overall fee. It totally depends on what was negotiated between the clubs at the time of the original deal.
 
LoughboroBlade said:
I see this mentioned quite a bit on here, and only on here, as though sell-on clauses aren’t any longer based on the overall fee. A % of the profit from everything I can gather from what I’ve read on transfer deals is the much rarer version of the two – I think we had this for Maguire for example re: 10% of any profit. We got £4.5m from the Walker deal which was in contrast 10% of the overall fee. It totally depends on what was negotiated between the clubs at the time of the original deal.
Click to expand...

Let's hope we drafted Terry Robinson in for the Brooks deal then ;)
 
How does this happen ?
He's barely played, injury prone, plays for what was the smallest club in the Premier League, who have just got relegated.

If he'd been with us and had a half decent season he'd have been worth £15 million tops
 
JJBlade said:
How does this happen ?
He's barely played, injury prone, plays for what was the smallest club in the Premier League, who have just got relegated.

If he'd been with us and had a half decent season he'd have been worth £15 million tops
Click to expand...

He played 30 in his first season and nominated for PFA young player. I don't buy paper talk fees but 15 million doesn't even get you a championship proven striker.....
 
Berkshire Blade said:
He played 30 in his first season and nominated for PFA young player. I don't buy paper talk fees but 15 million doesn't even get you a championship proven striker.....
Click to expand...

About a quarter of it will get Premier League Lundstram though
 



Berkshire Blade said:
Yes. A player with his contract up soon and not a starter. Hardly like for like
Click to expand...


We're not really going to bring the short contract up again are we ?
It doesn't work anywhere else regarding cheap prices.

Lundstram has probably played as many Premier league games as Brooks in one season as Brooks has played in two, he's done more, achieved more and is one of our first team regulars regardless of what anybody thinks. Brooks is a Championship player at the moment, Lundstram is a Premier League player at the moment.

We'll get £3 million for Lundstram, they're asking £40 million for Brooks, it doesn't add up whichever way it's spun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NAnstonblade
There's more to life...?
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
Iron blade
Iron blade
B
We’re a selling club - but are we a good one?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Old Programme seller
Old Programme seller
Lmaobob
‘Undisclosed’ fees + Unknown Wages
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
VictoryBlade
VictoryBlade
BazWainwright
The right formation, with what we have ...
Replies
15
Views
893
Guiseley Blade
G
G
Two for George
Replies
20
Views
4K
from Sheffield - Doo Dah
from Sheffield - Doo Dah

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom