£65m Harry Maguire

[Basing Blade]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/foot...y-maguire-transfer-manchester-united-12964183

 

[Barney]

I hope we've got a 3rd sell on clause.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

I hope we've got a 3rd sell on clause.

As sweet as that would be, I'm not sure that would even be legally permissible in contract law. Unless of course McCabe learnt from the Tevez Affair and had retained some kind of third party ownership....

 

[Barney]

As sweet as that would be, I'm not sure that would even be legally permissible in contract law.

I know mate, I was taking the piss.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

I know mate, I was taking the piss.

Some will still blame McCabe...

 

[Boxer Blade]

Some will still blame McCabe...

And the Prince, don't forget the prince

 

[Dave]

As sweet as that would be, I'm not sure that would even be legally permissible in contract law. Unless of course McCabe learnt from the Tevez Affair and had retained some kind of third party ownership....

Not 100%. Clubs can include a sell on profit attached to a player. So we could have had a clause in the contract from his Hull days stating that if Leicester sell him, we get a % of profit from the transfer that hull make. It usually is small. But better than nothing.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

Not 100%. Clubs can include a sell on profit attached to a player. So we could have had a clause in the contract from his Hull days stating that if Leicester sell him, we get a % of profit from the transfer that hull make. It usually is small. But better than nothing.

I'm not convinced. Surely that would come under the Third Party ownership issue? Can't see how we'd have any claim. If you were buying and selling a car or house, the previous owners wouldn't have any claim on a fee further down the chain. Surely once that player has been sold once, all previous contractually obligations are annulled?

 

[Dave]

I'm not convinced. Surely that would come under the Third Party ownership issue? Can't see how we'd have any claim. If you were buying and selling a car or house, the previous owners wouldn't have any claim on a fee further down the chain. Surely once that player has been sold once, all previous contractually obligations are annulled?

Its not third party ownership. It's taking a % of the profit Hull make when selling a player. Can be written into any football contract

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

Its not third party ownership. It's taking a % of the profit Hull make when selling a player. Can be written into any football contract

But this would be Leicester making a profit?

 

[SandyMcBlade]

Just shows though dun it, he'd have been better of staying we us.....

 

[SuperDuperBlades]

Great player. Nice bloke. God luck to him.

 

[mancunianblade]

But this would be Leicester making a profit?

But Hull would also have a sell on clause if they have anything about them. I mean i very much doubt it as we won’t have this clause but that’s what he’s gettin at.. unless it’s all considered part of the fee..

If we do and Hull have a 25% sell on.......

 

[YES Blade]

But Hull would also have a sell on clause if they have anything about them. I mean it’s irrelevant as we don’t need have this clause but that’s what he’s gettin at

I’ve never heard of a club getting a percentage of a sell on clause fee, I would have thought it’s written into contracts that when a player is sold the sell on clause fee is the final payment. If that makes sense

 

[norfolkblade]

But this would be Leicester making a profit?

Would indeed but if Hull have a sell on clause (likely) they'll also then make additional profit on the transfer. This is where we could still have an active clause in the sale contract but who knows, would be nice!

 

[Cerberus Blade]

As sweet as that would be, I'm not sure that would even be legally permissible in contract law. Unless of course McCabe learnt from the Tevez Affair and had retained some kind of third party ownership....

GLTTL!

I am looking forward to seeing Brooks join a big Premiership club too in the future for an even bigger amount.

 

[Tray]

I might be wrong, but don't we get a small percentage of any fee for him as he was trained by us as a youngster?

 

[Eric Cartman]

A sell of profit percentage is a very real thing, but not too common. I know Chesterfield included one when they sold us Jamie Ward. So if we'd sold him somewhere and that team then sold him on for a profit (which didn't happen) Chesterfield would've been entitled to a chunk of our profit.

It's just a link to the club you're selling to in reality, it's the equivalent to them including a sell on but the money goes straight to the club who included the clause.

 

[Inter_blade83]

Would indeed but if Hull have a sell on clause (likely) they'll also then make additional profit on the transfer. This is where we could still have an active clause in the sale contract but who knows, would be nice!

Anyone that's played football manager would know that there is an overall agreement to filter the money down. It's not a lot though.

 

[mancunianblade]

I’ve never heard of a club getting a percentage of a sell on clause fee, I would have thought it’s written into contracts that when a player is sold the sell on clause fee is the final payment. If that makes sense

To be honest i don’t think I’ve ever heard of it either. I’d presume once payment is made that the chapter closed but I guess in theory now with fees being so high it will become a thing.

I mean if Hull stuck a 20% sell on clause in the contract the fee Leicester end up paying Hull would pretty much double from £12m to £24m

 

[YES Blade]

To be honest i don’t think I’ve ever heard of it either. I’d presume once payment is made that the chapter closed but I guess in theory now with fees being so high it will become a thing.

I mean if Hull stuck a 20% sell on clause in the contract the fee Leicester end up paying Hull would pretty much double from £12m to £24m

Good point about higher fees, 10 years ago a secondary sell on fee might only be worth say £50k so wasn’t widely reported but now days it could be £1m plus so it’s bigger news.

I still would have thought we would of heard of it even if it was a small fee, so I’m not optimistic of us getting another penny for Harry.

 

[S64 Blade]

Not sure Man Utd would be the best move for him.

Mourinho is increasingly abbrasive and seems to struggle getting the best out of players (see Rashford).

 

[Sean Thornton]

if the player has a dog that is allowed in the ground at any of the three clubs, is it counted in the attendance in all of them?

 

[Chali 2na]

Not sure Man Utd would be the best move for him.

Mourinho is increasingly abbrasive and seems to struggle getting the best out of players (see Rashford).

Can't see Mourinho being there that much longer to be honest.

 

[bornablade]

It would be more than annoying if Adkins received the sell on fee and used it to produce a promotion winning team.

 

[Living In a Fantasy World]

Great player. Nice bloke. God luck to him.

God luck to him indeed if he goes to man u

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

Can’t see why we would get a penny. I’m not holding out for one anyway.

And to think we sold him for about £3m.

 

[mancunianblade]

Good point about higher fees, 10 years ago a secondary sell on fee might only be worth say £50k so wasn’t widely reported but now days it could be £1m plus so it’s bigger news.

I still would have thought we would of heard of it even if it was a small fee, so I’m not optimistic of us getting another penny for Harry.

I doubt we would to be honest, but unless there is fine print in the agreement stating it doesn't include any future fees I guess clubs could be exposed to legal claims. I mean what is the norm here? Maguire fee was £12m rising to £17m what did we get paid out on? the initial fee £12m

 

[bornablade]

How much could they have picked him up for if they'd signed him after the FA Youth cup final?

We all knew he was something special but the powers that be at Old Trafford obviously couldn't see it.

 

[broomhillblade]

Harry seems to be a nice bloke and a decent footballer. However, £65 million for any human being is a joke. After all, the human body is made up of 60% water (not 90% - that's a myth).

That's very expensive water.