Teasy Posted Sunday at 14:46 Share Posted Sunday at 14:46 4 minutes ago, nufc123 said: If the clause is low we dont have a choice. What do you mean I'd the clause is low? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiotes Witch Doctor Posted Sunday at 14:46 Share Posted Sunday at 14:46 Could we not have found out about this before we entered negotiations isn't that usually common practice nowadays? Especially if the deals have been lined up for months? It could be bollocks though I suppose, the same sources were all saying it was set be announced yesterday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted Sunday at 14:47 Share Posted Sunday at 14:47 2 minutes ago, duo said: Can't build any sort of foundation that way though - loans are just a short term fix. Would assume take him some time to get used to the league as well. But in that scenario, he has got used to the league, as Real Madrid want to sign him I don't think a release clause that applies to only the biggest club in the world (and may not even exist in the first place) is worth being worried about, tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted Sunday at 14:49 Share Posted Sunday at 14:49 2 minutes ago, Geordie Magpie said: I've saw no source but it's very common practice in Spanish football co ownership and if Madrid were allowed to add a clause like that into the contract ( which as it stands is just rumours) then it would point to that being the case here. Some sites so seem to be claiming they own 50%. IF that's true then they do obviously have some leverage. Still don't believe we'd agree to allow them to ask for him back at any time in the first year for what we paid for him. That would be madness. But maybe a higher fixed fee of we decide to sell on the first year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duo Posted Sunday at 14:50 Share Posted Sunday at 14:50 Just now, Andy said: But in that scenario, he has got used to the league, as Real Madrid want to sign him I don't think a release clause that applies to only the biggest club in the world (and may not even exist in the first place) is worth being worried about, tbh. My point is it'll take time for him to get up to speed so if we only get to have him for the season we may not see much benefit before Real buy back for the same price. We're back to square one without making anything from the transfer for the time/effort Eddie and his staff will no doubt put into the lad. I am not against a release clause it's the amount - have it so at least the club gets some financial benefit should Real want him back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted Sunday at 14:53 Share Posted Sunday at 14:53 6 minutes ago, Geordie Magpie said: I've saw no source but it's very common practice in Spanish football co ownership and if Madrid were allowed to add a clause like that into the contract ( which as it stands is just rumours) then it would point to that being the case here. Wait a minute. I remember co-ownership has been banned by FIFA for long. In the past Juventus was the one that play this trick most in Europe, and now they basically have none, for nearly a decade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted Sunday at 14:53 Share Posted Sunday at 14:53 Just got to trust that Wilson and the people at the top understand what they’re doing. We’re having to play a game this window that sees us fighting for top developing talents and we don’t really have the bargaining position to dictate terms. If we can get this window right then it’ll make it so much easier for us to manage future windows on our terms. Might be some more short-term pain but I think our approach is spot on this window Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duo Posted Sunday at 14:54 Share Posted Sunday at 14:54 1 hour ago, The Prophet said: @Dr Venkman 🤷♂️ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted Sunday at 14:54 Share Posted Sunday at 14:54 2 minutes ago, Andy said: But in that scenario, he has got used to the league, as Real Madrid want to sign him I don't think a release clause that applies to only the biggest club in the world (and may not even exist in the first place) is worth being worried about, tbh. Doesn't have to get used to it straight away. He could have a decent second half to the season and be worth much more than 30m Euros. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG Posted Sunday at 14:57 Share Posted Sunday at 14:57 Might be the right time for Wilson to walk away from the club. Real Madrid clrarly don't respect him and are taking us for mugs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted Sunday at 14:57 Share Posted Sunday at 14:57 I get the feeling that if RM had a buy back clause, the likes of Romano would be shouting it from the rooftops already. Assuming the clause is true, the only reason RM would bother their arse with him is if he had a good season for us, which means he's been a success, so not ideal, but still a deal worth doing IMO. Anything to keep the jokers we currently have on the wings away from the starting line up is a bonus for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiotes Witch Doctor Posted Sunday at 14:58 Share Posted Sunday at 14:58 Does this mean if he absolutely smashes it from day 1 they could buy him back in January? I don't like the sound of this deal it makes us seem small and weak, only worth considering if the release is at least double the transfer fee, but I just don't like it at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted Sunday at 15:00 Share Posted Sunday at 15:00 Owning 50% of the player and owning 50% of the next transfer fee are entirely different things. We dont have to agree jack shit with real madrid. Osasuna have an obligation to inform madrid of a sale and give them half the fee. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted Sunday at 15:06 Share Posted Sunday at 15:06 4 minutes ago, STM said: Owning 50% of the player and owning 50% of the next transfer fee are entirely different things. We dont have to agree jack shit with real madrid. Osasuna have an obligation to inform madrid of a sale and give them half the fee. We have no idea what obligation Osasuna have or what their terms with Madrid are. If this clause is real and ends up in the contract, then I'd be pretty confident that it was the only option that existed to get the deal done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted Sunday at 15:09 Share Posted Sunday at 15:09 The clause is kind of irrelevant regardless, if Real wanted him next summer, they would get him clause or no clause. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiotes Witch Doctor Posted Sunday at 15:12 Share Posted Sunday at 15:12 2 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said: The clause is kind of irrelevant regardless, if Real wanted him next summer, they would get him clause or no clause. Yeah but we could set the price, so not irrelevant at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fak Posted Sunday at 15:13 Share Posted Sunday at 15:13 Just now, Tiotes Witch Doctor said: Yeah but we could set the price, so not irrelevant at all. Do we not set the price in this buy back clause? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted Sunday at 15:26 Share Posted Sunday at 15:26 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Fak said: Do we not set the price in this buy back clause? Well people are claiming the price would be pre agreed. I don't believe a word of it mind. Unless it was a fee well above what we're paying and, as reported, only allowed in year one Edited Sunday at 15:27 by Teasy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted Sunday at 15:34 Share Posted Sunday at 15:34 32 minutes ago, STM said: Owning 50% of the player and owning 50% of the next transfer fee are entirely different things. We dont have to agree jack shit with real madrid. Osasuna have an obligation to inform madrid of a sale and give them half the fee. From what I can gather, split contract deals in Spain legally leave the primary club (Osasuna) owning the players full registration. The split only effects an obligation to give first refusal at a fixed fee and/or half the transfer fee to the secondary club. So no, even if it's technically split ownership it doesn't seem like any negotiating has to be done between the buying club and the secondary club (Real Madrid). Just as far as I can work out anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERTOON Posted Sunday at 15:36 Share Posted Sunday at 15:36 23 minutes ago, Tiotes Witch Doctor said: Yeah but we could set the price, so not irrelevant at all. Of course, but we won't agree to a really low fee so it is irrelevant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiotes Witch Doctor Posted Sunday at 15:37 Share Posted Sunday at 15:37 23 minutes ago, Fak said: Do we not set the price in this buy back clause? That's the question isn't it, but currently we want something from them so I'd be more inclined to think they would call the shots, but I suppose we could always walk away if it took the piss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordiesteve710 Posted Sunday at 15:54 Share Posted Sunday at 15:54 1 hour ago, duo said: Can't build any sort of foundation that way though - loans are just a short term fix. Would assume take him some time to get used to the league as well. We would be taking the risk if he's a flop but without any financial upside if he isn't. Let some other mug play that game and move on imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted Sunday at 16:01 Share Posted Sunday at 16:01 6 minutes ago, geordiesteve710 said: We would be taking the risk if he's a flop but without any financial upside if he isn't. Let some other mug play that game and move on imo. There's a massive gulf between being a flop and Real Madrid wanting to follow through on signing him like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crayola Kid Posted Sunday at 16:04 Share Posted Sunday at 16:04 Does 12 months even give him enough time to get used to Eddie's methods and earn a few minutes on the pitch? February 2027 pre match press conference: "He's doing well, coming along nicely and we like him a lot'. Makes debut in May Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted Sunday at 16:08 Share Posted Sunday at 16:08 are people seriously having a wobble over losing a player we haven't even signed yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now