because its a rule in spain and not anywhere else by and large
its not really a rule, its just something they do
Yes but nothing preventing our sides doing it is there ?
So can put huge clauses in to scare predators away for example.
comment by Dink Dunk, Donk, Denk and Dank and also now regrettably DOINK!!!! (U11713)
posted 2 minutes ago
its not really a rule, its just something they do
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it is a rule, every contract has to include a release clause
Why would having a buyout clause scare teams away?
are you sure about that, i mean... really sure
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 15 seconds ago
Why would having a buyout clause scare teams away?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obvious isn't it ?!! eg. Memphis buy-out clause included tomorrow say for £50m is going to scare all teams off more or less
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
Every contract probably has a set buy-out clause of a certain amount depending on the length of the contract...and probably another clause that says something like 'or a buy-out amount agreed between two parties' or something like that.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 56 seconds ago
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends how big the clause is and how much the other club are willing to pay again obviously.
Neymar has £140m say so only the likes of United, City, Chelsea could get anywhere near it
comment by Leiva la Vegeta Lucas {Proud owner of the 5 00... (U2720)
posted 29 seconds ago
Every contract probably has a set buy-out clause of a certain amount depending on the length of the contract...and probably another clause that says something like 'or a buy-out amount agreed between two parties' or something like that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they don't in this country. If you trigger the buy-out clause my understanding is you can then talk to the player. Obviously the club still has the last say I think.
No not if a team wants to sign him.
Having a buyout clause weakens your position. Having a ludicrous buyout clause such as the ones Messi and Ronaldo have don't mean anything as no club will meet that valuation anyway.
In the event of either of those players being transferred it would be far below the release clause.
Lots of clubs sell players below their release clause, especially in Spain where they are mandatory.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 2 minutes ago
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh I think you'll find Arsenal bid over and above the supposed clause. 1 quid
Saying that, why would your average player agree to a release clause of 10s of millions? Surely it'd limit their ability to move on to bigger and better things. The player would be restricting themselves and only the club would benefit.
Release clauses are so complicated, it's not just simply paying the fee. The player has to agree to the move, then there are tax issues involved. Herrera was an example of that.
Only because Bilbao are notoriously difficult to negotiate with.
Most Spanish clubs settle on the fee that the clause is set at to avoid the hassle.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 6 minutes ago
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It wasn't the concept of clauses that was ignored, that specific clause was just worded so poorly it was basically meaningless. They met the number, but all the clause said was we had to rub our chins and say "that's a tempting offfer... but no thanks you tosssers"
There are clauses written by people with a full set of chromosomes that actually have some teeth.
Kaiser
Is that true? What I heard was that your owner Henry realised the meaningless of 'release clauses' in this country and that there was nothing legally binding in them. So even if a club did match it you could just ignore it and that goes for all release clauses.
Kaiser is spot on. The Suarez clause was that we would notify him of any offer over x amount and consider it.
Then ignore it.
Manfrombelmonty
Really? What was the f-cking point of that then? Have Liverpool never included a release clause before or was this added by request of Suarez and his people?
Yeah apparently it's a legal thing and why they have them in Spain and we don't.
depends on how pedantic you want to be about certain quotes.
One thing is defintely true - whoever wrote Suarez's clause had a law degree from a primary school. The PFA's lawyers looked at it and came back immedaitely with the response "sorry Luis, you're feckked mate. this thing is horrid and non binding". IT was completely shiite as far as clauses go, possibly the worst ever.
The other side is that Henry did say that clauses in general had limited enforceability as far as he was concerned. Would he defy a well written clause? maybe, maybe not.
@FootballLaw: Release, buy-out & buy-back clauses explained. http://t.co/KLRSUGfF5H & http://t.co/cFpicsoprB http://t.co/vU60CZpMXb
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 12 minutes ago
....One thing is defintely true - whoever wrote Suarez's clause had a law degree from a primary school. The PFA's lawyers looked at it and came back immedaitely with the response "sorry Luis, you're feckked mate. this thing is horrid and non binding". IT was completely shiite as far as clauses go, possibly the worst ever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I see it as having been written by someone quite clever, in that they fooled Luis and his agent into thinking there was a clause which meant we had to sell him at £40 mill+. Whereas actually we only had to inform them of the offer, but not necessarily accept it. So to me, it was actually very clever.
Release clauses are a legal requirement in Spain.
Initially clubs used to set clauses they considered impossible to meet. Nowadays, however, it's hard to find such outrageous clauses because the law was amended to oblige clubs to link the amount in the clause to the player's wages.
Why don't English clubs include clauses systematically?
Because they rarely favour the club and more often than not play into the footballer's hands. If another club meets the clause, the club is powerless to stop the player from leaving.
It's especially the case in Spain with the less wealthy clubs, or even some of the "Tier 2" clubs wishing to attract bigger names. They'll often agree to set a relatively modest clause in order to convince a player to sign, then lose them for less than they'd fetch in the open market if they held any bargaining power.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Contract buy-out clauses ?
Page 1 of 1
posted on 1/9/15
because its a rule in spain and not anywhere else by and large
posted on 1/9/15
its not really a rule, its just something they do
posted on 1/9/15
Yes but nothing preventing our sides doing it is there ?
So can put huge clauses in to scare predators away for example.
posted on 1/9/15
comment by Dink Dunk, Donk, Denk and Dank and also now regrettably DOINK!!!! (U11713)
posted 2 minutes ago
its not really a rule, its just something they do
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it is a rule, every contract has to include a release clause
posted on 1/9/15
Why would having a buyout clause scare teams away?
posted on 1/9/15
are you sure about that, i mean... really sure
posted on 1/9/15
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 15 seconds ago
Why would having a buyout clause scare teams away?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obvious isn't it ?!! eg. Memphis buy-out clause included tomorrow say for £50m is going to scare all teams off more or less
posted on 1/9/15
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
posted on 1/9/15
Every contract probably has a set buy-out clause of a certain amount depending on the length of the contract...and probably another clause that says something like 'or a buy-out amount agreed between two parties' or something like that.
posted on 1/9/15
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 56 seconds ago
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends how big the clause is and how much the other club are willing to pay again obviously.
Neymar has £140m say so only the likes of United, City, Chelsea could get anywhere near it
posted on 1/9/15
comment by Leiva la Vegeta Lucas {Proud owner of the 5 00... (U2720)
posted 29 seconds ago
Every contract probably has a set buy-out clause of a certain amount depending on the length of the contract...and probably another clause that says something like 'or a buy-out amount agreed between two parties' or something like that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they don't in this country. If you trigger the buy-out clause my understanding is you can then talk to the player. Obviously the club still has the last say I think.
posted on 1/9/15
No not if a team wants to sign him.
Having a buyout clause weakens your position. Having a ludicrous buyout clause such as the ones Messi and Ronaldo have don't mean anything as no club will meet that valuation anyway.
In the event of either of those players being transferred it would be far below the release clause.
Lots of clubs sell players below their release clause, especially in Spain where they are mandatory.
posted on 1/9/15
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 2 minutes ago
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh I think you'll find Arsenal bid over and above the supposed clause. 1 quid
Saying that, why would your average player agree to a release clause of 10s of millions? Surely it'd limit their ability to move on to bigger and better things. The player would be restricting themselves and only the club would benefit.
posted on 1/9/15
Release clauses are so complicated, it's not just simply paying the fee. The player has to agree to the move, then there are tax issues involved. Herrera was an example of that.
posted on 1/9/15
Only because Bilbao are notoriously difficult to negotiate with.
Most Spanish clubs settle on the fee that the clause is set at to avoid the hassle.
posted on 1/9/15
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 6 minutes ago
Well Liverpool had a clause and then went and completely ignored it when Arsenal matched it.
Not really sure how much they deter other clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It wasn't the concept of clauses that was ignored, that specific clause was just worded so poorly it was basically meaningless. They met the number, but all the clause said was we had to rub our chins and say "that's a tempting offfer... but no thanks you tosssers"
There are clauses written by people with a full set of chromosomes that actually have some teeth.
posted on 1/9/15
Kaiser
Is that true? What I heard was that your owner Henry realised the meaningless of 'release clauses' in this country and that there was nothing legally binding in them. So even if a club did match it you could just ignore it and that goes for all release clauses.
posted on 1/9/15
Kaiser is spot on. The Suarez clause was that we would notify him of any offer over x amount and consider it.
Then ignore it.
posted on 1/9/15
Manfrombelmonty
Really? What was the f-cking point of that then? Have Liverpool never included a release clause before or was this added by request of Suarez and his people?
posted on 1/9/15
Yeah apparently it's a legal thing and why they have them in Spain and we don't.
posted on 1/9/15
depends on how pedantic you want to be about certain quotes.
One thing is defintely true - whoever wrote Suarez's clause had a law degree from a primary school. The PFA's lawyers looked at it and came back immedaitely with the response "sorry Luis, you're feckked mate. this thing is horrid and non binding". IT was completely shiite as far as clauses go, possibly the worst ever.
The other side is that Henry did say that clauses in general had limited enforceability as far as he was concerned. Would he defy a well written clause? maybe, maybe not.
posted on 1/9/15
Kaiser
Fair enough.
posted on 1/9/15
@FootballLaw: Release, buy-out & buy-back clauses explained. http://t.co/KLRSUGfF5H & http://t.co/cFpicsoprB http://t.co/vU60CZpMXb
posted on 1/9/15
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 12 minutes ago
....One thing is defintely true - whoever wrote Suarez's clause had a law degree from a primary school. The PFA's lawyers looked at it and came back immedaitely with the response "sorry Luis, you're feckked mate. this thing is horrid and non binding". IT was completely shiite as far as clauses go, possibly the worst ever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I see it as having been written by someone quite clever, in that they fooled Luis and his agent into thinking there was a clause which meant we had to sell him at £40 mill+. Whereas actually we only had to inform them of the offer, but not necessarily accept it. So to me, it was actually very clever.
posted on 2/9/15
Release clauses are a legal requirement in Spain.
Initially clubs used to set clauses they considered impossible to meet. Nowadays, however, it's hard to find such outrageous clauses because the law was amended to oblige clubs to link the amount in the clause to the player's wages.
Why don't English clubs include clauses systematically?
Because they rarely favour the club and more often than not play into the footballer's hands. If another club meets the clause, the club is powerless to stop the player from leaving.
It's especially the case in Spain with the less wealthy clubs, or even some of the "Tier 2" clubs wishing to attract bigger names. They'll often agree to set a relatively modest clause in order to convince a player to sign, then lose them for less than they'd fetch in the open market if they held any bargaining power.
Page 1 of 1