Callum O'Dowda - Leeds interest

Junior_1 said:
Eales sometimes took the extra money up front in return of a no future fee upon a sale. I know he did this on at least once occasion whilst I charge. Bonkers but that’s Eales.
Click to expand...

Snake in the grass. He's fucked us well and truly considering the high probability that the money is being used at Solihull as we speak...
 
Last edited:
LeftSideBoy said:
No sell on fee for Roofe? No way!? That has to be one of the worst business decisions we've made and my word have we made a lot of those...
Click to expand...
Didn't we get £3.5m for Roofe? A very good deal at the time.
As others have said we took a lot more up front instead of a sell on fee
Very easy to criticise but I am not sure that at the time anybody complained and DE seemed overall pretty good to me in getting the best deals for the club.
 
Foley said:
Didn't we get £3.5m for Roofe? A very good deal at the time.
As others have said we took a lot more up front instead of a sell on fee
Very easy to criticise but I am not sure that at the time anybody complained and DE seemed overall pretty good to me in getting the best deals for the club.
Click to expand...
Dave Jones negotiated the Roofe deal.
 
werthersoriginal said:
Since you’re all such experts it’s a shame you’re not in charge, isn’t it?
Click to expand...

Granted, we got a very decent fee for him when we first sold him but you don't have to be an expert to know that is a poor business decision. He was a valuable asset with huge potential and that potential is now being realised. So, why would you not include a sell on fee? Even a 10% sell on clause would be worth half of what we initially sold him for, given his current market value.
 
Last edited:
let's not get carried away here, he has hardly pulled up trees there prior to his current decent form and many Leeds fans thought he was shite.

i doubt anyone on here was even thinking of such clauses before the last month or 2
 
Junior_1 said:
Eales sometimes took the extra money up front in return of a no future fee upon a sale. I know he did this on at least once occasion whilst I charge. Bonkers but that’s Eales.
Click to expand...
Presumably a combination of getting cash in up front to meet the bills, and also when looking to sell the club then you maximise the assets you've got.
Sell on-clauses and potential valuable players in the future are difficult to value.

Remember he sold Johnson for £3million I think (no idea if a sell on clause too). Now was that a good deal, or did he shaft the club by not taking a lower fee and a sell-on clause?
Or should he have kept him at the club and not sold him at all?
 
horseman said:
let's not get carried away here, he has hardly pulled up trees there prior to his current decent form and many Leeds fans thought he was shite.

i doubt anyone on here was even thinking of such clauses before the last month or 2
Click to expand...

Of course? The potential was clear and these clauses should be almost mandatory when selling such a valued asset. If it doesn't work, nothing lost - If it does work and they sell him for a much bigger fee then you can't help but look at that figure and think about how useful a % of that would have been for us or, Solihull Motors...
 
Last edited:
LeftSideBoy said:
Of course? The potential was clear and these clauses should be almost mandatory when selling such a valued asset. If it doesn't work, nothing lost - If it does work and they sell him for a much bigger fee then you can't help but look at that figure and think about how useful a % of that would have been for us or, Solihull Motors...
Click to expand...
If you get a sell on clause then you would normally be paid less.
I can't remember anybody m9aning about the deal which looked to be a very good one at the time.
 
Foley said:
If you get a sell on clause then you would normally be paid less.
I can't remember anybody m9aning about the deal which looked to be a very good one at the time.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't necessarily say I'm moaning, It's just a bit of a shock that we didn't even include a 5/10% sell on clause which really, isn't that high when you consider the amount he would be sold for. Not the end of the world by any means, just surprising.
 
it was a record fee received by the club and you still moan! plus we were league 2 and just got promoted and possibly the larger amount up front was needed to fund being sustainable in league 1

We got a 30% sell on for COD so i am sure the club negotiated in both deals what was the best deal overall AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME.
 
LeftSideBoy said:
Granted, we got a very decent fee for him when we first sold him but you don't have to be an expert to know that is a poor business decision. He was a valuable asset with huge potential and that potential is now being realised. So, why would you not include a sell on fee? Even a 10% sell on clause would be worth half of what we initially sold him for, given his current market value.
Click to expand...
Plus, WBA got a wedge.
 
COD was younger and had international recognition, plus Bristol City would clearly be a stepping stone club for him, so smaller fee and 30% sell on seems sensible to me.

Roofe was older, had not made it with higher division clubs previously, would likely never get international recognition and was moving to a club in Leeds that would more likely keep him then sell him to a bigger club. it looks like Leeds will go up this year so that 500k looks very nice thanks
 
Im amazed a club of our stature doesn't add sell on as standard practice. A huge oversight.

Port vale reportedly got 1.9 million for the Hugill transfer to West Ham
 
AbbeyOx said:
Fair play to the lad. Bit of a knob with the way he left the club and shame he didn't stay an extra season but hope he carries on progressing
Click to expand...

Bit of a knob? why?
COD's side of this was never given but from an ITK source, the deal with Bristol was all agreed without drama. At the last minute Eales tried mugging him off by insisting that contractual payments due to him would only be agreed if he put in a transfer request. Callum refused and it all got very messy and litigious. Eales soon realised he didn't have a leg to stand on and the rest is history. Moral of that story is don't **ck about with employees contracts, particularly those that have been loyal to you for 13 years!!
BTW, you will see where the 25% of future sale goes to and, trust me, you wont like it
 
Keepitreal said:
Bit of a knob? why?
COD's side of this was never given but from an ITK source, the deal with Bristol was all agreed without drama. At the last minute Eales tried mugging him off by insisting that contractual payments due to him would only be agreed if he put in a transfer request. Callum refused and it all got very messy and litigious. Eales soon realised he didn't have a leg to stand on and the rest is history. Moral of that story is don't **ck about with employees contracts, particularly those that have been loyal to you for 13 years!!
BTW, you will see where the 25% of future sale goes to and, trust me, you wont like it
Click to expand...

Sollihull? Blimey...
 
Foley said:
If you get a sell on clause then you would normally be paid less.
I can't remember anybody m9aning about the deal which looked to be a very good one at the time.
Click to expand...

Maybe they didn't moan at the time because they didn't know that a sell on fee wasn't part of the deal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Ex Player Callum O'Dowda
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
14K
Beast
B
N
Callum O'Dowda
2 3
Replies
50
Views
7K
MarkG
MarkG
Back
Top Bottom