Transfer News Summer 2023 Transfer Window Thread

[Colin B]

Anyone know the sell on we have? Guess it might be about £640k based on the below.

Sold for £1.6m
Burnley sell for £8m
Difference is £6.4m
10% est. sell on
10% of £6.4m is £640k

Sound about right?

Your maths, and selling price are correct, but the sell on is double the percentage you used.

Yet another example where I feel we sold a year too early and for too low a price. I'm hoping the new regime of, on field and off field management, do not make the same mistakes, and are as good at the selling side of transfers as they appear to be at the recruitment side of them.

 

[Jaboysmith]

Your maths, and selling price are correct, but the sell on is double the percentage you used.

Yet another example where I feel we sold a year too early and for too low a price. I'm hoping the new regime of, on field and off field management, do not make the same mistakes, and are as good at the selling side of transfers as they appear to be at the recruitment side of them.

The 20% is a very nice surprise

 

[Canterburyexile]

Your maths, and selling price are correct, but the sell on is double the percentage you used.

Yet another example where I feel we sold a year too early and for too low a price. I'm hoping the new regime of, on field and off field management, do not make the same mistakes, and are as good at the selling side of transfers as they appear to be at the recruitment side of them.

Wise words in my view, and the proof of the pudding will be in what happens to young Tyler this season I reckon.

 

[oufcreport]

Your maths, and selling price are correct, but the sell on is double the percentage you used.

Yet another example where I feel we sold a year too early and for too low a price. I'm hoping the new regime of, on field and off field management, do not make the same mistakes, and are as good at the selling side of transfers as they appear to be at the recruitment side of them.

Any chance that it's not a profit clause? I'd hope that would go towards a couple other new players, maybe investments into non-league

 

[WRox]

Call me an old git, but pre-season means absolutely nothing.

At least our squad is generally fit and ready to go.

Except for you know who .. of course.

It means progressively more as it goes on, that’s the point of it. It’s an exercise in building fitness and understanding prior to the start of the season.

You can’t read as much into a 10th July game where everyone gets 45mins including a bunch of youth teamers and trialists, and even a week out it’s not comparing like for like with a competitive game, but by this stage you would expect to see a clear system, partnerships forming and match fitness to a totally different extent.

Saturday was very encouraging on all of those and suggested for the first time in a long time, we might actually be ready to hit the ground running. That doesn’t mean “absolutely nothing”.

 

[brassmonkey]

I would guess any add funds would go towards the KR / Baldock / Wildschut / Murphy?? pay offs.

 

[Bicester Yellow]

Anyone know the sell on we have? Guess it might be about £640k based on the below.

Sold for £1.6m
Burnley sell for £8m
Difference is £6.4m
10% est. sell on
10% of £6.4m is £640k

Sound about right?

Think it was higher than 10%. 15% or 20% I thought I’d read.

 

[brassmonkey]

Think it was higher than 10%. 15% or 20% I thought I’d read.

you read colinb's post 5 comments up?

 

[OX14]

you read colinb's post 5 comments up?

It was indeed 20% sell on clause on any profit Burnley achieve from the initial purchase price.

 

[OUFC OX3]

It was indeed 20% sell on clause on any profit Burnley achieve from the initial purchase price.

niiiice, I like that slice.

 

[oufcreport]

It was indeed 20% sell on clause on any profit Burnley achieve from the initial purchase price.

Anything we get go to St. Pats?

 

[Colin B]

Any chance that it's not a profit clause? I'd hope that would go towards a couple other new players, maybe investments into non-league

It would be very strange if that were the case. Sell on clauses are always based on a percentage of the profit made (if any) when selling. If Burnley were to sell McNally for less than £1.6m we would get nothing. That's what happened with Rob Dickie's move to Bristol City.

Now if we had a "rolling" or "perpetual" sell on that could be really lucrative with a player as young as Luke McNally, who may have several transfers throughout his career. This is where we get a percentage of the percentage of every future transfer fee for the player. For example if Burnley sell him for £8m with a 20% sell on, and his next club sell him for say £20m, then Burnley get a sell on of (£12m x 20%) £2.4m and we would get 20% of the £2.4m, which would be another £480,000.

As an aside I believe we paid St Pats cash upfront, in one lump, and I think that meant that we negotiated no sell on for them, but I may be wrong on that.

 

[Gregortheox]

Before last season we had three fabulously entertaining seasons, you can't complain about that or the quality of the football. Hopefully we can get back to that level while also being more consistent against the more basic sides.

Nah, for me it was the xmas 2021 transfer window, and the general performance levels from that point until KR got the boot. It was about 3 or 4 months too long in my opinion. Utter dross for a very long time.

 

[Swaby39]

Out of interest, another interested party is Millwall and Burnley have been interested in Zian Flemming I believe? In the event a swap deal was done, I suppose the sell-on is only applicable to cash involved rather than the overall value but the asking price for Flemming is well in excess of the current bid for McNally. Would be a nice little bypass from Burnley if they needed one.....

 

[stokeu]

How the hell can Stoke afford £8m??? The Championship is completely barmy!

(However, if we benefit, I won't complain)

The Stoke City bankrolled by the Coates family fortune of £8.8 billion?…

 

[BigCrompy]

Now if we had a "rolling" or "perpetual" sell on that could be really lucrative with a player as young as Luke McNally, who may have several transfers throughout his career. This is where we get a percentage of the percentage of every future transfer fee for the player. For example if Burnley sell him for £8m with a 20% sell on, and his next club sell him for say £20m, then Burnley get a sell on of (£12m x 20%) £2.4m and we would get 20% of the £2.4m, which would be another £480,000.

As an aside I believe we paid St Pats cash upfront, in one lump, and I think that meant that we negotiated no sell on for them, but I may be wrong on that.

Could that reasonably be enforced in ANY future deals with clubs who haven't agreed to a sell-on clause with Burnley (yet)?

 

[RyanioBirdio]

Your maths, and selling price are correct, but the sell on is double the percentage you used.

Yet another example where I feel we sold a year too early and for too low a price. I'm hoping the new regime of, on field and off field management, do not make the same mistakes, and are as good at the selling side of transfers as they appear to be at the recruitment side of them.

Given the terms of the Stevens deal, combined with the fact that we turned down other bids for him because those offers weren’t as beneficial, there are certainly a few promising signs.

 

[Colin B]

Could that reasonably be enforced in ANY future deals with clubs who haven't agreed to a sell-on clause with Burnley (yet)?

Yes, it's not as unusual as you might think. It happened to us, as the selling club, a while ago (I can't remember the player) and we had to pay a percentage to somebody, and also pass on a percentage of that to a previous club. In the back of my mind I think a Scottish club was involved somewhere?

 

[ChamonixOx]

Interesting question around McNally is any loan fee part of the 20%? So if he was loaned for a £1m then sold for £9m, would the 20% be based on £10m (minus £1.6m we sold him for)? One would hope it is if the lawyers have done their job properly?

 

[SteMerritt]

Yes, it's not as unusual as you might think. It happened to us, as the selling club, a while ago (I can't remember the player) and we had to pay a percentage to somebody, and also pass on a percentage of that to a previous club. In the back of my mind I think a Scottish club was involved somewhere?

Must admit I thought that was standard practice with transfers, because (using this case as an example) if Burnley sold McNally for £10M with a sell on, and then received another £5M as a sell-on percentage then the total they received is £15M, so we'd have 20% of that (less the initial outlay).

Didn't we have another club try and "buy" the add-on clause we had inserted in a deal off of us one time, as they thought they would save money? Thinking it might have been Stoke with Mark Stein before they sold him to Chelsea?