Bristol Rovers to claim more money if BZ is sold by Spurs

[Icy Gull]

According to the Argus, Rovers expect a further 30% of Albion's negotiated sell on clause should Spurs sell BZ .

 

[Yorkie]

Do they think they have got a claim on him for life?

 

[Fluffster]

Just because we beat them...

 

[Tom Bombadil]

The problem is they sound like they have a very good claim. If they are entitled to 30% of everything we receive for BZ that's going to include any sell-on clauses.
Sounds like we didn't word the contract carefully enough.

 

[Dropkick Turnip]

This was done (to death) on here when Zamora was first sold to Spurs. Whether it's ethically right or wrong, if the contact between Albion and Rovers says that Rovers will be entitled to 30% of whatever we make from future sales of Zamora then we have to honour that. Assuming none of us have seen the contract, we are not in a position to comment. What I do know, however, is that if the boot was on the other foot we'd all be saying what great businessmen Knight and Perry were for drafting such a watertight contract in the first place. Zamora's gone. Get over it please and look forward to McPhee, Knight and Henderson scoring 30+ between them this season. Not to mention all the Cullip, Watson and Carpenter goals that we will see.

Rant over. I could have just posted "Crap thread" but I don't like to do that.

 

[Icy Gull]

This was done (to death) on here when Zamora was first sold to Spurs.
Rant over. I could have just posted "Crap thread" but I don't like to do that.

Apologies for going over old ground then, but it's the first I've heard of a sell on clause within a sell on clause.

Stop replying to my crap threads then dropkick

 

[Dropkick Turnip]

Apologies for going over old ground then, but it's the first I've heard of a sell on clause within a sell on clause.

Stop replying to my crap threads then dropkick

Can't help it, I have an addiction y'see.

 

[Wozza]

This is the norm for a sell-on clause. Get over it.

 

[Icy Gull]

This is the norm for a sell-on clause. Get over it.

Better let DK know then.

Quote from the Argus

Albion are of the opinion that Rovers' share in Zamora ended with his switch to Glenn Hoddle's team.

 

[Exiled in Exeter]

I see even today’s News of the World has picked up on this now.

 

[Trigger]

Rovers ARE entitled to 30% of everything we make from BZ, DK should have been more careful with the contract, surely he must have known this would be the case?

 

[chez]

Well after the Etherington transfer to West Ham it seems like Spurs aren't the best club to have sell on agreements with. I heard that Peterboro were gonna take Spurs to court over the dodgy way in which Etherington was exchanged with kanoute. If you didnt know, they had a sell on clause with him but in the exchange he was valued at £500k while as a single sale he was valued at £1.5 mil.

 

[Zeitgeist]

Well after the Etherington transfer to West Ham it seems like Spurs aren't the best club to have sell on agreements with. I heard that Peterboro were gonna take Spurs to court over the dodgy way in which Etherington was exchanged with kanoute. If you didnt know, they had a sell on clause with him but in the exchange he was valued at £500k while as a single sale he was valued at £1.5 mil.

Our very own Stewart Storer was involved in a similar dodgy deal like the one above when he was transfered from Birmingham to Everton during the eighties. I don't remember the full details, but It caused a stink at the time.......A good old "stitch up".....