Because we don’t do them. Like we don’t take players on loan to develop them for their parent clubs
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Losing Macalister & Caicedo
- Thread starter moggy
- Start date
The Fits
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 10,106
Or sign players in January. Or sign players over 24 etc etc.Because we don’t do them. Like we don’t take players on loan to develop them for their parent clubs
brighton_tom
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2008
- 5,511
They might do but you’re not going to convince a chairman/chief executive that has said multiple times that we don’t do them to suddenly introduce them for 2 key players unless the release clause fee is very high. No way has a £50-60m release clause been inserted into Mac contract (which is was Fab is insinuating) if we’ve previously sold players like Cucurella for £62m without one. It’s only happening if it’s more like £80m+
What if Alexis said I’m not signing a new deal then and my contract is expiring 2023, or 2024 if you take an option so I’ll just walk away cheaply / free.
Tony Bloom isn’t completely stupid
Nobby Cybergoat
Well-known member
- Jul 19, 2021
- 8,622
It's possible and only a select handful knows about his contract.
But the following blog points out that transfers due to release clauses have reportedly happened only a handful of times between PL clubs. And not recently and not for big amounts. Demba Ba and Joe Allen are the cited examples. It's possible, but seems unlikely.
Buy-Out & Release Clauses in Football Contracts: The Basics — DANIEL GEEY
This is a brief blog on the issue of buy-out and release clauses in football player contracts. There appears to be some confusion between the two concepts and the aim of this blog is to set out the basics with the aid of a few recent examples. For more detail on this topic, I would highly recommend
www.danielgeey.com
The Fits
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 10,106
People need to get real. Mac signed his new contract in October, when he looked like he'd be at best a squad member for Argentina and before they won the world cup.
There is clearly some kind of clause in his contract that allows certain teams to sign him for a fixed amount and all the evidence suggests this won't be as high as a lot of people on here are hoping.
Say what you like about Romano but it isn't just him reporting this- it's been an open secret for weeks, as has him going to Liverpool.
We clearly had a choice in October - either agree a contract with an exit clause or he doesn't sign a new one and we miss out on millions.
You can quote me on all this next week.
No inside knowledge. It's just fairly bleeding obvious.
There is clearly some kind of clause in his contract that allows certain teams to sign him for a fixed amount and all the evidence suggests this won't be as high as a lot of people on here are hoping.
Say what you like about Romano but it isn't just him reporting this- it's been an open secret for weeks, as has him going to Liverpool.
We clearly had a choice in October - either agree a contract with an exit clause or he doesn't sign a new one and we miss out on millions.
You can quote me on all this next week.
No inside knowledge. It's just fairly bleeding obvious.
brighton_tom
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2008
- 5,511
Why wound Alexis have been so bullish at that point and not wanted to sign a new deal that doesn’t have a low release clause? That is pre World Cup, and pre this brilliant season when there was little interest from big clubs. Why would he have threatened to walk away from a club that he loves at a point where he has no idea of future interest? That just seems like a clashing point that wouldn’t have been necessary.
The Fits
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 10,106
It's not a clashing point to say 'I've loved my time here but I'll be ready for a new challenge next season'.
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,120
Release clauses give the buying club all the power in a negotiation. This is why we do not do them and Paul Barber has explicitly said so.
As club we do not stand in the way of players or managers progressing their careers, release clauses are not necessary. The club has a value for all the players, if the value is met a deal can be done. Lowballers need not apply.
I am sure that Mac Alister's reps have spoken to Liverpool but those talks count for nothing until Liverpool formally make an offer to the Albion and we consider it. All this guff regarding the fee from FR is simply that, guff, unless Tony or Paul have given him the info himself (they have not). Its PR designed to add pressure to the negotiations. Alexis is on a four year deal, we have the leverage.
A deal will get done when we are happy with it and not before, whether it is at £60m or £70m, it will be one we are happy to accept.
brighton_tom
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2008
- 5,511
I’m not saying that Mac isn’t going up leave, and I’m not saying there isn’t a release clause in the contract which Fab knows the existence of, but it makes no sense for that release clause to have been agreed at the low price being suggested.
The Fits
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 10,106
And has reported multiple times, it isn't a minimum release clause. There's caveats that Liverpool are patently happy to meet.
Really? He was having a fantastic end of last and early start to the season as well, there was some interest reported last summer.
The Fits
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 10,106
It does if the other option is he either leaves on a free or for cheaper a la Biss.
brighton_tom
Well-known member
- Jul 23, 2008
- 5,511
Not anything remotely serious that it involved bids. Or reported approaches to the player.
Why are we selling so soon after a new deal then? And why not for more money? Why not drag it out to bring in other bidders to drive up the price?
Why not stand up and say he only just signed a deal, we don’t want to sell like we did Caicedo.
The Fits
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2020
- 10,106
The elephant in the room.
If there was no clause we'd be absolutely selling him to the highest bidder.
There are several good reasons. But mainly it goes to the heart of our business model. Mac Allister is one of the most high-profile footballers in South America. His family is hugely well connected. We need the South American wonder kids to WANT to come to Brighton. We're not going to muck him around!
Generally we don't.
However Mac Allister and, more notably, Caicedo had very little to gain in signing extended contracts with us when they did as, typically, this would have weakened their hands in terms of getting the big moves they want.
So, I'm struggling to believe there isn't some sort of "help you leave" sweetener in their contracts. Maybe not a traditional "£X and you can leave" release clause, but something that means, from their side, they won't be trapped if a big club offer comes along.
boik
Well-known member
It feels like we have some sort of agreement with AM and we're not the sort of club to go back on a agreement. The whole philosophy of the club is to attract the best up and coming players and a big part of that is the progression path. Not gonna be popular with youngsters if we're seen to be holding out for unreasoanble fees from clubs they have no interest in joining.