And maybe if RM didn't agree to the ceiling he goes and signs elsewhere?
And maybe if RM didn't agree to the ceiling he goes and signs elsewhere?
Perth are looking at what, $2,500,000 for da Silva, and we get $400,000 for Taggart, which we probably won't get.
There's something wrong with that.
Middleby Gone
Lawrie Out
Also MFKFC just assuming it is "only" 400k is a bit naive. DDS is going to Roma for "only" 500k. But with appearance bonus, sell-on fees, etc could escalate to 2.5m (so you're not right, Thomas). Taggz will have similar in his buyout clause.
And realistically, whilst the club wants to make money from him, they can't stand in his way if he wants to test himself in Europe. I daresay the FFA & PFA get heavily involved in buyout clauses too, to ensure clubs don't hold the young player(s) at ransom. 400k upfront is one of the higher sell prices the HAL has seen. Carle maybe was 500k, I think Rostyn Griffiths went for 1-2m to Asia but that's a different kettle altogether.
OK
none of the money will go onto the club. may has well let him go for free imo. a lot of wasted energy thinking about it.
we will loose
I'm on record as being unsatisfied with the one year extension he signed. I thought we negotiated from a position of weakness.
But anyway.
Having said that now is the time for him to go, and if we get $400k so be it. There's something about him that doesn't sit right. I just don't see him making it in the big time. We should get whatever we can and hopefully maximise our assets in future.
Yeah, the cynic (realist?) in me thinks this. All a transfer fee will do is mean club losses (HSG/Tinks) will be less, not more investment in the club. Could sell him for $20m and that just ends up as cash back for HSG/Tinks.Originally Posted by snake
Yeah, I hate the idea of investors getting a return too.
:ffs:
OK
Shut up, gypo. That's not the point I am making. Everyone above is having a whinge about how the club is going to get ****ed out of a few million because of a clause. The club gets nothing either way, why is everyone having a whinge about it?
If we sell for a price, the higher the price the better as our profile as a talent breeding club increases globally. Clubs all over the world will get wind of a transfer from some australian club to somewhere for $xxxxxx and a scout somewhere will think "wonder who else they have".
It's a positive move for the club, even if our budget doesn't increase from it IMO
OK
You are confusing "talent breeding" for "schmucks we can rip off because they undervalue their talent".
If I was Tinkler, I would be livid that someone in my organisation signed a clause for a player that is going to rob me of potential millions.
And you are making the point that the HIGHER we sell someone for, the better it is for the club. How is that a good thing if we have a 400k clause and are getting ****ed out of millions????
Who exactly is paying millions for a 20year old Australian striker, particularly when you look at the track record of Australians heading overseas (how many are actually starting each week?)? Like I said - 400k is a massive transfer fee from the HAL.
If I was Tinkler I'd applaud that they re-signed Taggart, and got a transfer fee at all, as opposed to letting him go on a free.
OK
Scum got a record $1.3m fee for a no talent plonker like Rostyn Griffiths. We have a fringe socceroo, potential world cup bolter who has just won the golden boot.
And don't forget that upcoming $2.5m for a 17yo from Perth.
did the member just make up this 400k figure?
i don't see it mentioned anywhere in the article.
I think it was Pico who mentioned it in an earlier post.
Taggart is a gimp. Will end up in holland for sure.
Seeing as the FFA get a cut out of all transfer dealings overseas I can't imagine they have any interest in stopping clubs selling players for more money as they stand to gain more. The PFA have no leg to stand on if a club refuses to sell a contracted player anyway. Yes a club can stand in his way by refusing to agree a deal unless they are happy with the compensation. That's what a contract is for and it is a 2 way street
Assuming it is 400k with clauses like the De Silva deal has I can cope with that. Problem being is I see it happening that we sell a bloke of his talents for 400k and that's all with no clauses.
Can see many clubs in Europe taking a gamble on him at 400k cause worse case scenario it is a good investment cause if he fails and it ain't that much money down the drain for Euro Clubs.
IF he works out you polish him up get some on field value out of him and can then on sell him for a million or two or even more to a bigger club
I think there was something mentioned at the time of re-signing. I'd heard this figure before but can't remember the source.
I hope Taggz does well if he goes overseas and am glad we will be getting something for him if so because we really weren't getting anything for him. The player in this instance had all the power in the negotiations. At the time I recall a lot of people saying his re-signing was only going to be until the end of the season anyway.
I just hope that IF he fails he returns to our team because they gave him the chance to play and get that overseas contract. That will be a big test of his loyalty.
seems legit
I am sure it was mentioned somewhere in the recent past by some Journo that Birraz and Taggz have buy out clauses but the Beard doesn't
$400,000 I guess allows people to come to the table. If there are a number of clubs interested then a bidding war may start. This is a best case scenario for us.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
