Jump to content

Walking Down The Halbeath Road


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Andriy_Parmolenko said:

Would be quite unprofessional to announce that they weren't renewing his contract without telling him first tbf, even if the statement they came out with was equally unprofessional.

If his contract was due to end on the 31st, and they hadn't offered or been in talks by then, he would know he was leaving. It wouldn't be news to him

 

Edited by Heaton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, 101 said:

Ah that's interesting didn't realise it was on the profit, could make the difference in breaking our record transfer fee, if it's close I doubt the club will even say sadly.

Yes I think the rumours at the time were around the £200k mark.

Well obviously I'm not party to the terms of the sale to Hibs in the first place but I'd be amazed if it's a straight percentage of fee. It would make no sense. I've never seen a "sell on" clause not refer to percentage of profit, especially if the initial fee was not insignificant.

To put it in perspective, with some rough numbers. Hibs pay £250,000 to Dunfermline to sign him in the first place. Three years down the line they sell him to St Johnstone for £200,000 and they have to then give £50,000 of it (or whatever percentage it is) to Dunfermline despite making a loss on the transaction overall? That would be bonkers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Well obviously I'm not party to the terms of the sale to Hibs in the first place but I'd be amazed if it's a straight percentage of fee. It would make no sense. I've never seen a "sell on" clause not refer to percentage of profit, especially if the initial fee was not insignificant.

To put it in perspective, with some rough numbers. Hibs pay £250,000 to Dunfermline to sign him in the first place. Three years down the line they sell him to St Johnstone for £200,000 and they have to then give £50,000 of it (or whatever percentage it is) to Dunfermline despite making a loss on the transaction overall? That would be bonkers.

Sounds pretty much like Hibs to me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Heaton said:

If his contract was due to end on the 31st, and they hadn't offered or been in talks by then, he would know he was leaving. It wouldn't be news to him

 

So? Club still has a duty to inform the player officially before announcing it to the public. It’s common decency apart from everything else, especially when the player in question has been at the club for 9 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RRFC_Liam said:

24 quid is a bit expensive I agree keep it the same price for every home game but will you have the same Energy if Dundee United Charge 26-30 quid next season? 

Oh, times ten. That's absolutely outrageous. 

1 hour ago, itzdrk said:

I might have to do jury duty for the St Pauli game throwing my day aff and delicious pint plans into chaos.  What time is kick off and what is the closest train station? 

 

That's an annoyance, the two train stations (City and Queen Margaret) are equal distances from the ground, if you're heading to east fife (Glenrothes, Kirkcaldy etc) then go to Queen Margaret, if you're heading to Edinburgh or Inverkeithing then go to Dunfermline City. 

 

God speed, turn up to duty pished. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Well obviously I'm not party to the terms of the sale to Hibs in the first place but I'd be amazed if it's a straight percentage of fee. It would make no sense. I've never seen a "sell on" clause not refer to percentage of profit, especially if the initial fee was not insignificant.

To put it in perspective, with some rough numbers. Hibs pay £250,000 to Dunfermline to sign him in the first place. Three years down the line they sell him to St Johnstone for £200,000 and they have to then give £50,000 of it (or whatever percentage it is) to Dunfermline despite making a loss on the transaction overall? That would be bonkers.

That would be mad. A sell on is a percentage of profit made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Well obviously I'm not party to the terms of the sale to Hibs in the first place but I'd be amazed if it's a straight percentage of fee. It would make no sense. I've never seen a "sell on" clause not refer to percentage of profit, especially if the initial fee was not insignificant.

To put it in perspective, with some rough numbers. Hibs pay £250,000 to Dunfermline to sign him in the first place. Three years down the line they sell him to St Johnstone for £200,000 and they have to then give £50,000 of it (or whatever percentage it is) to Dunfermline despite making a loss on the transaction overall? That would be bonkers.

Yep that makes perfect sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Well obviously I'm not party to the terms of the sale to Hibs in the first place but I'd be amazed if it's a straight percentage of fee. It would make no sense. I've never seen a "sell on" clause not refer to percentage of profit, especially if the initial fee was not insignificant.

To put it in perspective, with some rough numbers. Hibs pay £250,000 to Dunfermline to sign him in the first place. Three years down the line they sell him to St Johnstone for £200,000 and they have to then give £50,000 of it (or whatever percentage it is) to Dunfermline despite making a loss on the transaction overall? That would be bonkers.

I'm not doubting you that it is likely to be a cut of profit as I don't know how these things work past my experience playing football manager (where it can be total or profit), but I don't see why that situation is so bonkers.

All signings are a bit of a gamble, especially when a substantial fee is involved, and sell on fees are a bit of a trade off from both sides. E.g. It might have been seen to be beneficial to Hibs at the time to offer a cut of total sale if it meant an even smaller up front cost. You then run the risk of doubling down on your loss as in your scenario but if you're confident that probably won't happen (because you're signing a baller like Nisbet) then you take that calculated risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, par-adise said:

I'm not doubting you that it is likely to be a cut of profit as I don't know how these things work past my experience playing football manager (where it can be total or profit), but I don't see why that situation is so bonkers.

All signings are a bit of a gamble, especially when a substantial fee is involved, and sell on fees are a bit of a trade off from both sides. E.g. It might have been seen to be beneficial to Hibs at the time to offer a cut of total sale if it meant an even smaller up front cost. You then run the risk of doubling down on your loss as in your scenario but if you're confident that probably won't happen (because you're signing a baller like Nisbet) then you take that calculated risk.

It might. I've never seen a sell on clause that wasn't profit rather than total. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist but I doubt many chairmen would be willing to agree a scenario where they may have to cut their losses and sell on a player who hasn't worked out as hoped and then have to give some of the cash they do get to a 3rd party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rob1885 said:

I see Jamie Macdonald speaking about leaving the Rovers as they offered reduced terms.

 

I'd have preferred to get him in for a year than give Deniz 3 tbh.

Not for me he was getting on a bit, even for a keeper and had a poor game imo against Hamilton in the cup final.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 101 said:

Not for me he was getting on a bit, even for a keeper and had a poor game imo against Hamilton in the cup final.

That's fair mate, I saw literally none of Raith last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, MillersDave said:

Seen the away top earlier. All red. Very smart. Announced tomorrow. 

Does this one have a German flag or just the home one? Asking for a friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, new away kit looks very nice. All red, with white collar. Red shorts and socks. Sponsor logo is a bit different, think I preferred the old one. Overall a very decent looking kit, looking forward to seeing the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...