MCU Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Barca have put in a buyback clause of £8 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 11, 2015 Moderator Share Posted August 11, 2015 Buyback clauses are an absolute load of b*ll*cks. It's basically the previous club saying you can only keep him if he's shit. Whatever about a sell-on percentage, that's different. At least we get to choose if he's sold and for how much, but this low-ball buyback stuff should be illegal as it allows a club to effectively restrict the trade on a player that they no longer own. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevpants Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 A buyback clause for less than we are paying for him? In an up and coming young player? Have they asked my bollox? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Buyback clauses are an absolute load of b*ll*cks. It's basically the previous club saying you can only keep him if he's shit. Whatever about a sell-on percentage, that's different. At least we get to choose if he's sold and for how much, but this low-ball buyback stuff should be illegal as it allows a club to effectively restrict the trade on a player that they no longer own. They are generally pretty high prices though, no? It'd be similar to having the "minimum fee release clause" that Liverpool bought Benteke for... except for one club only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 A buyback clause for less than we are paying for him? In an up and coming young player? Have they asked my bollox? Sarcasm meter is required here The real question that needs answering is whether we can get this guy AND loan Januzaj at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troon_villan Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Someone mentioned it before but if he's good enough for Barca to want him back... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 The problem with the buy back clause isn't that barca might want him back, it's that he they can just make an easy profit from bringing him back and selling him on at a profit. It's slightly better than a loan, but not much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 11, 2015 Moderator Share Posted August 11, 2015 Buyback clauses are an absolute load of b*ll*cks. It's basically the previous club saying you can only keep him if he's shit. Whatever about a sell-on percentage, that's different. At least we get to choose if he's sold and for how much, but this low-ball buyback stuff should be illegal as it allows a club to effectively restrict the trade on a player that they no longer own. They are generally pretty high prices though, no? It'd be similar to having the "minimum fee release clause" that Liverpool bought Benteke for... except for one club only. They generally aren't very high, because it's in the interest of the selling club to set them low. At the point when Villa are buying the player, they have to concede ground in order to get the player. But the main controversy is that a club who no longer own the player still have a(ny) control over him. Which if it was in other areas on the contract would be illegal (i.e. conditions around not playing against them for example). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swerbs Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Give him reasons to stay at Aston Villa and reject Barca. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 11, 2015 Moderator Share Posted August 11, 2015 The problem with the buy back clause isn't that barca might want him back, it's that he they can just make an easy profit from bringing him back and selling him on at a profit. It's slightly better than a loan, but not much. Case in point. Alderweireld this season. There was a fixed price for him going to Southampton after the loan, but he had such a good season and was worth so much more than that price that Atletico said no, we'll take him back, give you a few quid compensation for breaking our word and flog him to Spurs for a fortune. Contract broken, sod all comeback for Southampton and not even sure if they got any money from the u-turn. The conditions would be slightly different but the result is exactly the same. The only thing that has to happen is that he be worth more on the market than his buyback clause, then Barca can just recall him and make the additional cash themselves. Absolutely mental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troon_villan Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Give him reasons to stay at Aston Villa and reject Barca. Sinclair's missus just gave birth. Dunno if she's up for swanning about the Holte Suite in her smellies just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Reports in Spain are there is no buy back clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Buyback clauses are an absolute load of b*ll*cks. It's basically the previous club saying you can only keep him if he's shit. Whatever about a sell-on percentage, that's different. At least we get to choose if he's sold and for how much, but this low-ball buyback stuff should be illegal as it allows a club to effectively restrict the trade on a player that they no longer own. They are generally pretty high prices though, no? It'd be similar to having the "minimum fee release clause" that Liverpool bought Benteke for... except for one club only. They generally aren't very high, because it's in the interest of the selling club to set them low. At the point when Villa are buying the player, they have to concede ground in order to get the player. But the main controversy is that a club who no longer own the player still have a(ny) control over him. Which if it was in other areas on the contract would be illegal (i.e. conditions around not playing against them for example). It's in the interest of the selling club to set them low comparatively, sure. I'd have thought... ...let's say we purchase Traore for £6m. The buyback clause isn't going to be for £6m, or likely even £10m. It'd represent a gain of value by the player becoming awesome vs. being lower than what they estimate the player could be. I'd guess at maybe £20m - a price between what we've paid for him and what value of player in the market Barcelona would want back (£30m?). Hard to describe, but I can't see it being something we get shafted over. Certainly can't see it being any worse than a minimum fee clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biskitt Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 The problem with the buy back clause isn't that barca might want him back, it's that he they can just make an easy profit from bringing him back and selling him on at a profit. It's slightly better than a loan, but not much. Case in point. Alderweireld this season. There was a fixed price for him going to Southampton after the loan, but he had such a good season and was worth so much more than that price that Atletico said no, we'll take him back, give you a few quid compensation for breaking our word and flog him to Spurs for a fortune. Contract broken, sod all comeback for Southampton and not even sure if they got any money from the u-turn. The conditions would be slightly different but the result is exactly the same. The only thing that has to happen is that he be worth more on the market than his buyback clause, then Barca can just recall him and make the additional cash themselves. Absolutely mental. Southampton originally took him on a loan though whereas we would be buying him. I've no idea if a buy back clause will be in the contract but it's a slightly different set of circumstances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted August 11, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 11, 2015 Thats more like it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) The problem with the buy back clause isn't that barca might want him back, it's that he they can just make an easy profit from bringing him back and selling him on at a profit. It's slightly better than a loan, but not much. Case in point. Alderweireld this season. There was a fixed price for him going to Southampton after the loan, but he had such a good season and was worth so much more than that price that Atletico said no, we'll take him back, give you a few quid compensation for breaking our word and flog him to Spurs for a fortune. Contract broken, sod all comeback for Southampton and not even sure if they got any money from the u-turn. The conditions would be slightly different but the result is exactly the same. The only thing that has to happen is that he be worth more on the market than his buyback clause, then Barca can just recall him and make the additional cash themselves. Absolutely mental. Completely different situation though? That would be more akin to us loaning Sinclair for the season with a £2.5m future fee thing included... but then Sinclair being awesome for us, Man City recalling him instead and then selling him to West Ham for £10m. Edited August 11, 2015 by bobzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 not bothered about buy back, its barcelona ffs he has to be unbelieveably good for them to want him back 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 11, 2015 Moderator Share Posted August 11, 2015 Well a fairly comparitive example would be Delofeu at Everton. By all accounts the buyback on him is €9m for the first season and €12m in the second. Not an enormous amount for Barcelona and nothing like the 20ish that you'd expect Barca to be putting into their first team, but it would be low enough to maybe make a quick twist on him if he turns out not to be shite. The problem with the buy back clause isn't that barca might want him back, it's that he they can just make an easy profit from bringing him back and selling him on at a profit. It's slightly better than a loan, but not much. Case in point. Alderweireld this season. There was a fixed price for him going to Southampton after the loan, but he had such a good season and was worth so much more than that price that Atletico said no, we'll take him back, give you a few quid compensation for breaking our word and flog him to Spurs for a fortune. Contract broken, sod all comeback for Southampton and not even sure if they got any money from the u-turn. The conditions would be slightly different but the result is exactly the same. The only thing that has to happen is that he be worth more on the market than his buyback clause, then Barca can just recall him and make the additional cash themselves. Absolutely mental. Southampton originally took him on a loan though whereas we would be buying him. I've no idea if a buy back clause will be in the contract but it's a slightly different set of circumstances I literally say that in the post and then explain where the similarities lie. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Seems low for Deulofeu - who was more hyped up than Traore as far as I'm aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisVillan Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I'll settle for a thinly veiled multi-year loan if he's half as good as he's said to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts