Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 25/05/2019 at 19:20, Dave-R said:

Robbie Savage is apparently saying to ole and Man Utd thag they should move heaven and earth to sign Grealish and make him there no1 summer signing.

It seems that everyone will be after Jack this summer if we go up or stay put. I still stand by what I said that clubs who want him will have to pay a fortune regardless. That 60 mill buyout may be just a starter bid from these clubs, a bidding war will see Jack go for something absoloute crazy.

“If I were Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, the first signing on my list this summer would be Jack Grealish," Savage told the Mirror.

"If the rumours are true, and Manchester United are looking at Swansea's Daniel James and Newcastle prospect Sean Longstaff as possible signings, I would go for Grealish ahead of them."

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/781369/Man-Utd-Jack-Grealish-Aston-Villa-Ole-Gunnar-Solskjaer-transfer-latest

Total contradiction.

A buy out clause is a buyout clause.

There is no reason for anyone to bid higher than the buyout clause.  The player would be entitled to speak to anyone matching the buyout fee, so bidding higher than this is something only a total numpty would do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/05/2019 at 17:13, Vive_La_Villa said:

On a serious note I know a person that has such a perfect sleep routines that whenever we go out he always falls asleep after a few drinks no matter where we are. People think he is wrecked when really he is just shattered. Could be the same for Jack.

Oh don't you try and make excuses for his behavior! This is outrageous! Look, he doesn't even know which way his hat goes..!

I fell asleep on concrete outdoors in Autumn within 5 minutes of lying down at 10pm when we did an event to raise money for homelessness. Slept through 'til 6am..

I'm sure people have dozed off whilst sitting up right when they've been a passenger on a long drive, they just felt like having a nod..

Mind you the pink leopard skin Gucci outfit and hat backwards suggests to me he's in real trouble. Only joking.

He might well have had a big night out, I don't know, but I guarantee you, the time he has invested in being skilled at football far outweighs the time under the influence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thug said:

Total contradiction.

A buy out clause is a buyout clause.

There is no reason for anyone to bid higher than the buyout clause.  The player would be entitled to speak to anyone matching the buyout fee, so bidding higher than this is something only a total numpty would do.

Yep. 

Again people are demonstrating that they don’t know what a buy out clause is. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Thug said:

Total contradiction.

A buy out clause is a buyout clause.

There is no reason for anyone to bid higher than the buyout clause.  The player would be entitled to speak to anyone matching the buyout fee, so bidding higher than this is something only a total numpty would do.

I think the OP was saying if more than one club was interested they may offer an amount other clubs are not prepared too. 

I personally don’t think a club will even offer 60 million for him.  To suggest clubs will offer more is ridiculous. I love Jack and he has a bright future but I do think some of our fans get carried away 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I think the OP was saying if more than one club was interested they may offer an amount other clubs are not prepared too. 

I personally don’t think a club will even offer 60 million for him.  To suggest clubs will offer more is ridiculous. I love Jack and he has a bright future but I do think some of our fans get carried away 

No.

’that £60m buyout clause will be just a starter bid..’

means OP thinks that clubs will get into a bidding war ABOVE that amount.

My point is, once the buy out clause is met, it’s met. After that it’s up to the player to choose his club. The only control the club have in the say of a transfer is which bid they wish to accept, and which they don’t. Once the bid reaches the buyout clause, the club can not reject it. Unless of course there is a further clause which excludes certain clubs etc.

Under the value of the buyout clause, club are free to reject or accept a bid as they desire.

Above the level of the clause, the bid is accepted by default, and the buying club then have to entice the player to sign for them over any other accepted bids.

Why would they pay the selling club £10m extra, when they can use that as a carrot to dangle in front of the player instead? 

best way to explain it is using eBay as an example

the buyout clause is the ‘buy it now’ price

you're welcome to make offers under this amount - ‘Make an offer’

 

Clearly, a lot of people don’t understand what a minimum fee release clause is., which is fine, and I’m not trying to be mean, just trying to set the records straight.

 

 

Edited by Thug
Changed analogy
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thug said:

No.

’that £60m buyout clause will be just a starter bid..’

means OP thinks that clubs will get into a bidding war ABOVE that amount.

My point is, once the buy out clause is met, it’s met. After that it’s up to the player to choose his club. The only control the club have in the say of a transfer is which bid they wish to accept, and which they don’t. Once the bid reaches the buyout clause, the club can not reject it. Unless of course there is a further clause which excludes certain clubs etc.

Under the value of the buyout clause, club are free to reject or accept a bid as they desire.

Above the level of the clause, the bid is accepted by default, and the buying club then have to entice the player to sign for them over any other accepted bids.

Why would they pay the selling club £10m extra, when they can use that as a carrot to dangle in front of the player instead? 

Its like you walking into Asda;

’how much are the cornflakes love?’

’£3’

’No. I’ll give you £10’

Clearly, a lot of people don’t understand what a minimum fee release clause is., which is fine, and I’m not trying to be mean, just trying to set the records straight.

 

 

Yeah I’ve just read back and you’re right.  Plus that explains release clauses too.

But as I’ve said before no club is offering 60m anyway. If we go up he stays with us one more season. If we don’t them I reckon we would sell for around 30 million. We would probably have too. 

In the one season with us he will prove if he’s worth that 60m.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Yeah I’ve just read back and you’re right.  Plus that explains release clauses too.

But as I’ve said before no club is offering 60m anyway. If we go up he stays with us one more season. If we don’t them I reckon we would sell for around 30 million. We would probably have too. 

In the one season with us he will prove if he’s worth that 60m.

I think you’re right here.

Unfortunately, FFP will probably mean we’d end accepting a lot less.

to be honest I don’t even know if there is a £60m release clause?

Link to post
Share on other sites

same as taking back tuanzebe, man utd have deep troubles, top to bottom troubles and a very unhappy and demanding fanbase, spending 60m on jack will not solve their problems, that club will be poisonous for a couple of years, obviously a huge step for him but out of everyone he could be linked to I think that's the one that would be shit for him through no fault of his own

longstaff is a good example, decent prospect but will be overpriced and the utd fan social media response wrote him off straight away, he's an indication of how shit they've become rather than someone who will make them better, grealish would be greeted the same

Link to post
Share on other sites

was at a wedding Saturday, got around to talking about football, baggies fan through gritted teeth telling me his 6 year old was a villa fan because he runs round the playground emulating his favourite player jack grealish...all the dads on my table had a similar story, youngsters love him, felt very strange to hear, even when we had a decent team under MON and at times exciting under Gregory and we won stuff in the 90s I cant remember us having a player as marketable as jack

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thug said:

No.

’that £60m buyout clause will be just a starter bid..’

means OP thinks that clubs will get into a bidding war ABOVE that amount.

My point is, once the buy out clause is met, it’s met. After that it’s up to the player to choose his club. The only control the club have in the say of a transfer is which bid they wish to accept, and which they don’t. Once the bid reaches the buyout clause, the club can not reject it. Unless of course there is a further clause which excludes certain clubs etc.

Under the value of the buyout clause, club are free to reject or accept a bid as they desire.

Above the level of the clause, the bid is accepted by default, and the buying club then have to entice the player to sign for them over any other accepted bids.

Why would they pay the selling club £10m extra, when they can use that as a carrot to dangle in front of the player instead? 

best way to explain it is using eBay as an example

the buyout clause is the ‘buy it now’ price

you're welcome to make offers under this amount - ‘Make an offer’

 

Clearly, a lot of people don’t understand what a minimum fee release clause is., which is fine, and I’m not trying to be mean, just trying to set the records straight.

 

 

Try yelling that to Liverpool who rejected Suarez's buy out clause from Arsenal a few years ago and then went on the next season to sell him for more than double that buy out clause.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Try yelling that to Liverpool who rejected Suarez's buy out clause from Arsenal a few years ago and then went on the next season to sell him for more than double that buy out clause.......

Wenger said: “He was very close (to signing for Arsenal). We had an agreement with the player. We had been wrongly advised that he had a clause, with a minimal clause, but we had an agreement with the player. You can ask him.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/03/24/arsene-wenger-reveals-version-luis-suarez-liverpool-arsenal/

 

Guys, I don’t know what people don’t get about what a minimum fee release clause is.

it’s not rocket science!

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thug said:

Wenger said: “He was very close (to signing for Arsenal). We had an agreement with the player. We had been wrongly advised that he had a clause, with a minimal clause, but we had an agreement with the player. You can ask him.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/03/24/arsene-wenger-reveals-version-luis-suarez-liverpool-arsenal/

 

Guys, I don’t know what people don’t get about what a minimum fee release clause is.

it’s not rocket science!

 

Isn't it because they took the piss by offering 40 million and 1 pound? If they'd have offered like 41 mil he'd have been an arsenal player. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, VillaJ100 said:

Isn't it because they took the piss by offering 40 million and 1 pound? If they'd have offered like 41 mil he'd have been an arsenal player. 

Don't think it matters. If the release clause was "anything above £40m" then offering a pound over that is enough to trigger the release clause.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

Don't think it matters. If the release clause was "anything above £40m" then offering a pound over that is enough to trigger the release clause.

My guess would be that it was a handshake agreement that they'd agree to any offer above £40m rather than a contractual one, so when Arsenal took the piss by offering £1 over, Liverpool didn't have any obligation to say yes.

Edited by MessiWillSignForVilla
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DCJonah said:

The idea that this will be his last game for us is horrible. We have to win. 

Agree part of the reason this game feels so monumental. Can see him staying for years (perhaps rose tinted glasses) if we get promoted and show signs of progression,

Lose and no one can blame him not wanting to waste another year in the Championship he is too talented.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â