Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Saughall Robin]

I think he's very skillful but physically too small for championship football. Whatever happens I wish him good luck. One badly timed tackle and your career is messed up

I agree. I don't see him in the Championship (yet) but, as I said, I think he'd be able to do a job in League One right now.

[MarpleAlty]

500K would be unbelievable. I think (should CCC leave) it'll be nearer the Stokes fee tbh but I hope you are right. Do I think Fleetwood would have been stupid? Yes 🤣

Whatever happens, I just hope it's done quickly (and undisclosed) so the club know where they stand.

Fleetwood are getting money because of his age. They will have done % deal though it's almost a standard feature of lower league transfers. See us getting some money for signing and never playing Berry. We'll do the same with Chris when we sell him I'm certain. We know from Watmore though that doesn't always work out so well.

Stokes went for over 300 all in I think and he came with a wage free loan back. so that's 500k in value surely. We've gotta hope it gets bidding war silly to push to the higher end. Which as has been mentioned might come with the social media frenzy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well could be!) but I'm not sure age comes into it - Fleetwood agreed a transfer with us, of their own free will, for a player that was under contract with them. How well they negotiated in terms of sell-on % is up to them.

[chesteralty]

How many players have quit a regular starting spot at their club for pastures supposedly greener, only to disappear without trace. Stay at Alty Chris, you'll always be wanted here!!

[Alty Bri]

500K would be unbelievable. I think (should CCC leave) it'll be nearer the Stokes fee tbh but I hope you are right. Do I think Fleetwood would have been stupid? Yes 🤣

Whatever happens, I just hope it's done quickly (and undisclosed) so the club know where they stand.

Fleetwood are getting money because of his age. They will have done % deal though it's almost a standard feature of lower league transfers. See us getting some money for signing and never playing Berry. We'll do the same with Chris when we sell him I'm certain. We know from Watmore though that doesn't always work out so well.

Stokes went for over 300 all in I think and he came with a wage free loan back. so that's 500k in value surely. We've gotta hope it gets bidding war silly to push to the higher end. Which as has been mentioned might come with the social media frenzy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well could be!) but I'm not sure age comes into it - Fleetwood agreed a transfer with us, of their own free will, for a player that was under contract with them. How well they negotiated in terms of sell-on % is up to them.

Fleetwood's owner is in jail, they were relegation fodder. I doubt they would have had the wisdom to negotiate anything in terms of selling on fee - they'd have just seen the transfer fee and run.

[MarpleAlty]

500K would be unbelievable. I think (should CCC leave) it'll be nearer the Stokes fee tbh but I hope you are right. Do I think Fleetwood would have been stupid? Yes 🤣

Whatever happens, I just hope it's done quickly (and undisclosed) so the club know where they stand.

Fleetwood are getting money because of his age. They will have done % deal though it's almost a standard feature of lower league transfers. See us getting some money for signing and never playing Berry. We'll do the same with Chris when we sell him I'm certain. We know from Watmore though that doesn't always work out so well.

Stokes went for over 300 all in I think and he came with a wage free loan back. so that's 500k in value surely. We've gotta hope it gets bidding war silly to push to the higher end. Which as has been mentioned might come with the social media frenzy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well could be!) but I'm not sure age comes into it - Fleetwood agreed a transfer with us, of their own free will, for a player that was under contract with them. How well they negotiated in terms of sell-on % is up to them.

Fleetwood's owner is in jail, they were relegation fodder. I doubt they would have had the wisdom to negotiate anything in terms of selling on fee - they'd have just seen the transfer fee and run.

I hope you're right!

Any chance they'll let us have Cian Hayes too?

[Amsterdam Alty]

500K would be unbelievable. I think (should CCC leave) it'll be nearer the Stokes fee tbh but I hope you are right. Do I think Fleetwood would have been stupid? Yes 🤣

Whatever happens, I just hope it's done quickly (and undisclosed) so the club know where they stand.

Fleetwood are getting money because of his age. They will have done % deal though it's almost a standard feature of lower league transfers. See us getting some money for signing and never playing Berry. We'll do the same with Chris when we sell him I'm certain. We know from Watmore though that doesn't always work out so well.

Stokes went for over 300 all in I think and he came with a wage free loan back. so that's 500k in value surely. We've gotta hope it gets bidding war silly to push to the higher end. Which as has been mentioned might come with the social media frenzy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well could be!) but I'm not sure age comes into it - Fleetwood agreed a transfer with us, of their own free will, for a player that was under contract with them. How well they negotiated in terms of sell-on % is up to them.

Age does I believe for players under 23 that have been trained by an academy there is a fixed solidarity percentage around 5%. This will mean Burnley and Fleetwood profit. We got the same when Dan Mooney left for his sojourn to the world of big crowds and small squads.

The owner of the club does not do the contract administration either. It would be negligent of an employee to just not bother with an industry standard clause.

We'll owe around 20-25% is my guess to Fleetwood (& Burnley to a lesser extent). With similar percentages negotiated in with the sale price when we are negotiating. Remember this clause is free money to all selling parties involved. It's an easy sweetener on a player you rate.

[MarpleAlty]

500K would be unbelievable. I think (should CCC leave) it'll be nearer the Stokes fee tbh but I hope you are right. Do I think Fleetwood would have been stupid? Yes 🤣

Whatever happens, I just hope it's done quickly (and undisclosed) so the club know where they stand.

Fleetwood are getting money because of his age. They will have done % deal though it's almost a standard feature of lower league transfers. See us getting some money for signing and never playing Berry. We'll do the same with Chris when we sell him I'm certain. We know from Watmore though that doesn't always work out so well.

Stokes went for over 300 all in I think and he came with a wage free loan back. so that's 500k in value surely. We've gotta hope it gets bidding war silly to push to the higher end. Which as has been mentioned might come with the social media frenzy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well could be!) but I'm not sure age comes into it - Fleetwood agreed a transfer with us, of their own free will, for a player that was under contract with them. How well they negotiated in terms of sell-on % is up to them.

Age does I believe for players under 23 that have been trained by an academy there is a fixed solidarity percentage around 5%. This will mean Burnley and Fleetwood profit. We got the same when Dan Mooney left for his sojourn to the world of big crowds and small squads.

The owner of the club does not do the contract administration either. It would be negligent of an employee to just not bother with an industry standard clause.

We'll owe around 20-25% is my guess to Fleetwood (& Burnley to a lesser extent). With similar percentages negotiated in with the sale price when we are negotiating. Remember this clause is free money to all selling parties involved. It's an easy sweetener on a player you rate.

Dan Mooney was out of contract though - I thought it was to protect clubs who had developed a young player only to lose them for absolutely nothing?

I agree that I'd be amazed if the industry standard clause isn't in there - out of a £250k fee for argument's sake, I suspect at least £50k would go to Fleetwood.

Burnley chose to release him, I don't think they'd get a penny otherwise it would be carnage up and down the pyramid. I'm sure the acid test is demonstrating that you put your own contract on the table.

[Amsterdam Alty]

500K would be unbelievable. I think (should CCC leave) it'll be nearer the Stokes fee tbh but I hope you are right. Do I think Fleetwood would have been stupid? Yes 🤣

Whatever happens, I just hope it's done quickly (and undisclosed) so the club know where they stand.

Fleetwood are getting money because of his age. They will have done % deal though it's almost a standard feature of lower league transfers. See us getting some money for signing and never playing Berry. We'll do the same with Chris when we sell him I'm certain. We know from Watmore though that doesn't always work out so well.

Stokes went for over 300 all in I think and he came with a wage free loan back. so that's 500k in value surely. We've gotta hope it gets bidding war silly to push to the higher end. Which as has been mentioned might come with the social media frenzy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well could be!) but I'm not sure age comes into it - Fleetwood agreed a transfer with us, of their own free will, for a player that was under contract with them. How well they negotiated in terms of sell-on % is up to them.

Age does I believe for players under 23 that have been trained by an academy there is a fixed solidarity percentage around 5%. This will mean Burnley and Fleetwood profit. We got the same when Dan Mooney left for his sojourn to the world of big crowds and small squads.

The owner of the club does not do the contract administration either. It would be negligent of an employee to just not bother with an industry standard clause.

We'll owe around 20-25% is my guess to Fleetwood (& Burnley to a lesser extent). With similar percentages negotiated in with the sale price when we are negotiating. Remember this clause is free money to all selling parties involved. It's an easy sweetener on a player you rate.

Dan Mooney was out of contract though - I thought it was to protect clubs who had developed a young player only to lose them for absolutely nothing?

I agree that I'd be amazed if the industry standard clause isn't in there - out of a £250k fee for argument's sake, I suspect at least £50k would go to Fleetwood.

Burnley chose to release him, I don't think they'd get a penny otherwise it would be carnage up and down the pyramid. I'm sure the acid test is demonstrating that you put your own contract on the table.

There are two rules. The one we were able to take advantage of as a out of contract player with Mooney, then the training solidarity fee which is where we'd need to share some cash in a sale situation to all parties involved in their development.

I know of this due to FM but it is real they might not know the actual wages/real player ratings etc. but they do have the rules to hand.

[MarpleAlty]

500K would be unbelievable. I think (should CCC leave) it'll be nearer the Stokes fee tbh but I hope you are right. Do I think Fleetwood would have been stupid? Yes 🤣

Whatever happens, I just hope it's done quickly (and undisclosed) so the club know where they stand.

Fleetwood are getting money because of his age. They will have done % deal though it's almost a standard feature of lower league transfers. See us getting some money for signing and never playing Berry. We'll do the same with Chris when we sell him I'm certain. We know from Watmore though that doesn't always work out so well.

Stokes went for over 300 all in I think and he came with a wage free loan back. so that's 500k in value surely. We've gotta hope it gets bidding war silly to push to the higher end. Which as has been mentioned might come with the social media frenzy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well could be!) but I'm not sure age comes into it - Fleetwood agreed a transfer with us, of their own free will, for a player that was under contract with them. How well they negotiated in terms of sell-on % is up to them.

Age does I believe for players under 23 that have been trained by an academy there is a fixed solidarity percentage around 5%. This will mean Burnley and Fleetwood profit. We got the same when Dan Mooney left for his sojourn to the world of big crowds and small squads.

The owner of the club does not do the contract administration either. It would be negligent of an employee to just not bother with an industry standard clause.

We'll owe around 20-25% is my guess to Fleetwood (& Burnley to a lesser extent). With similar percentages negotiated in with the sale price when we are negotiating. Remember this clause is free money to all selling parties involved. It's an easy sweetener on a player you rate.

Dan Mooney was out of contract though - I thought it was to protect clubs who had developed a young player only to lose them for absolutely nothing?

I agree that I'd be amazed if the industry standard clause isn't in there - out of a £250k fee for argument's sake, I suspect at least £50k would go to Fleetwood.

Burnley chose to release him, I don't think they'd get a penny otherwise it would be carnage up and down the pyramid. I'm sure the acid test is demonstrating that you put your own contract on the table.

There are two rules. The one we were able to take advantage of as a out of contract player with Mooney, then the training solidarity fee which is where we'd need to share some cash in a sale situation to all parties involved in their development.

I know of this due to FM but it is real they might not know the actual wages/real player ratings etc. but they do have the rules to hand.

Wasn't familiar with this at all! Thanks for the info.

[StaffsAlty]

At the risk of being bannished to that place in East Cheshire beginning with ‘M’ one observation i have on CCC over the last few games of the season was that he seemed desperate to get on the scoresheet rather than looking at who was around him in the box that were in better positions to ‘slot the ball’ home. Certainly a couple of chances at Bromley and there were a number of frustrated reactions as to why he shot instead of passed from his team mates in the box. Maybe its the ‘selfish striker’ mode i dont know, but as good as CCC is maybe , and im not saying he isnt before i write this, a more team focus no 10 is needed. I wouldnt want to see him leave as his skill is great but maybe his awareness in the box could be worked on and trick the opposition into thinking he is playing 23/24 style of ‘going it alone’ to draw defenders into him but then break out 24/25 style to pass to those unmarked so the team benefits from his ability scoring more next season

Just my thoughts. And getting packed ready for the knock on the door from the extradition team to cart me off to ‘M.;?)?;ld

Looking forward to 2024 season