Maxwel Cornet

[Btay]

17 minutes ago, Goodison Glory said:

So we will pay 35% more than we need to in order to defer - we are in the shit.

It’s not ideal but if it keeps us up this season the extra £7m is peanuts. Also, £5 million upfront is probably equivalent to that of a loan fee so it doesn’t look as bad as it seems.

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

https://www.goodisonnews.com/2022/07/25/burnley-want-clubs-to-pay-17-5m-to-sign-everton-target-maxwel-cornet/

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

 

[RuffRob]

Reading two stories today - one saying we have agreed £67k a week deal with him, other say Newcastle are going to grab him from under our noses. 

[MikeO]

2 minutes ago, RuffRob said:

Reading two stories today - one saying we have agreed £67k a week deal with him, other say Newcastle are going to grab him from under our noses. 

I heard he was going to jack it all in and sign up with the Taliban.

[London Blue]

Not in their match squad for tonight.

[Hafnia]

My guess is that with us having done business with them with McNeil that they will be more receptive to us. 

[StevO]

4 hours ago, MikeO said:

I heard he was going to jack it all in and sign up with the Taliban.

It fell through. Talibans away strip this season has a rainbow on it. 

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

https://www.goodisonnews.com/2022/07/31/everton-given-25m-price-for-maxwel-cornet-to-do-transfer-in-instalments/

[Matt]

So release clause is only relevant if its paid up front? I don't buy that. 

[SpartyBlue]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

So release clause is only relevant if its paid up front? I don't buy that. 

Makes sense to me. Otherwise you could just pay 1m a year for 18 years or something 

[Matt]

11 minutes ago, SpartyBlue said:

Makes sense to me. Otherwise you could just pay 1m a year for 18 years or something 

But the clause is a value, not a payment plan. If the value is being met, I'd imagine negotiation on the payment plan makes sense but just saying "no, we don't accept that but if that's what you want to do then it's an extra 40%" doesn't seem right to me. 

[SpartyBlue]

1 minute ago, Matt said:

But the clause is a value, not a payment plan. If the value is being met, I'd imagine negotiation on the payment plan makes sense but just saying "no, we don't accept that but if that's what you want to do then it's an extra 40%" doesn't seem right to me. 

It has to be the full fee unless otherwise negotiated. Imagine Richie having a 50m release cause and Spurs saying we will pay you 7m for 7 years or something. It would seriously damage the selling club. 
 

Seems smart by Burnley. We want the money now. If you can’t pay now then it’s going to cost you more in the long run. We have an option to avoid it by just paying the fee. If we are unable to then makes sense we’d get charged a premium. I would guess we would settle on a fee less than 25m but that assumes another club won’t give them a better offer which may be just to pay the release clause in total 

[Wall Writer]

I always thought that it was something like a buy out clause - in other words, pay us this amount of money stated in your contract and the contract is terminated. Essentially the new club pays the amount set in the contract and the player is free to join the new club. That's my naive understanding of this type of clause at least, but I guess it all depends on the wording of the contract, and whether the selling club is willing to accept any alternative terms (If the club wanted to they could agree to 1m a year for 18 years - that's their prerogative). 

[SpartyBlue]

1 minute ago, Wall Writer said:

I always thought that it was something like a buy out clause - in other words, pay us this amount of money stated in your contract and the contract is terminated. Essentially the new club pays the amount set in the contract and the player is free to join the new club. That's my naive understanding of this type of clause at least, but I guess it all depends on the wording of the contract, and whether the selling club is willing to accept any alternative terms (If the club wanted to they could agree to 1m a year for 18 years - that's their prerogative). 

Certainly. It’s just very unlikely a club would ever do that, particularly one in Burnley’s situation. 

[SpartyBlue]

I’m curious how it works when multiple teams are willing to pay a release clause. Is it the player’s decision? Is it a bidding war with a deadline? 

[London Blue]

2 minutes ago, SpartyBlue said:

I’m curious how it works when multiple teams are willing to pay a release clause. Is it the player’s decision? Is it a bidding war with a deadline? 

Depends on how the contract is written, if it says once the clause is activated the player must be free to choose I guess.

[Matt]

19 minutes ago, SpartyBlue said:

It has to be the full fee unless otherwise negotiated. Imagine Richie having a 50m release cause and Spurs saying we will pay you 7m for 7 years or something. It would seriously damage the selling club. 
 

Seems smart by Burnley. We want the money now. If you can’t pay now then it’s going to cost you more in the long run. We have an option to avoid it by just paying the fee. If we are unable to then makes sense we’d get charged a premium. I would guess we would settle on a fee less than 25m but that assumes another club won’t give them a better offer which may be just to pay the release clause in total 

Why does it have to be the full fee? Release clauses aren't even met a lot of the time (see Spain). It is "smart" by Burnley on the surface and I understand they want the big chunk up front but to refuse anything than all of it and then add 40% as a negotiation, all the while frustrating the player and potentially upsetting their dressing room isn't all that smart when you think about it in more detail. 

But as LB wrote, all depends on how the contracts are written I guess. 

[SpartyBlue]

15 minutes ago, Matt said:

Why does it have to be the full fee? Release clauses aren't even met a lot of the time (see Spain). It is "smart" by Burnley on the surface and I understand they want the big chunk up front but to refuse anything than all of it and then add 40% as a negotiation, all the while frustrating the player and potentially upsetting their dressing room isn't all that smart when you think about it in more detail. 

But as LB wrote, all depends on how the contracts are written I guess. 

If a player isn’t worth his release clause of course he could go for less. That isn’t really relevant here.

Sure, it depends on the contract but it doesn’t make sense for a release clause to not mean a large chunk of the fee or the whole fee. Otherwise a club could just do what I described and offer the selling club a fraction of the release clause over many years. That would be horrible. We would burn down goodison if we were forced to sell Richarlison for a Nominal yearly fee and couldn’t reinvest

[Matt]

30 minutes ago, SpartyBlue said:

If a player isn’t worth his release clause of course he could go for less. That isn’t really relevant here.

Sure, it depends on the contract but it doesn’t make sense for a release clause to not mean a large chunk of the fee or the whole fee. Otherwise a club could just do what I described and offer the selling club a fraction of the release clause over many years. That would be horrible. We would burn down goodison if we were forced to sell Richarlison for a Nominal yearly fee and couldn’t reinvest

He's had a decent 6 months, the release clause is only marginally larger than what they paid. 

£13m is a large chunk of the £17.5m release clause, which is what we're rumoured to have offered in that latest link. Rather than £4m in installments (which could be paid off relatively quicker) they want £17.5m plus £8m in installments? That's not negotiation, that's just stupid. 

[SpartyBlue]

9 minutes ago, Matt said:

He's had a decent 6 months, the release clause is only marginally larger than what they paid. 

£13m is a large chunk of the £17.5m release clause, which is what we're rumoured to have offered in that latest link. Rather than £4m in installments (which could be paid off relatively quicker) they want £17.5m plus £8m in installments? That's not negotiation, that's just stupid. 

I don’t believe they can dictate to us if we pay the release clause in full. Perhaps if they have Cornet agree to come to Everton only if we pay that extra bit or something. 
 

Again though, a release clause is only logical if you have to pay it up front to trigger it. Otherwise every club in the world would be in for Lionel Messi at 2m a year for 100 years or whatever. 
 

Helps Burnley that they appear to have at least a couple of suitors here. We shall see.

[StevO]

Every clause can be written in any possible way, as long as the club and the player agree to it being in the contract. 
If Burnley wrote in that it needs to be paid in full, and Cornet agreed to it, then it’s their prerogative to turn down anything that doesn’t meet the clause. They may choose to accept a payment plan, after all it’s very rare a club don’t buy on a payment plan anyway, but again that would be their choice. 
There are no standard clauses, no “that’s not how it work’s”, it’s a contract. As long as the terms are agreed to it can be anything, so long as it’s legal. 
Burnley might have a clause saying they must be paid in gold and ruby, if that’s the clause it is what it is. 
 

Hopefully, if we are trying to him, Burnley will be happy to negotiate on the payment terms. From an accounting point of view, if we pay it all this year or over five years, it’ll be spread over the terms of his contract on the books as amortisation, so makes no difference to P&S. It’s just whether Moshiri wants to put his hand in his pocket to cover the expense in the short term. 

[StevO]

2 hours ago, SpartyBlue said:

We would burn down goodison if we were forced to sell Richarlison for a Nominal yearly fee and couldn’t reinvest

It would never be a nominal fee. Chances are Spurs won’t have paid it all in one lump sum. Probably paid over three/four years, but as we’ve sold him the guaranteed money can go into the accounts in one go, minus what expenses we had left from when we bought him. So ball park, we paid about £36m for him, five year initial contract with four years gone, so maybe £7m left. £43m gone in the accounts. 
 

When exactly we get the money isn’t as important as the guaranteed value of the sale. 

[SpartyBlue]

23 minutes ago, StevO said:

It would never be a nominal fee. Chances are Spurs won’t have paid it all in one lump sum. Probably paid over three/four years, but as we’ve sold him the guaranteed money can go into the accounts in one go, minus what expenses we had left from when we bought him. So ball park, we paid about £36m for him, five year initial contract with four years gone, so maybe £7m left. £43m gone in the accounts. 
 

When exactly we get the money isn’t as important as the guaranteed value of the sale. 

I hear you, if it’s all the same as far as FFP goes then it’s a different conversation. I would still expect that in most release clause situations you can’t pay a small fraction over many years. I suppose we just can’t know until this deal is done, or not.

[StevO]

10 hours ago, SpartyBlue said:

I hear you, if it’s all the same as far as FFP goes then it’s a different conversation. I would still expect that in most release clause situations you can’t pay a small fraction over many years. I suppose we just can’t know until this deal is done, or not.

It’s not a case of most release clauses, they can all be different, but as almost all transfers are paid in instalments it’s in everyone’s interest for them to be paid like that, so no real need for them to lock into the clause anyway.  

And we probably won’t know even if a deal is done, it’s very rarely disclosed in detail. 

[Romey 1878]

West Ham are in advanced talks to sign him.

[patto]

1 minute ago, Romey 1878 said:

West Ham are in advanced talks to sign him.

Haha tit for tat.

[dunlopp9987]

5 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

West Ham are in advanced talks to sign him.

Yep, they've activated the £17.5m release clause

[AlbanyNYToffee]

Can put this one to bed. Moyes has just said he's in the building. 

[Romey 1878]

Signed for West Ham.