pozbaird Posted July 6, 2018 Share Posted July 6, 2018 8 minutes ago, Stu said: Queens tried for MacKenzie but it's a no go, presuming over wages. Have Queens still got a plastic pitch? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted July 6, 2018 Share Posted July 6, 2018 1 minute ago, pozbaird said: Have Queens still got a plastic pitch? Yeah but he's played on it plenty of times - scored the winner just before Christmas. Don't think it's as big a problem for him as Davis. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djchapsticks Posted July 6, 2018 Author Share Posted July 6, 2018 https://www.stmirren.com/news/club/all-news/1972-bolton-game-cancelled Friendly cancelled tomorrow as Bolton go on strike over unpaid wages. And yet they call our league 'tinpot' and 'Sunday league'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordecai Posted July 6, 2018 Share Posted July 6, 2018 https://www.stmirren.com/news/club/all-news/1972-bolton-game-cancelled Friendly cancelled tomorrow as Bolton go on strike over unpaid wages. And yet they call our league 'tinpot' and 'Sunday league'. [emoji38] I'm not sure it'll get the fans onside to announce the strike the day before an away match where fans will have bought travel and potentially accommodation. It's not looking good for Bolton anyway, will probably deter a few potential signings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geo87 Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 There are more than just four who have been told to look for another club. This is a savage re-structuring of the squad. Do you think he’s come to the conclusion after la manga that the players just aren’t good enough? Or do you think he’s trying to break up Ross’s players? It couldn’t have been an easy changing room to take over considering how much the players (I assume) liked and respected Ross 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddist Monk Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 41 minutes ago, geo87 said: It couldn’t have been an easy changing room to take over considering how much the players (I assume) liked and respected Ross I understand the point you are making but you'd expect that to be much less of an issue considering it was Ross' decision to leave rather than he was forced out. In regard to Stubbs, I see where he's coming from. If we are all being honest there are players we'd like to keep that aren't likely to do that well in the top division. If he thinks he can guide us beyond the relegation fight then I'm happy to see where this goes even if it means an almost complete turn over of the squad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djchapsticks Posted July 7, 2018 Author Share Posted July 7, 2018 John McGinn moving on today or Monday. Seen quoted that it's £2.5m up front with additional performance based clauses raising it to £5m. We are definitely due the same cut of those performance based clauses as we are for the upfront cash so it's a fantastic deal for us which could potentially get even better if and when he is a success at Celtic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 15 minutes ago, djchapsticks said: John McGinn moving on today or Monday. Seen quoted that it's £2.5m up front with additional performance based clauses raising it to £5m. We are definitely due the same cut of those performance based clauses as we are for the upfront cash so it's a fantastic deal for us which could potentially get even better if and when he is a success at Celtic. I'm not sure you get any of the clauses, these deals are usually based on the initial fee and the initial fee only. So you'll get 30% of the profit, and that's it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddist Monk Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 1 hour ago, djchapsticks said: John McGinn moving on today or Monday. Seen quoted that it's £2.5m up front with additional performance based clauses raising it to £5m. On 01/07/2018 at 16:31, Buddist Monk said: If I had to guess, I'd expect it to be the low end of £2m with Allan on top, so say... £2.3m with some extra bits added on for performance? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djchapsticks Posted July 7, 2018 Author Share Posted July 7, 2018 56 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: I'm not sure you get any of the clauses, these deals are usually based on the initial fee and the initial fee only. So you'll get 30% of the profit, and that's it. I'm sure that performance and appearance based clauses are included. If they weren't, there'd be nothing stopping Celtic offering nothing upfront but £2.5m to Hibs upon the first appearance and therefore cutting us out completely. Even if it's the case that we don't get any clause related extras, though, it's still £800k upfront which is cracking turn for us. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddist Monk Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 There is not a chance in hell that we could have sold McGinn for £800k if he had chosen to stay with us. While it was disappointing to lose one of our best players in a generation for next to nothing the sell on clause has really worked wonders for us in this instance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenburn bud Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said: I'm not sure you get any of the clauses, these deals are usually based on the initial fee and the initial fee only. So you'll get 30% of the profit, and that's it. Why are you guessing about contractual clauses, when you have no idea of the details. Edited July 7, 2018 by glenburn bud 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lebowski Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 I'm not sure you get any of the clauses, these deals are usually based on the initial fee and the initial fee only. So you'll get 30% of the profit, and that's it. Absolute pish. Hibs got additional fees out of Fletchers performance clauses after Burnley punted him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 15 minutes ago, Lebowski said: 2 hours ago, RandomGuy. said: I'm not sure you get any of the clauses, these deals are usually based on the initial fee and the initial fee only. So you'll get 30% of the profit, and that's it. Absolute pish. Hibs got additional fees out of Fletchers performance clauses after Burnley punted him. Any proof of that? I was told about the May deal, and clauses don't carry when the player moves on afterwards. We had clauses about him reaching a certain amount of caps, we won't receive anything from Sheffield Wednesday if he receives caps while at Aberdeen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lebowski Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 Any proof of that? I was told about the May deal, and clauses don't carry when the player moves on afterwards. We had clauses about him reaching a certain amount of caps, we won't receive anything from Sheffield Wednesday if he receives caps while at Aberdeen. Of course they don't. Where did I say they did? But the fee Hibs get for Mcginn St Mirren are due their percentage of. The clauses don't continue on, but the fees for the new clauses for the current transfer are paid to the team with the percentage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Lebowski said: Of course they don't. Where did I say they did? But the fee Hibs get for Mcginn St Mirren are due their percentage of. The clauses don't continue on, but the fees for the new clauses for the current transfer are paid to the team with the percentage. Yes, St Mirren get their 33% of the profit, of the initial fee. They don't get any money for the clauses they'd agreed with Hibs that are unpaid, nor do they get anything from the clauses Hibs have agreed with Celtic. Edited July 7, 2018 by RandomGuy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torfason Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 31 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: Yes, St Mirren get their 33% of the profit, of the initial fee. They don't get any money for the clauses they'd agreed with Hibs that are unpaid, nor do they get anything from the clauses Hibs have agreed with Celtic. If St Mirren had a caps clause with Hibs then that dies when McGinn moves but that isn’t what is being discussed, it’s the total value of the actual transfer fee between Hibs and Celtic that is shared and that includes all future monies related to that transaction. In your example if SW continued to earn from the sale to Aberdeen and if you had a sell on clause then every time they got a payment you would get a percentage. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 8 minutes ago, Torfason said: If St Mirren had a caps clause with Hibs then that dies when McGinn moves but that isn’t what is being discussed, it’s the total value of the actual transfer fee between Hibs and Celtic that is shared and that includes all future monies related to that transaction. So if the deals £3.5m, and the clauses that take it up to £5m are all related to international caps/goals, the percentage will be worked off £3.5m, yes? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 So if the deals £3.5m, and the clauses that take it up to £5m are all related to international caps/goals, the percentage will be worked off £3.5m, yes? I suggest you put your spade aside. Unless of course you were in the room when the details of the contract were agreed. [emoji4] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lebowski Posted July 7, 2018 Share Posted July 7, 2018 nor do they get anything from the clauses Hibs have agreed with Celtic. Yes they do. Of course they do, why on earth wouldn't they? Its already been pointed out that if they didn't Hibs and Celtic could utterly screw St Mirren over by saying that the initial fee was 120k and then 2.4m after one appearance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.