Jump to content

Saints will get 'development fee' if bale is sold


Batman

Recommended Posts

Imagine if we'd not had to cash in our sell on fee and had 15% coming our way, a nice little £12m bonus would come in handy.

 

Yeah, but to be fair, all we need to do to get 12M is to invite Arsene down :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something is better than nothing, but pretty astonishing that we can produce one of top 3 players in world football and get a total of £9 million from the original transfer and sell-on.

 

Meanwhile, Spurs will be rolling in + £80 million. I know a lot of this is circumstantial (our financial predicament, Bale's own development at Spurs, etc.) but it does seem a gross injustice.

 

The FA solidarity agreements are a good policy in itself, but could definitely be topped up to at least the 15% mark. I'm sure quite a few clubs would agree on this (Palace, Crewe, etc.) and might dissuade big clubs from collecting all the talent from lower leagues and letting them rot in their reserves.

 

At the very least, it would give the academies of those clubs prone to having their best young talent 'poached', something close to a fair reward for all their work developing the player. You can see why someone like Simon Jordan became so exasperated with players like Bostock, Moses, and even Clyne (after his time I know), sold at tribunal for next to nothing.

 

It's also in the F.A.'s best interest as they would ensure that those academies producing the best players have another revenue stream coming in and something of a solid financial underpinning. Where would they be if clubs like Saints and Palace actually went into liquidation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something is better than nothing, but pretty astonishing that we can produce one of top 3 players in world football and get a total of £9 million from the original transfer and sell-on.

 

Meanwhile, Spurs will be rolling in + £80 million. I know a lot of this is circumstantial (our financial predicament, Bale's own development at Spurs, etc.) but it does seem a gross injustice.

 

The FA solidarity agreements are a good policy in itself, but could definitely be topped up to at least the 15% mark. I'm sure quite a few clubs would agree on this (Palace, Crewe, etc.) and might dissuade big clubs from collecting all the talent from lower leagues and letting them rot in their reserves.

 

At the very least, it would give the academies of those clubs prone to having their best young talent 'poached', something close to a fair reward for all their work developing the player. You can see why someone like Simon Jordan became so exasperated with players like Bostock, Moses, and even Clyne (after his time I know), sold at tribunal for next to nothing.

 

It's also in the F.A.'s best interest as they would ensure that those academies producing the best players have another revenue stream coming in and something of a solid financial underpinning. Where would they be if clubs like Saints and Palace actually went into liquidation?

 

he was not even close to that when he left saints

the player he is now is quite far removed from the left back that left saints

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he was not even close to that when he left saints

the player he is now is quite far removed from the left back that left saints

 

You have a tendency to isolate a specific sentence or cluster of words in my post and ignore the broader point I was making. Also, pretty sure I acknowledged his development at Spurs in the following sentence. Feel free to embolden that as well. ;)

 

Do you really think having a mandatory 15% development fee would be asking too much? Are you saying that Spurs contributed + 85% to the player he is today?

 

He is obviously not the same player he was when he left Saints, but he was also the best player of his age I have ever seen play (with the possible exception of Shaw, who has done it at PL level).

 

An almost impossible thing to quantify, I realise, but our academy staff spent eight years developing him at Bath and then Staplewood. He has only been at Spurs for six, two of which he was poorly managed and was perceived as as jinx to the team. Fair play to Spurs for sorting a new position out for him, making best use of his assets, etc. But a lot of his development has been physical and mental - the talent has always been there.

 

Do you not think that academies producing such players deserve a bit more protection from the F.A.? Or is it acceptable that they pour millions into developing players and the 'bigger' team that snap them up reap most, if not all, of the rewards?

Edited by Toon Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really think having a mandatory 15% development fee would be asking too much?

 

we got what? £6m for a good NPC LB with a very bright future. a great deal more than we paid for clyne.

we will get more money

 

spurs have done more to make him into a supposedly £80m player than we have. they have completely transformed him. so not too sure we should be entitled to £££££Mmmmillions really

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we got what? £6m for a good NPC LB with a very bright future. a great deal more than we paid for clyne.

we will get more money

 

spurs have done more to make him into a supposedly £80m player than we have. they have completely transformed him. so not too sure we should be entitled to £££££Mmmmillions really

 

Clyne also one of the players I referred to as being sold dirt-cheap because of the financial predicaments of the selling club. Most Saints fans should be able to sympathize with Palace on that front as we have had to sell so many of our promising players.

 

When you are talking about world-record transfer fees then no, I don't think that is enough at all. The benefit of having a higher development fee would be that it reflects the players relative value, and the selling club (especially, if under financial pressure to sell) wouldn't get quite so shafted by the bigger clubs. What is the incentive for academies if the F.A. just allow that to keep on happening? How is that good for the national game if some of the countries best academies feel it is pointless to carry on developing player as they aren't getting any meaningful rewards?

 

Can you imagine if we were still in the Championship and Shaw and possibly JWP had left this transfer window? Luckily we have money behind us and a shrewd Chairman who sees the long-term benefits of our youth system, but lot's of clubs lower down the leagues aren't in that position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought a development fee was when players (like lennon) were sold before they were on full pro contracts

we sold bale for a large sum (at the time) and then sold out sell on fee.

 

he was not poached as a non-pro if you get me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the rules if Spurs do a money + players deal regarding Bale?

 

Do we get the % from the money or do they put a value on the players in the deal too and we get the % from the total value of the deal?

 

Can we get di Maria's left foot?

Edited by DuncanRG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bale may have been a steal for Spurs (as was Shearer, also with no sell on fee), but there's plenty of ex Saints who didn't live up to their fee who we sold at the right time. James Beattie for example...

 

Kevin Davies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought a development fee was when players (like lennon) were sold before they were on full pro contracts

we sold bale for a large sum (at the time) and then sold out sell on fee.

 

he was not poached as a non-pro if you get me

 

It's something like its scaled down from 5% if the player is there between 12-24, so we'd get a bit. Nothing loads though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this really any different to us buying Crouch for peanuts and selling him for big wedge on the back of us getting him to play well, hate to say it but spurs will be entitled to thier huge profit from turning hom from the leftback we sold to the player he now is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

apart from,

 

 

when in reality, we never

Spurs have transformed him, completely

How much of that was Spurs and how much was his own natural development? It was pretty obvious when he left us he was going to be something special and, frankly, Spurs ignored him for a significant period. I am not sure that they contributed that much let alone transformed him completely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gareth Bale deveoped his career sensibly in that he stayed with us in the early years, to gain experience in the championship. He was something special and he had to go as we needed the money and he wanted better things. Good luck to the boy-he always speaks highly about his time with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gareth Bale deveoped his career sensibly in that he stayed with us in the early years, to gain experience in the championship. He was something special and he had to go as we needed the money and he wanted better things. Good luck to the boy-he always speaks highly about his time with us.
He only played one season with us and left when he was 17.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you honestly believe that rubbish? We have had just as big a hand in his deveopment as Spurs. FFS he played under Redknapp it's lucky he wasn't ruined as footballer.

 

How much of that was Spurs and how much was his own natural development? It was pretty obvious when he left us he was going to be something special and, frankly, Spurs ignored him for a significant period. I am not sure that they contributed that much let alone transformed him completely

 

Gotta love the Saintweb delusionals.

 

In twelve months time, were Clyne to have a dream season at Saints culminating in him scoring the vital shoot out penalty to take us into the WC quarter finals in Rio, I wonder just how much you two would credit Crystal Palace and "just natural development, innit" for his progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gareth Bale deveoped his career sensibly in that he stayed with us in the early years, to gain experience in the championship. He was something special and he had to go as we needed the money and he wanted better things. Good luck to the boy-he always speaks highly about his time with us.

 

Early year. Only played for the first team for less than 13 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much of that was Spurs and how much was his own natural development? It was pretty obvious when he left us he was going to be something special and, frankly, Spurs ignored him for a significant period. I am not sure that they contributed that much let alone transformed him completely

 

Also, if it's all just "natural development" then we don't deserve any credit either, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta love the Saintweb delusionals.

 

In twelve months time, were Clyne to have a dream season at Saints culminating in him scoring the vital shoot out penalty to take us into the WC quarter finals in Rio, I wonder just how much you two would credit Crystal Palace and "just natural development, innit" for his progress.

 

I don't know, he came out of the gates pretty fully formed if you ask me.

 

Yes, he has become more consistent and will get better, but he was a good player before our influence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bale was outstanding for Saints, running matches from left back (ably assisted by Skacel) until Championship sides decided to start doubling up on him. He was a superb talent, able to run through Championship defences almost at will, already had excellent free-kick technique, and was sold to Spurs as a Prem-standard teenager.

 

It took some time for his confidence to come through, not aided by him not playing in a winning Spurs team for the best part of a year, but the most significant changes to Bale came when he was long-term injured in his first season, and came back after his lay off at the start of 2008/9 with shoulders the size of a fridge and finally a manager who actually picked him regularly.

 

Once he knew he was first choice he had the confidence to realise his dribbling past all and sundry could also be done at Prem and European level, and he's since been moved into positions where he can affect a game more frequently due to his obvious talent. He's also changed his physique and leaned up a lot since adding the original muscle mass without it impacting detrimentally on his strength, which is down to a combination of him and his training regime as set by Spurs.

 

The key thing is that Spurs offered a chance to play in the Prem and Europe when Saints couldn't, and that, along with the ability and the level of the players in training around him, helped his progress in a way a Championship side couldn't at the time. But he was a hell of a player even for Saints that season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I'm not sure we do get a development fee, he's over 23 and I was under the impression you only got the compensation payment for U-23 players ? I will defer to MLG on this one, as I can't be bothered to look it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an Echo article from 2006 on him before he had made a 1st team appearance.

 

The interesting bit for me is the 3rd paragraph from the end when you consider he almost single handed tried to get that 4th CL place from arsenal.

I hope the bedwetters on here remember that when Luke plays against chelski or Rickie tries to help Saints beat Liverpool for a European place.

 

? Why do the London Press / media / bedwetters on here make such an issue of Luke being a Chelsea supporter and yet never mention the team that Bale supports ?

Baleat16.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you honestly believe that rubbish? We have had just as big a hand in his deveopment as Spurs. FFS he played under Redknapp it's lucky he wasn't ruined as footballer.

 

True, look what he did to the careers of Frank lampard, Rip Ferdinand and Joe Cole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, look what he did to the careers of Frank lampard, Rip Ferdinand and Joe Cole.

 

They were all like a son to him. Except Frank, more of a nephew. Add Jermaine Defoe to that list of players who succeeded despite Redknapp's influence as well.

 

Oh, and the whole squad from that League Cup game at Mansfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lord Sugar ‏@Lord_Sugar 16h

What is that football players and agents don't understand. If there is a contract in place for 3 years, they have to stick to it. #bale

 

Bale was under contract at Southampton, I wonder if Lord Sugar held that same view in 2007 when Spurs signed him? I doubt it - hypocrite! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something is better than nothing, but pretty astonishing that we can produce one of top 3 players in world football and get a total of £9 million from the original transfer and sell-on.

 

Meanwhile, Spurs will be rolling in + £80 million. I know a lot of this is circumstantial (our financial predicament, Bale's own development at Spurs, etc.) but it does seem a gross injustice.

We got "Future England goalie" Tommy Forecast in lieu of the 15% sell-on clause. What more do you want?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta love the Saintweb delusionals.

 

In twelve months time, were Clyne to have a dream season at Saints culminating in him scoring the vital shoot out penalty to take us into the WC quarter finals in Rio, I wonder just how much you two would credit Crystal Palace and "just natural development, innit" for his progress.

 

If we sold Clyne for a massive fee I would think it fair that Palace should get a decent percentage of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lord Sugar ‏@Lord_Sugar 16h

What is that football players and agents don't understand. If there is a contract in place for 3 years, they have to stick to it. #bale

 

Bale was under contract at Southampton, I wonder if Lord Sugar held that same view in 2007 when Spurs signed him? I doubt it - hypocrite! :D

 

Any reason you have no put to bed the "development money" rumour ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so, due to FIFA rules we will get 5%.

 

Is that 5% of the cash exchange, or do we get 5% of the value of Morata (if he is part of the deal) as well ?

 

 

one might assume..... that the Bale deal is a separate deal to any potential part-exchange.

 

They aresurely two separate business agreements. I can't see how Morata being required to put his signature on a contract for Bale's transfer.

 

At present.. they both have different employers, and different terms of employment.

 

I'd say it was more likely to be 5% of (Bale's) cash valuation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

considering " the Media" is so good at "manufacturing " transfer deals with little substance; suddenly a number of them are on a campaign for Bale NOT to leave Tottenham.

 

They are expecting him to play another season with a club that hasn't won the League title for over 40 year, and any sort of trophy in the last 20 (!)

...and who are almost a one-man band (him), to forget playing in Europe for ANOTHER season, and to be " patriotic ", close his eyes and think of England (sorry Wales).

 

Do they really expect him to stay in little England and continue being the only star at White Hart Lane?.

 

Total bull ****. He's one of the best players in Europe, he deserves to play for one of the best clubs in Europe.

 

If he make a fortune out of this deal - good luck to him....and just give us our £2 mill. it should have been MUCH, MUCH more.

Edited by david in sweden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...