Undisclosed fees

Should be ******* banned. Total lack of respect from football club owners towards the lifeblood of their clubs.

 

£1.25 million

 

I disagree. There’s transparency and then there’s disclosing sensitive financial information to your immediate competitors thus prejudicing your position. I don’t mind media speculation as it can easily be refuted and is often incorrect but for a club to be obliged to divulge the ins and outs of every deal just isn’t for me, it would do more harm than good and would only serve to appease those amongst the fan base with a need to know everything about their club and its business.

 

Very frustrating. I would have argued that they avoid other clubs knowing how much money we have received which may in turn inflate their value of our targets. But I'm sure anyone within the game could probably find out the figure through a couple of calls. I doubt there's many secrets in modern football.

 

Theoretically I agree. But clubs, agents and players will all know the exact terms of the deal. It's only fans that don't .

 

Every other club that wants to know WILL know. Only supporters are in the dark

 

I fail to see how every club that isn’t party to the legal documentation will know the definitive ins and outs. As I said above, media speculation is often incorrect and as we’ve seen with the likes of Posh’s chairman, even those within the game are often miles off even if they think that they aren’t. As a fan myself I just can’t understand the clamour some have to know from thread to the needle. If it was in a club’s best interests to disclose all information then they would, it’s as simple as that.

 

Any proven examples of this? Really interesting that you seem to have such an insight.

Looking forward to the follow up post.

 

What evidence would you take as proof?

 

Fan want to know because they have not only invested large sums of money (relatively speaking) but have invested a lot of their emotions and lives in the club and in the players too.

Clubs will find out because its in agents interests to go spreading it around in order to make more moves happen

 

I'm sure there's a valid reason for it, but I have no idea what that reason is.
Bizarrely, I could tap the address of anyone of my neighbours, into the Internet, and find out exactly what they paid for their houses. But a footballer, in the public eye, and their value gets buried.

 

Any example? Every player we've ever sold where the buying club has mysteriously guessed the release fee.

Any proof that when they want to talk then people can't keep their gobs shut despite releasing undisclosed fee statements? Patrick cryne

 

That’s completely different though, JBP. You’re comparing a legal estate in land with essentially a business asset. You couldn’t type something into the internet and ascertain what a local or national business had paid for a new bit of plant or machinery.

 

What do you mean, @SuperTyke?

 

I think it shows a spectacular naivety to believe it doesn't happen.

John Smith is the agent of Tom Bradshaw. He is privy to every clause in the deal that takes Tom from Barnsley to Millwall. He helped broker it.

Jordan Willliams (yet another) is the agent of Bradley Green who Barnsley are hoping to sign in replacement for Tom. Jordan works for the same firm of sports agents as John. They have desks in the same office.

Jordan Williams: "Hey John, how much did Millwall pay Barnsley for Tom Bradshaw?"

Mapplewell Red is right though. It is in the club's best interests to keep the details of the transfer secret. If you don't tell the people who put all the money into the club, they can't hold you accountable.

 

Clubs have bought our players before where they have randomly made an offer that exactly matches a release fee in the players contract. In other words his agent couldn't keep his gob shut because it was in his financial interest to force another move.

 

And that last sentence is the only real reason for undisclosed fees.

 

Incredibly disingenuous analysis of my post.

Payments are often staged and incentive based. An agent may say that their player has moved for circa £1m but that £1m may be over 24 months with certain aspects governed by player or club performances post completion. That’s the difference, Jay.

 

Like who? I can’t recall off the top of my head any players with a contractual clause where we’re obliged to accept an offer of a certain amount.

 

They know that information too and pass it on just as readily. And it wasn't an analysis of your post. Just an observation of how you've got it wrong.