Sterling Deal Complete: 49 million (44 + 5)

[jexykrodic]

In an ideal world, I'd defo agree with you, because we'd surely be entitled to 30+mill upwards at a tribunal when his contract expires. BUT, there's talk of him engaging a very very rarely used loophole called the 'webster ruling', which means he can hand in his notice a few weeks before the end of next season, and buy out his contract for a couple of million and leave on a free. And there will be no compensation.
From what I've read this webster ruling has only been used once by the initial claimant andy webster, but in theory sterling could try it.

He'd leave himself open to being sued and that after expensive court proceedings and no doubt appeals - a lengthy process. It would also almost certainly go to the Dispute Resolution Chamber of FIFA and/or CAS who decide on the market rate for the player. I also read that most top level player have it written into the contract that if they unilaterally terminate their contract, the market rate of the player will be classed as the harm suffered by the club. I don't know if Sterling has this clause but I suspect it's standard now.

 

[Hansern]

The newspapers were saying Citys next bid would be 40 mill + 6 in add ons.
We travel to Asia in a week. You'd think a new bid etc would be lodged by then, or else he's going on the pre season tour.

 

[Mors]

It's not that simple. There was a tonne of stuff posted about the Webster ruling already, the buying club would almost certainly end up paying out a similar amount but it would be undetermined for a while, which no club wants.

I think that's Aidy's only weapon, he must know if we see it out to the end of his contract, then hardly worse off than selling to city this summer - as we'd save at least 65k a week in wages over 2yrs so that's about 6.5-7mill. Then add on to that the 10's of millions we'd get at the tribunal in 2yrs time. And we'd get him playing for us for 2yrs and adding to the team performances.

Unless the webster rule can be used, and let them walk away, we've got to extract the full 50mill. I can't see how we lose otherwise. He can't go on strike, it'll fuck his euro hopes. He can be grumpy all he likes, he has got to perform on the pitch, and for 35k, if he's not performing, we just whack him in the rezzies. We've got players like balotelli on 90k a week not even making the squad, it's not going to make a shit of difference of someone on 35k doesn't make the squad.

 

[Mors]

He'd leave himself open to being sued and that after expensive court proceedings and no doubt appeals - a lengthy process. It would also almost certainly go to the Dispute Resolution Chamber of FIFA and/or CAS who decide on the market rate for the player. I also read that most top level player have it written into the contract that if they unilaterally terminate their contract, the market rate of the player will be classed as the harm suffered by the club. I don't know if Sterling has this clause but I suspect it's standard now.

Well if Aidy doesn't have the webster rule, then him and City don't have a leg to stand on for this transfer, we hold all the cards and sit out for 50mill, cash, upfront, no addons.

 

[Best Believe It]

We've informed the press that we want £50 million for him, which in itself was a stupid idea, so if we accept less than £50 million we'll look like twats.

 

[Oliver Twist]

We've informed the press that we want £50 million for him, which in itself was a stupid idea, so if we accept less than £50 million we'll look like twats.

What about if we don't even accept £50m and ask for £60m?

We'll look ace.

 

[Mystic]

What about if we don't even accept £50m and ask for £60m?

We'll look ace.

We'll look unprofessional.

 

[Insignificance]

We've informed the press that we want £50 million for him, which in itself was a stupid idea, so if we accept less than £50 million we'll look like twats.

I think we have said he is not for sale... then the press slash a 50 million pricetag on him?

 

[Mystic]

I think we have said he is not for sale... then the press slash a 50 million pricetag on him?

They didn't make up that figure, the club told them it.

 

[Oliver Twist]

We'll look unprofessional.

What's new?

And what difference does it make what we tell the press anyway?

 

[Mystic]

What's new?

And what difference does it make what we tell the press anyway?

You're a fool if you don't think our (and all football clubs) usage of the press is all part of the negotiation process.

 

[Best Believe It]

I think we have said he is not for sale... then the press slash a 50 million pricetag on him?

They wouldn't have plucked that figure from nowhere, they would have been briefed. I don't know enough about the process to know whether that's how clubs let other clubs know how much they want (ie through friendly journalists, as in Bascombe, Barrett, Joyce etc) or whether it's just briefed to all and sundry, but I do know we briefed.

 

[Best Believe It]

What's new?

And what difference does it make what we tell the press anyway?

I said this above, but I don't know enough about the way these deals work - I don't know whether leaking to the press via certain journalists is the club's way of letting Man City know how much we want, or whether we would have done that through other intermediaries. But it matters that we named our price after claiming we don't want to sell him. If we don't want to sell him then we shouldn't have named a price. If we did want to sell him, naming our price limits how much we can get for him. We should be canny enough to take advantage of the fact that Man City will spend stupid money on English players and not named a price. We could still have ended up with £50 million, but we were eliminating the prospect - however slim - of getting more.

 

[Oliver Twist]

You're a fool if you don't think our (and all football clubs) usage of the press is all part of the negotiation process.

Are you calling me a fool? Who are you; Mr T?

Anyway, I agree, of course clubs brief the press. But I don't it'll make us look anything, no matter how the Sterling transfer unfolds.

 

[peterhague]

How much would we actually be likely to get at a tribunal? If its £20m plus then I can see that we should hold out for the full £50m upfront.

 

[Mors]

They seem to think Ings Tribunal is going to end up about 8mill. Based on all the shit below, so it's easy enough to think that we'd be entitled to 3 or more times that considering we've had a 40mill bid for him already.

[article]“They would take into account the status of the club the player is leaving, the status of the club he’s joining, the amount of money the club paid when they signed him originally, the length of time he spent at the club and the terms of the contract offered to him by the club he’s at and the club he’s leaving.

“They would also factor in his playing record including any international appearances, as well as any ‘substantiated interest’ shown by other clubs in signing him and reported interest in a player could see the compensation amount rise.

“The panel would also consider other costs, which Burnley would have to provide evidence of, including cost of training and playing facilities, education and welfare requirements, medical facilities, friendly and competitive matches as well as scouting and coaching fees.[/article]

 

[peterhague]

£8m for Ings 🤢

Seems to me a good rule of thumb for these things is about half the player's market value, so quite possibly Sterling would be set at more than £20m.

 

[keniget]

We'll look unprofessional.

Why would we look unprofessional?

 

[Mystic]

Why would we look unprofessional?

Asking for £50million one month, then upping our asking price a month later, seems like a dirty negotiating tactic, which looks unprofessional to me.

 

[Mamma Mia]

Asking for £50million one month, then upping our asking price a month later, seems like a dirty negotiating tactic, which looks unprofessional to me.

Whatever you believe about our briefings to the press, we did not set an asking price. We said he is not for sale.

 

[cloggypop]

City can spend gazillions now though. All they have to do is sell a few more barrels. Raises the asking price for us.

 

[FoxForceFive]

Asking for £50million one month, then upping our asking price a month later, seems like a dirty negotiating tactic, which looks unprofessional to me.

Who gives a shit? Sterling has been unprofessional, his agent has been unprofessional & I guarantee you that behaviour wasn't done so without implicit knowledge that City were going to bid for him, which is unprofessional.

Fuck them. If you can't beat them, join them.

 

[peterhague]

City can spend gazillions now though. All they have to do is sell a few more barrels. Raises the asking price for us.

Are Uefa just completely abandoning FFP now? I thought it had only been relaxed in particular circumstances?

 

[King Binny]

[article=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/11509780/Raheem-Sterling-If-Liverpool-had-offered-me-a-contract-last-summer-I-wouldnt-be-rejecting-100000-a-week-now.html]Liverpool are left with two options if a compromise is not reached. They can maximise the profit from Sterling’s sale by inviting offers this summer, or bide their time in the knowledge his value will not have decreased that much over the next 12 months.

Indeed, Liverpool have no cause to the see the much publicised delay in negotiations until the end of the season as an inconvenience. There are only two months of the campaign left and any notion of a deadline to conclude talks with Sterling is the figment of the agent and player’s imagination.

Sterling has two years left on his existing deal, and although the club would receive a lower transfer fee if his contract expires in 2017 he would not be a free transfer.

Instead, a tribunal would decide his valuation and no English club could be sure how much they would be ordered to pay. It would be unprecedented in English football for a 22-year-old with a World Cup and European Championships on his cv to have his valuation determined independently.

Sterling could, however, move abroad for a nominal fee in those circumstances, something he hinted he was open to.

He said: “Everyone's dream growing up is seeing themselves in an away kit somewhere in a sunny country. But, in reality, I'm happy to be playing for Liverpool and trying to win trophies.”

Sterling is currently losing at least £65,000 a week from his salary. His current wage would have increased from £35,000 to £100,000 had he accepted Liverpool’s last offer.

Over the next two years, that’s around £7 million he is risking if John W. Henry decides to play hardball and refuses to sell to a Premier League rival – something he proved with Luis Suarez he does not bluff about.[/article]

 

[FoxForceFive]

That's what they've said, but in effect they've opened the door, it's as close to unenforceable as possible.

 

[cloggypop]

Are Uefa just completely abandoning FFP now? I thought it had only been relaxed in particular circumstances?

They seem to relax it if you hire expensive lawyers and threaten to sue.

 

[King Binny]

Actually, I'm not sure about the unprofessional part (esp. as the club owning the player). Putting our club's own interest first is what matters most.

For example, Daniel Levy was willing to loan Adebayor out in Jan but when he refused moves to Crystal Palace and QPR, Levy vetoed his move to West Ham (6 points separating them and Spurs then).

 

[peterhague]

They seem to relax it if you hire expensive lawyers and threaten to sue.

That's a problem then, because no lawyer is so expensive that clubs like LFC and Utd can't afford them too, and their case would be stronger given what's been written down in extensively established rules and the investments that have depended on them.

 

[Mystic]

Who gives a shit? Sterling has been unprofessional, his agent has been unprofessional & I guarantee you that behaviour wasn't done so without implicit knowledge that City were going to bid for him, which is unprofessional.

Fuck them. If you can't beat them, join them.

Well, I wasn't say I had a problem with us looking unprofessional in this instance.

 

[gkmacca]

Instead, a tribunal would decide his valuation and no English club could be sure how much they would be ordered to pay. It would be unprecedented in English football for a 22-year-old with a World Cup and European Championships on his cv to have his valuation determined independently.

They wouldn't pluck the figure out of nowhere. In fact, every time that City bid this summer, the more guidance they'll be supplying to such an independent tribunal.