Sell on clauses

[Igovernor]

Does anyone know if the money due for a sell on clause has to be paid to the former club upfront or is it paid in installments as the second club receives its payments, thanks

[Heisenberg]

Does anyone know if the money due for a sell on clause has to be paid to the former club upfront or is it paid in installments as the second club receives its payments, thanks

For example: If Sala has a 50% sell on clause in his contract and City are going to pay £10m up front and the rest in installments, Nantes would have to pay Bordeaux £5m on receipt of the first payment and then 50% of everything they receive in the future (when they receive it)

Edit: Also, in the unlikely event that there is a sell on clause in Sala's contract with us, Nantes would still have to pay 50% of anything they receive to Bordeaux.

[Igovernor]

Cheers

[StraightOuttaCanton]

For example: If Sala has a 50% sell on clause in his contract and City are going to pay £10m up front and the rest in installments, Nantes would have to pay Bordeaux £5m on receipt of the first payment and then 50% of everything they receive in the future (when they receive it)

Edit: Also, in the unlikely event that there is a sell on clause in Sala's contract with us, Nantes would still have to pay 50% of anything they receive to Bordeaux.

There will be multiple options. Everything is negotiable

[Heisenberg]

There will be multiple options. Everything is negotiable

Not quite sure what you mean there. Care to explain?

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Not quite sure what you mean there. Care to explain?

Surely it depends on the individual contracts between the clubs.

[Heisenberg]

Surely it depends on the individual contracts between the clubs.

In general contracts, yes... but with a sell on fee in football it's classed as the money received from a transfer, not what they will potentially receive.

Can you imagine if that wasn't the case and Nantes pay £9m up front to Bordeaux for the estimated £18m from Sala's transfer and then City fail to pay them the rest of the installments because some of the performance related add-ons in his contract haven't been activated?

[Taunton Blue Genie]

In general contracts, yes... but with a sell on fee in football it's classed as the money received from a transfer, not what they will potentially receive.

Can you imagine if that wasn't the case and Nantes pay £9m up front to Bordeaux for the estimated £18m from Sala's transfer and then City fail to pay them the rest of the installments because some of the performance related add-ons in his contract haven't been activated?

I can imagine that not all contracts are absolutely identical and that they may vary in their complexity.

[Heisenberg]

I can imagine that not all contracts are absolutely identical and that they may vary in their complexity.

Again, yes... but it's not a contractual issue, it's a football governing issue on transfers and how they are enforced.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Again, yes... but it's not a contractual issue, it's a football governing issue on transfers and how they are enforced.

It seems that it is more nuanced than that e.g. gross v net fee:

https://www.ecaeurope.com/media/2728...tin-5-2015.pdf

[Heisenberg]

It seems that it is more nuanced than that e.g. gross v net fee:

https://www.ecaeurope.com/media/2728...tin-5-2015.pdf

I'm well aware of that, but we're not discussing all of the semantics of a sell on fee - we're just discussing when and how it is determined that a sell on fee will be paid in terms of installments.

That link is actually the one I used to get my information on sell on fees previously and has a very clear interpretation of how rulings were made on installments in regards to sell on fees - especially in contractual matters.

As you can see from the link, on a couple of occasions, legal action was taken by clubs in regards to not receiving payment up front or (on time) as expected - as it was stated in the contracts. The FIFA PSC ruled on every occasion that a club would not be enforced to pay any sell on fees until they had received their share first.

Like I said, it's not a contractual issue, it's a football governing issue on transfers and how they are enforced.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

I'm well aware of that, but we're not discussing all of the semantics of a sell on fee - we're just discussing when and how it is determined that a sell on fee will be paid in terms of installments.

That link is actually the one I used to get my information on sell on fees previously and has a very clear interpretation of how rulings were made on installments in regards to sell on fees - especially in contractual matters.

As you can see from the link, on a couple of occasions, legal action was taken by clubs in regards to not receiving payment up front or (on time) as expected - as it was stated in the contracts. The FIFA PSC ruled on every occasion that a club would not be enforced to pay any sell on fees until they had received their share first.

Like I said, it's not a contractual issue, it's a football governing issue on transfers and how they are enforced.

I understand what you are saying, brother blood. I bet the selling club doesn't contribute to any loss when a player is sold on

[Shute]

This is all fine and good but it doesn't answer the question "When are we getting our sell on clause for Bale's transfers to Spurs and Madrid?"

[Superdad]

I can imagine that not all contracts are absolutely identical and that they may vary in their complexity.

This article in reference to Jordan Rhodes is pretty good at explaining the subject. Far from straightforward.


https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport...-sell-10762768