THE CAS AGREES WITH FC NANTES

[Eric the Half a Bee]

I have always thought it rather strange that a player's employer doesn't include in the contract that only approved airlines should be used in order to protect their very valuable assets.

While I wouldn't be surprised if that happens as a result, would the contract also insist on only having approved taxi drivers etc?

[The Lone Gunman]

Too many simplistic viewpoints on this thread.

The viewpoints of FIFA and the CAS seem fairly simplistic - Cardiff City bought the player and should therefore pay for the player.

[Bobby Dandruff]

I am of the opinion there are many, many businesses and clubs who would have paid the transfer fees and dealt with these issues later and there are certainly good negotiators out there that could have sorted this out between the two clubs with understanding and empathy. I am absolutely sure there wouldn't be many on here defending another club for doing what we've done.

Would you ever feel comfortable with dealing with this Cardiff City regarding this kind of asset while the current board/owner is here?

I’m going to disagree with you here.

We are talking about a lot of money here - companies will go to great lengths, within the law, to avoid paying, whether we might think it right or wrong.

If this wasn’t football, Tan’s company would be doing exactly the same thing.

[DubaiDai]

Public disinformation campaign?

Nobody comes out of this at all well, especially Cardiff who really ought to pay something

I agree but Nantes should also come to the table. If reports are to be believed Nantes and the agent were responsible for continually hiking the fee based on fictitious counter offers from other clubs.
At £5.3M (first instalment) Nantes have already made a financial killing as Sala cost them less than £1M

[DubaiDai]

If Sala was insured properly I'm pretty sure it would have been the Insurance Company pursuing the matter in the courts and not Cardiff City. If everything had been set up correctly then the Insurance Co. would have paid out according to the terms and then it's their business to pursue damage claims in the courts with the aim of defraying expenses. Was everything set up correctly on our part?

I don’t think he was covered by insurance until he was fully signed. Which he wasn’t

[The Lone Gunman]

At £5.3M (first instalment) Nantes have already made a financial killing as Sala cost them less than £1M

I’ve seen this sort of line trotted out before. It’s amazing. It’s as if the writers have no idea how football transfers work.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

I am of the opinion there are many, many businesses and clubs who would have paid the transfer fees and dealt with these issues later and there are certainly good negotiators out there that could have sorted this out between the two clubs with understanding and empathy. I am absolutely sure there wouldn't be many on here defending another club for doing what we've done.

Would you ever feel comfortable with dealing with this Cardiff City regarding this kind of asset while the current board/owner is here?

The courts exist partly for parties that are in dispute - and if one party thinks that it is in the right they probably won't negotiate. Understanding and empathy are all well and good regarding the deceased player but they are not attributes that matter much in court between opposing parties.

[The Lone Gunman]

I don’t think he was covered by insurance until he was fully signed. Which he wasn’t

Both FIFA and CAS believe otherwise.

[Citizen's Nephew]

The courts exist partly for parties that are in dispute - and if one party thinks that it is in the right they probably won't negotiate. Understanding and empathy are all well and good regarding the deceased player but they are not attributes that matter much in court between opposing parties.

All totally reasonable and correct. However, it didn't make it right and it doesn't continue to do so. Especially after a second ruling against Cardiff City FC and a record sum for arbitration.

[The Bloop]

Does the same process have to be gone through for the 2nd and final installments?

[Citizen's Nephew]

It would seem so, since we have had quite a few transfers since the refusal of payment

Not for a record £15M or any player remotely close to the calibre of Sala. I doubt we'll ever do that kind of deal ever again under the current ownership/board. In actual fact, if this pans out as it is likely, we wouldn't be allowed to anyway: Transfer ban for delayed Emiliano Sala payments appeal to begin

Let's just remind ourselves that this is still out there.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Not for a record £15M or any player remotely close to the calibre of Sala. I doubt we'll ever do that kind of deal ever again under the current ownership/board. In actual fact, if this pans out as it is likely, we wouldn't be allowed to anyway: Transfer ban for delayed Emiliano Sala payments appeal to begin

Let's just remind ourselves that this is still out there.

I wonder if that's why we've been signing anything that moves recently.

[blue matt]

Fair comment. But remember, we needed Tan at a time when the club could have gone under and regardless of how unethically you believe he has acted in this case, he is a very successful businessman who was never going to give this up without a fight. It may hurt to have the club's name dragged through the mud but we'll just have grin and bare it until this saga comes to an end.

no business is going to hand over 15 mill without a fight though, no-one in her right mind would expect them to,

[blue matt]

Once you've exchanged contracts on a house it is your responsibility to insure it. If it is burnt down prior to completion then you, or your insurance company, have to pay.

Dont you start your insurance from completion day ? ? ?

when we purchased our New quid, we exchanged contracts 3 months before completion, insurance starts on completion day, as you haven't completed the purchase yet

[gabbsthenewt]

no business is going to hand over 15 mill without a fight though, no-one in her right mind would expect them to,

Unless whoever this her is had actually purchased and announced the signing of a player to media and on their own media channels complete with pictures of the contracts being signed by the player. Then should she be in her right mind you'd contend she'd be an idiot to fight that they shouldn't pay on the strength of that they hadn't registered them to play in any one competition, a secondary matter to the actual question as to whether or not you had completed the signing as has been ruled on, and then ruled on again on appeal.

[Citizen's Nephew]

no business is going to hand over 15 mill without a fight though, no-one in her right mind would expect them to,

In all fairness Matt, nobody ever was being asked to hand over any money without a fight. It was a deal (we've got the pictures and everything) The fight came about because of an awful tragedy. It didn't need to no matter what anybody says. Anyway, this'll just trundle along now. Shame, because I think this, and all the time/costs has really damaged us and we'll take a long time to recover. Not sure if that'll even be possible under the current ownership which also worries me.

[gabbsthenewt]

Dont you start your insurance from completion day ? ? ?

when we purchased our New quid, we exchanged contracts 3 months before completion, insurance starts on completion day, as you haven't completed the purchase yet

Every situation is unique no set rule, lots of variables - ie what is written into the individual policy and the insurers own ways of doing things. For all we know there may be something written into any given overall insurance policy for a sports teams roster of insured players to be automatically inclusive of any new signings (may be up to a certain threshold of total insured value) - but really we can only speculate on that score without knowing for sure the policy and insurance in place.

[Bobby Dandruff]

The courts exist partly for parties that are in dispute - and if one party thinks that it is in the right they probably won't negotiate. Understanding and empathy are all well and good regarding the deceased player but they are not attributes that matter much in court between opposing parties.

Exactly. This is purely a business dispute involving a lot of money and so it will be contested like other business disputes.

[gabbsthenewt]

Exactly. This is purely a business dispute involving a lot of money and so it will be contested like other business disputes.

Yeah the contesting of it isn't going well though is it lol

[Citizen's Nephew]

Exactly. This is purely a business dispute involving a lot of money and so it will be contested like other business disputes.

Funnily enough, I was just going to come back and add to my reply to TBG about this. There are more business disputes that don't go to court than do. It's always a calculated risk. Ideally, you don't want it to go to court as it can go horribly wrong (as is the case for us now). Costs start spiralling and pride gets in the way. The lawyers are the winners. What you don't do is effectively cripple your business and assets unless you are confident you can win or have nothing to lose i.e. you're facing financial ruin. Sometimes, as I said, sh*t happens and you lose a lot of money. But this isn't a lot of money. Especially as it could have been paid back over time. Now, f*ck knows what costs have been incurred.

[Bobby Dandruff]

Funnily enough, I was just going to come back and add to my reply to TBG about this. There are more business disputes that don't go to court than do. It's always a calculated risk. Ideally, you don't want it to go to court as it can go horribly wrong (as is the case for us now). Costs start spiralling and pride gets in the way. The lawyers are the winners. What you don't do is effectively cripple your business and assets unless you are confident you can win or have nothing to lose i.e. you're facing financial ruin. Sometimes, as I said, sh*t happens and you lose a lot of money. But this isn't a lot of money. Especially as it could have been paid back over time. Now, f*ck knows what costs have been incurred.

Lawyers…….don’t get me started on them…..

[gabbsthenewt]

Funnily enough, I was just going to come back and add to my reply to TBG about this. There are more business disputes that don't go to court than do. It's always a calculated risk. Ideally, you don't want it to go to court as it can go horribly wrong (as is the case for us now). Costs start spiralling and pride gets in the way. The lawyers are the winners. What you don't do is effectively cripple your business and assets unless you are confident you can win or have nothing to lose i.e. you're facing financial ruin. Sometimes, as I said, sh*t happens and you lose a lot of money. But this isn't a lot of money. Especially as it could have been paid back over time. Now, f*ck knows what costs have been incurred.

There is one context in which your hands may be tied mind - should the insurer have as part of their conditions in paying out on a claim, that you pursue every possible avenue with which to recover the loss, however factored into this would usually be reasonable avenues. Pursuing fundamentally flawed legal argument wouldn't be one of them. When your argument is secondary (we didn't register him to play in any one competition) rather than primary to the matter at hand (he'd signed the contract and agreement completed upon), it is not reasonable and has has been ruled to be so twice now, at great extra cost.

[Bobby Dandruff]

Yeah the contesting of it isn't going well though is it lol

Do you think that Nantes wouldn’t appeal if they’d lost then?

Or that companies just accept every ruling without question?

[gabbsthenewt]

Do you think that Nantes wouldn’t appeal if they’d lost then?

Or that companies just accept every ruling without question?

You are speaking to a management accountant, who has taken/managed large companies into and through litigation processes - for trade credit insurers, multinational manufacturers and financial services companies. i know they don't just accept every ruling without question, they also don't just disagree with them all either.

[WJ99mobile]

I wonder if that's why we've been signing anything that moves recently.

No we wanted to start our first game with the U16s and Gavin Whyte but this forced our hand