Jhon Lucumi - Transfer Rumour

[brains]

I'm certainly not complaining about us spending money here, but does seem little odd we're now apparently offering more than his original release clause.

Why? The clause would have been written when he signed his contract and now they may value him higher. If we didn't get it done in time then we are starting from scratch again with regards to the fee.

 

[John J Rambo]

Why? The clause would have been written when he signed his contract and now they may value him higher. If we didn't get it done in time then we are starting from scratch again with regards to the fee.

Because my understanding of a release clause, is that if you meet it, however much club want to keep him they can't stop him.

 

[redalert69]

I'm certainly not complaining about us spending money here, but does seem little odd we're now apparently offering more than his original release clause.

It's not though,
Release cause had to be paid in one lump, the new negotiated price even tho will be more is in installments.

 

[splorty]

Not happening is it?

Yes

 

[Shieldsman]

Not happening is it?

What KLD wants……KLD gets.

 

[Blockheed]

Less of a release clause and more of a hands off clause

 

[Super Colin Todd]

Because my understanding of a release clause, is that if you meet it, however much club want to keep him they can't stop him.

The club deliberately let the release clause deadline run out, so they can negotiate a better price, he has a year left and time is running out for bologna to get any money for him and the upping our offer to more than the release clause price at this moment is conjecture!

 

[brains]

Because my understanding of a release clause, is that if you meet it, however much club want to keep him they can't stop him.

Yes, if you do it whilst it is valid. If it expires then it's no longer applicable.

 

[John J Rambo]

The club deliberately let the release clause deadline run out, so they can negotiate a better price, he has a year left and time is running out for bologna to get any money for him and the upping our offer to more than the release clause price at this moment is conjecture!

Aye why i said apparently. Just sharing an opinion and thought.

Yes, if you do it whilst it is valid. If it expires then it's no longer applicable.

Aye, so why I originally said if true, we could have had him for less. Haway Brains

 

[Fetch Fletch]

Aye why i said apparently. Just sharing an opinion and thought.

Aye, so why I originally said if true, we could have had him for less. Haway Brains

We could have But we would have to pay one lump sum.

This way we spread the cost over 5 years.

 

[John J Rambo]

We could have But we would have to pay one lump sum.

This way we spread the cost over 5 years.

Aye that's probably why. Just if he's always been number 1 priority, again just as rumoured, could be risky a touch.

 

[Baxter the maestro]

We could have But we would have to pay one lump sum.

This way we spread the cost over 5 years.

I think that the more likely reason for allowing the release clause deadline to elapse was because it fell within a different accounting period for calculating the rolling three years losses. Given the club has arranged a line of credit, I doubt that the 'lump-sum' issue was prohibitive.

 

[LineTrash]

The club deliberately let the release clause deadline run out, so they can negotiate a better price, he has a year left and time is running out for bologna to get any money for him and the upping our offer to more than the release clause price at this moment is conjecture!

It's also conjecture that he wants to come to SAFC.

 

[Ohnonotagain]

I think that the more likely reason for allowing the release clause deadline to elapse was because it fell within a different accounting period for calculating the rolling three years losses. Given the club has arranged a line of credit, I doubt that the 'lump-sum' issue was prohibitive.

This

 

[Karl]

Not happening is it?

doesn't look like it m8. Fuck him, we move on.

 

[janey]

It's also conjecture that he wants to come to SAFC.

If it’s true we’ve been after him all summer and we are still after him, he must have indicated he was interested in coming.
They’d have moved on otherwise

 

[Super Colin Todd]

Aye why i said apparently. Just sharing an opinion and thought.

Aye, so why I originally said if true, we could have had him for less. Haway Brains

I know you are....

 

[Mackemansj1]

I'm certainly not complaining about us spending money here, but does seem little odd we're now apparently offering more than his original release clause.

Will be paid differently I’d have thought mate, from what I gather with those release clauses it’s pretty much a lump sum. This will be broken down into add ons etc I’d have thought.

 

[ClassicDom]

I'm certainly not complaining about us spending money here, but does seem little odd we're now apparently offering more than his original release clause.

It’s already been said a few times that the release clause would have needed to be paid in full upfront. This allows us to spread the cost or include add ons.

 

[Super Colin Todd]

It's also conjecture that he wants to come to SAFC.

we might not get him, considering who his agent is.....

"On the personal side of the deal, Lucumí is reportedly "keen" on the move, and Sunderland already has a history with Lucumí's agency, as he is with

You must be logged on to see external links

, who also represent three current Sunderland players - Simon Moore, Dennis Cirkin and Dan Neil."

You must be logged on to see external links