Bammo wrote:Because that's how deals work these days. By the same logic, why should we pay another club when one of our players scores? Why should we pay when they play for certain numbers of games for us?
By including clauses like these it means that both the buying and selling clubs are happy. If it was a flat fee, Roma would want more than 20m Euros. By including the clauses we give them an incentive to sell to us cheaper and we only end up paying more if he is a good player for us. If he's bad then we sell him on (e.g. Keane) and don't pay the add ons.
Because of the huge fees involved in the game today the days of actually paying for a transfer upfront are gone. It's all paid in instalments and clauses which is why Portsmouth still owed us for Crouch and why Utd are still to pay fully for Rooney.
So to answer your question, the CL clause is more to delay us paying them money. We'll have earned the £300k on interest in the bank (assuming we have any) by the time we need to pay it.
ehat you are talking about (added incentives ) are player specific .. i.e .... the player scores goals... plays a certain amount of games for the club ... we pay a sum to the concerned club ..... but why should CL qualification ... something that is more of a certainty (as opposed to winning the league).... and something which has more to do with performance of the club rather than the player concerned ... be involved in d incentives part ?
i have no problem with the other clauses in the deal ....only the CL qualification clause strikes me as bit odd... bad business. Anyways ... what's done is done. peace
