Ander Herrera is a Manchester United Player!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aye, but the point is, superficially, pretty much the same right?
It is the same, just that in Spain release/buyout clauses aren't obligative for foreign clubs. That means that while they can't reject a Spanish club to pay it (i.e Real can just pay the money and say feck off to them) they aren't forced to accpept the offers from non-Spanish clubs and in those cases the player has to pay the money himself.
 
Bit of housekeeping: this isn't a release clause; this is a buyout clause. Two different things.
Eh? Then why doesn't United pay the money directly to Bilbao and avoids all the tax issue? It's a release clause.

EDIT: Ok, the above post by Revan explains it.
 
Well this is fun, we thought everything was going so smoothly and the announcement was coming today.

It seems as though we have nothing to worry about, it just means we have to wait until Friday, no biggie.
 
It's nothing to do with 'holding their registration hostage' at all. It's to get more money out of it, you can't blame the club for getting the most they can from a player who they don't want to lose.

You missed my point entirely. Im saying eventually players will see what happens when you try to leave and start to think twice about signing in the first place, they already have a limited number of players to choose from and they will only make it even more limited by pissing off players because they want to move on.
 
It's there because the law demands it. You're forcing them to sell what they don't want to sell. It's a unilateral breach of contract, I don't expect that to be seen as friendly regardless of compensation paid. In football or in anywhere else.

I'm not judging United. Just looking at it from their point of view. It's pretty obvious they are not happy. Whether their behavior is ridiculous from a professional stand point it's a different matter, but I suppose they're more interested in appeasing their fans than in looking like a professional club to deal with. It keeps suitors aways from their players unless they really want them, and hence furthers their long-term goals.
I agree with you. We might be wrong, but from this situation, that seems to be the case.

Assuming he (or his rep) has been to the LFP he's probably already unilaterally terminated his contract with Athletic. The next step, removing his player registration from Athletic, prior to it being assigned to his new club, occurs when the payment is made to Athletic.

The reason we heard the "Friday" thing from AS etc may well be that Friday is the day when that payment is deemed to take place. With our money currently in the LFP's hands if Athletic have refused a direct payment from us.

The question of who owes Real Zaragosa the development payment, the 1.4m is one for the lawyers looking at the specific terms in his contract. Certainly the LFP can't allow the money to move until it's clear who is liable to pay them.
Well that helps clear a lot of things up. Thanks!! :)

im also no lawyer( i have a certificate to show im not a lawyer)
but i understand with normal buy out fees, that is the case, but i don't think it is that simple when buying out a players contract/ getting him to breech his contract.

and i have no idea what you mean by the A or B thing, but that might be becuase legal talk hurts my head!!!
The A and B things are the two options I mentioned earlier.

Either

A) The player already terminated his contract the moment he submitted the paperwork. Or
B) It doesn't matter anymore because the player intends to terminate his contract anyway and pay the full compensation amount.

But €36 million is the release clause.
Because it was a transfer bid that matched the buy out clause amount. It was not an actual triggering of the buy out clause itself. There are a lot of procedures and steps when it comes to triggering an actual buy out for the player. Especially by foreign clubs.
 
Last edited:
Bit of housekeeping: this isn't a release clause; this is a buyout clause. Two different things.
Same thing, It ensures the club get the value of the player plus his contract value as a minimum and they can enforce it to any offers so that they dont lose out on potential revenue from the deal.

Buy-Out meaning you are buying out the clause, offering them the full value of the player that then releases him from his contract.

Release Clause meaning you have paid out the funds to the club to the full value of the players worth therefore they must release him.

Subtle but essentially the same.
 
Don't be pedantic :lol:

They are essentially the same thing.

No they are not, they seems the same when we talk about high fees clause but for players who play in liga adelante and have clause around 1 or 2 millions it's totally different because they have enough money to buy themselves out of their contracts, and become free agent.

And a club is forced to accept an offer who meets the release clause, it's not the case for a buy out clause.
 
They could do exactly that if is was a release clause.
Sorry, you seem to be right. I never knew of the Spanish/foreigner angle and hence misinterpreted what a release clause.
 
I believe he is still their player until he buys himself out. Then again he is allowed to negotiate with us by the letter of law because of his ability to buy out his deal.
As reported he already deposited the sum at LFP. Not it's a legal matter to push through really.
 
Eh? Then why doesn't United pay the money directly to Bilbao and avoids all the tax issue? It's a release clause.

Because it's not a release clause. A buyout and release clause are different. Release clause allows a player to speak/sign to a club if a certain amount of money is offered. A buyout is where a club buys his contract out. To do that, in Spanish system, he has to deposit the money to the Spanish league who will cancel his contract with his current club.

Clubs usually get around this by negotiating a transfer around the buyout clause. How ever in Bilbao case, they do not want to sell, so they are forcing the player to buy out his contract.
 
You missed my point entirely. Im saying eventually players will see what happens when you try to leave and start to think twice about signing in the first place, they already have a limited number of players to choose from and they will only make it even more limited by pissing off players because they want to move on.

Think players will probably see the fact they're a well run club who're competing in the CL over anything tbh. Not all players join a club with the intention of leaving at some point, it's happened before with them aswell it isn't a recent thing, players will know what goes on at the club and how they're go about their business. This won't change a thing for them.
 
People are saying Bayern's chase and acquisition of Martinez took a couple of months of legal wrangling and problems, which could mean the same for us, but wasn't Martinez the first time anyone outside of Spain had activated the buy-out clause? If so, they were exploring new grounds so to speak. Now we're going down the same route, shouldn't it be a lot quicker to get the deal done now, as we pretty much know what to expect thanks to Bayern? I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people saying Bayern were the first club to do that.
 
No they are not, they seems the same when we talk about high fees clause but for players who play in liga adelante and have clause around 1 or 2 millions it's totally different because they have enough money to buy themselves out of their contracts, and become free agent.

And a club is forced to accept an offer who meets the release clause, it's not the case for a buy out clause.
They are the same really. The wording is just different. As people have explained above.
 
I see, but the result will still be the same! ;)
Could be the same, hopefully is, but the thing is, it's messier, very complicated, and could involve paying millions more in taxes and solidarity payments.

Even yet, Bilbao could refuse to accept the money and make it more complicated(which they couldn't with a release clause), like they did with Martinez, and the league had to put a bit of pressure on them.

Sorry, you seem to be right. I never knew of the Spanish/foreigner angle and hence misinterpreted what a release clause.
It's bloody annoying, that's for sure.
 
It is the same, just that in Spain release/buyout clauses aren't obligative for foreign clubs. That means that while they can't reject a Spanish club to pay it (i.e Real can just pay the money and say feck off to them) they aren't forced to accpept the offers from non-Spanish clubs and in those cases the player has to pay the money himself.

Not really, because EU and FIFA regs are on our side - Bayern did a lot of the groundwork on this. There is a complication, the LFP are basically treated as invisible (in tax terms) when money moves between Spanish clubs, or players etc. They may not be deemed invisible if the money comes from a non-member - again it's something lawyers can have fun with.
 
lol again comparing us to a third party in a divorce isn't making me feel any better about the ethics of this.....
If you worry about ethics, then most of the transfers are wrong because they are "de facto" breaches of contracts. What i tried to explain to you is a legal and in a way business side of it. There is no ethical or moral component there.
 
If you worry about ethics, then most of the transfers are wrong because they are "de facto" breaches of contracts. What i tried to explain to you is a legal and in a way business side of it. There is no ethical or moral component there.
well i think thier is, having a player at your traing groud before a deal is in place isnt morally right, even buy fooball standards.
 
Ok whatever :lol:

I'm not going to argue over minor things like this. Im not Bilbao
You may call it "buy out" or "release clause", it does not matter(because the original term in spanish anyway) as long as you understand the nature of this clause. It's not a sum of money that one club need to offer the other in order for transfer to go through.
 
http://www.mundodeportivo.com/20140...posita-la-clausula-rescision_54411313541.html

Mundo Deportivo claiming Herrera has deposited the termination clause for his contract.

I like this bit:

The Bilbao visits the facilities of United

Although it has not yet officially confirmed the signing of Ander Herrera by Manchester United, the Bilbao player is taking steps to become integrated as a new player of the English team.

Thus it happened yesterday by the sports club of the British experience firsthand its facilities . The playmaker, as revealed Goal Internet portal, was intercepted by Bobby Charlton and guided by this great legend Red Devils to or along its route to all corners of the AON Carrington Training Complex.

They were accompanied by the parent and the player's agent, who had flown to London on Tuesday next to him and after spending the night in the English capital is directed to all the facilities of United to go making contact with what will be his new stage.
 
Same thing, It ensures the club get the value of the player plus his contract value as a minimum and they can enforce it to any offers so that they dont lose out on potential revenue from the deal.

Buy-Out meaning you are buying out the clause, offering them the full value of the player that then releases him from his contract.

Release Clause meaning you have paid out the funds to the club to the full value of the players worth therefore they must release him.

Subtle but essentially the same.
Not really. A buy out is the minimum compensation you have to pay to terminate a contract.

A release clause is a minimum transfer fee that the club is compelled to accept if that amount or more is offered by another club.

These subtle differences make a lot of difference in legal matters. Contract termination has many caveats to deal with in practice. Release clauses don't. Not to mention there're many issues apparently with foreign clubs triggering the clause. Or at least that's my understanding of it.
 
well i think thier is, having a player at your traing groud before a deal is in place isnt morally right, even buy fooball standards.

The bid was rejected earlier in the week, for all this to happen (him being here, training ground etc.) we'll have come to an agreement somewhere in between. Athletic are just doing this to save face.
 
People are saying Bayern's chase and acquisition of Martinez took a couple of months of legal wrangling and problems, which could mean the same for us, but wasn't Martinez the first time anyone outside of Spain had activated the buy-out clause? If so, they were exploring new grounds so to speak. Now we're going down the same route, shouldn't it be a lot quicker to get the deal done now, as we pretty much know what to expect thanks to Bayern? I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people saying Bayern were the first club to do that.

Indeed. Though because the Bayern transfer never went to law or tax court, some of the guidance/rulings would only be provisional. There's also a 4 year statute of limitations on tax in Spain, so it'll be another couple of years before Bayern/Martinez know for sure if there's going to be another twist in the story.

But the principle is true. Whether we planned to go back for Herrera or nor, we probably have done the legal groundwork to know how to use a forced release if we have to.
 
feck this.. I'm off for a hike in the mountains - expecting this thread to have grown to epic proportions when I'm back!
 
Indeed. Though because the Bayern transfer never went to law or tax court, some of the guidance/rulings would only be provisional. There's also a 4 year statute of limitations on tax in Spain, so it'll be another couple of years before Bayern/Martinez know for sure if there's going to be another twist in the story.

But the principle is true. Whether we planned to go back for Herrera or nor, we probably have done the legal groundwork to know how to use a forced release if we have to.

So they may still have to pay tax? or have I misunderstood.
 
How reliable are they?

Exceptional when it comes to Barcelona. Good with the rest of the league. Obviously, they have less links into the Madrid clubs.
 
well i think thier is, having a player at your traing groud before a deal is in place isnt morally right, even buy fooball standards.
That's where you mistaken, because the deal is in place. As soon as Ander activated his release clause he activated the breach of contract. It does not matter what Athletic wants or thinks about it. They probably had their chance to go via transfer route and they declined United, maybe weeks ago, who knows. The fact is United offered Ander a help with becoming a free agent if he will sign for United. That's not a transfer from club to club. Legally we will be signing Ander as a free agent, that is after all legal dust settles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.