Jadon Sancho - Chelsea (loan) watch | £5M opt-out fee

Brand Nubian said:
Seriously thought, would this break clause work both ways? Like some crazy Saudi now offering United big bucks for Sancho, or a Laussanne outfit putting 40mil on SJR table. Would CFC have any say in such deals? Suddenly crying wolf its them signing Sancho for 25mil so they can swiftly move him on for profit..
Click to expand...
Hope it work both ways but the chances are pretty slim for a club from Saudi or other league willing to pay more than 25m for Sancho with his stupid wages.
 
devilish said:
I don't want to sound like a Glazer's apologist (which I am not, the Glazers are the worst thing ever to happen to the club in the past half a century or so) but as said before this had been happening way before the Glazers bought the club. We sold Nicky Butt for 3.75m euros and Forlan for 3.2m euros at a time when we bought young Pique for 5.25m euros and Smith for 9m euros. We sold Yorke for 3.5m euros, (we bought Ricardo for 2.25m). We sold Phil Neville for 5.2m euros (less then Pique who was bought the year before). We sold RVN for 12m less then we bought Carrick in that same year and the list go on and on. The amount of talent we sold for less than a million is staggering and it doesn't only include academy players (ex VDB and Silvestre). Wes was sold off for 1.5m euros, Park for 3.1m euros while Berbatov was sold for 5m euros.

This is an issue that had been long coming. We sell cheap and we buy at premium. We love to call it the United tax. However there's no Real Madrid tax or Liverpool tax. Therefore we should call it for what it is ie incompetence.
Click to expand...

To be fair I can remember SAF and Gill always saying that in the case of academy players like Neville, Butt, Brown, O'Shea etc who'd given the club years of service. The club never haggled over price when it was time for them to go, they didn't ask for much so the players could get good deals and basically go where they wanted.
 
romufc said:
No.. I dont dislike your post. You can clip me, I have made loads of comments which were untrue / I changed my mind on players...

Its not about liking... its about you constantly having a go at the club...

You start with... what makes United think they can attract a player like Sancho, he is too good for us...

If he is good enough we should pay whatever it takes.... this was when his fee was over 100m.

3 years later... calling the club a criminal for paying 50m less than what was quoted 1 year ago.

lets all agree... we all made a mistake, I thought he was going to be amazing, we got it wrong just like the club.
Click to expand...
Mate, I have a go at the club (and I am not alone) because in case you have not noticed we were best club in England before them and now they normalized us being 13-14th, so it is called "caring" but that doesn't mean I have to fight you for having different perspective

I sincerely wish you the best and am glad you have more cheerful outlook.
 
NewGlory said:
Mate, I have a go at the club (and I am not alone) because in case you have not noticed we were best club in England before them and now they normalized us being 13-14th, so it is called "caring" but that doesn't mean I have to fight you for having different perspective

I sincerely wish you the best and am glad you have more cheerful outlook.
Click to expand...

Its okay... I can predict what you will do... moan we dont sign players, if we do sign a player and doesn't turn out to be good.. you will act like you knew all along the player was not good and just moan and blame.

Its okay sometimes to admit you were wrong.
 
McTerminator said:
Feels as though people are getting carried away here.

Comparing Tel’s £8.5m loan fee with the £5m seems disingenuous. Surely there was a loan fee already paid for Sancho this year so you would need to add the £5m to that for a true comparison.

As for the obligation. It’s disappointing it isn’t there, but if it couldn’t be agreed to that’s life.

I would want to know the full loan fee and wage contribution including the added £5m before I started condemning the deal.
Click to expand...

There were no loan fee, united pay 100k per week of his salary. Obligation 20-25m depending on Chelsea table position. 5m clause to break from the deal.

Shit deal for us.
 
What is Jadon Sancho's current market value ? I find it hard to believe that he is worth much more than 20 to 25M so don't see why Chelsea would buy him & pay his outlandish wages when they have have the option of paying a 5M loan fee.
He really has shown very little to justify his outrageous salary.
 
jeff gurr said:
What is Jadon Sancho's current market value ? I find it hard to believe that he is worth much more than 20 to 25M so don't see why Chelsea would buy him & pay his outlandish wages when they have have the option of paying a 5M loan fee.
Click to expand...

On the face of it, for us especially considering how we view Jadon, it is a no brainer for Chelsea to pay the loan fee and be done with him.

Chelsea will not be viewing it through our perspective though. In terms of his value to the squad the only opinion that truly counts is that of the manager and Maresca seems to be constant in his praise of Jadon and how he fits the style of play he wants. He continues to brief that Jadon is impressing with his efforts in training and he is pleased with him.

Financially, if they send him back then they are down 5M plus whatever they have contributed to his wages this season with nothing to show for it. If they buy him then they have added an asset on the books, with amoritization they won't pay more than 5M this year regardless and probably less. For PSR it is actually much healthier for them to do this than pay the penalty, unlike us Chelsea are excellent at shifting unwanted players and so may well think they could easily get 15M as a minimum to move him on in another year or two if he does not show the improvement they are expecting.

The key is going to be agreeing a contract that fits their wage structure. On the surface why would Jadon take a lesser salary to join Chelsea but there is nuance within that. Getting paid by us for one more year whilst possibly not playing any meaningful games could leave him looking at very limited options next summer, maybe clubs offering short term prove it deals instead of anything with security. Taking a lesser salary to get the security of a 5 year deal with the club he allegedly supports is quite appealing in that scenario, particularly as we will probably give him at least some of the difference in salary in a payoff for next season if the deal goes through.

It still seems more probable than not that he stays with Chelsea, the devil will be in the details but we should end up in a position to at least payoff the remainder of the fee to Dortmund whilst Chelsea will get a potentially quality asset for a budget price and on a contract and fee that will enable them to get out of it pretty easily in a year or two without difficulty if they choose to.
 
There is a lot of back and forth here, but anyone trying to say he isn’t worth 20 million instead today’s market is madness. Chelsea sign players who haven’t even played full seasons for almost double that.

The key will be wages, and there is no reason to believe he doesn’t believe in their structure or incentive based contracts. I think he will stay.
 
Posh Red said:
Who is this Norma?
Click to expand...
I don't know, but if she's responsible, she needs sorting out!

We all thought it was genius shipping him out for an agreed fee. Then it came to light there was an opt out clause. Now it's £5m!

Next they'll tell us we're footing 90% of his wages and will do even if they do take him.
 
Sandikan said:
I don't know, but if she's responsible, she needs sorting out!

We all thought it was genius shipping him out for an agreed fee. Then it came to light there was an opt out clause. Now it's £5m!

Next they'll tell us we're footing 90% of his wages and will do even if they do take him.
Click to expand...
We’ll probably get arrested and thrown in jail
 
I think the last few months we get an opportunity to see a Sancho who has to fight for his future. If he comes back, obviously the club gets fecked but the damage to his reputation would be at it’s peak. He would also rather have the obligation fulfilled and then go back to his nothingness next season onwards.
 
Maluco said:
There is a lot of back and forth here, but anyone trying to say he isn’t worth 20 million instead today’s market is madness. Chelsea sign players who haven’t even played full seasons for almost double that.

The key will be wages, and there is no reason to believe he doesn’t believe in their structure or incentive based contracts. I think he will stay.
Click to expand...
Maybe some of these 20 years old Palmers are not damaged goods already? Training hard, adhering to a diet and other requirements, unlike Sancho? More and more clubs do due diligence before splashing 20 million on a fifa player.
 
jeff gurr said:
What is Jadon Sancho's current market value ? I find it hard to believe that he is worth much more than 20 to 25M so don't see why Chelsea would buy him & pay his outlandish wages when they have have the option of paying a 5M loan fee.
He really has shown very little to justify his outrageous salary.
Click to expand...

Who would realistically take chance on him with the attitude he has, wages a side... He is like massive turd floating in the pool when people are trying to have fun.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
He seems to be getting a lot of minutes for a player that Chelsea will pay £5 million quid to get rid off. They’ve got a zillion players in their squad. Why play him at all if they don’t rate him? Something doesn’t add up.
Click to expand...

Probably eyeing up someone better in the summer and just want to save on the cash.

He's not been as awful as people make out but he's not exactly been good either. Just looks the same as he did for us.

He's the footballer equivalent of tidying the kitchen. All looks very neat but actually what was the f*cking point in any of it.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
He seems to be getting a lot of minutes for a player that Chelsea will pay £5 million quid to get rid off. They’ve got a zillion players in their squad. Why play him at all if they don’t rate him? Something doesn’t add up.
Click to expand...

Well the person that reported the £5million fee also said it's still expected that they'll sign him, so it seems people are just picking at part of what was said so they can overreact and have a moan.
 
duffer said:
Based on what precident? Have we ever seen such a high "break" clause before?
Click to expand...
Do you know of any break clauses even existing in any previous obligation to buy loan deals? Because I sure as hell never heard of such clauses untill a couple of days ago.
 
Media hates us when he leaves and has a few so-so games. Ask how could Chelsea get such a great player for peanuts. United must be the problem. Media hates us when his so so games become abysmal games. Asks how could United be dumb enough to put a 6m clause in the deal if it doesn’t go through. United must be the problem. Clicks upon clicks from ABU’s.
 
jeff gurr said:
What is Jadon Sancho's current market value ? I find it hard to believe that he is worth much more than 20 to 25M so don't see why Chelsea would buy him & pay his outlandish wages when they have have the option of paying a 5M loan fee.
He really has shown very little to justify his outrageous salary.
Click to expand...
Market value ? On his salary and form, with one year left on his contract, it's essentially zero.

People forget that players have agency and can reject any transfer. Imagine club "A" offers United 20m and Sancho 100k a week, Club "B' offers United nothing and Sancho 130k a week. If I was Sancho I'd simply inform United that I wouldn't want to join club "A". What are we going to do, hold him to his contract ?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
He seems to be getting a lot of minutes for a player that Chelsea will pay £5 million quid to get rid off. They’ve got a zillion players in their squad. Why play him at all if they don’t rate him? Something doesn’t add up.
Click to expand...
They haven't agreed a contract with Sancho
 
Escobar said:
We should have put in a clause that if he plays more than x minutes, you buy anyhow.
Click to expand...
Once again, Chelsea haven't agreed a contract with Sancho yet

they literally can't sign him as it stands even if they want to!
 
If it wasn’t for his exorbitant wages, would any of you had been open to have him back in the squad and be used in one of the #10 roles?
 
Red Company said:
If it wasn’t for his exorbitant wages, would any of you had been open to have him back in the squad and be used in one of the #10 roles?
Click to expand...
If he was on £10k a week it would still be £20k a week too much such is the toxic nature of his personality.
 
Red Company said:
If it wasn’t for his exorbitant wages, would any of you had been open to have him back in the squad and be used in one of the #10 roles?
Click to expand...

I think he's extremely well suited to that role and could establish himself here under Amorim.

I think the bigger concern is his personality, though.
 
Freak said:
I’m pretty sure it’s 5m on top of the agreed permanent signing fee of 25m. It makes no sense if we allow them to break the contract for only 5m
Click to expand...

That would mean it costs them 25m to sign him, or 30m to not sign him, so I don't think so.
 
Pexbo said:
If he was on £10k a week it would still be £20k a week too much such is the toxic nature of his personality.
Click to expand...

Trequarista10 said:
I think he's extremely well suited to that role and could establish himself here under Amorim.

I think the bigger concern is his personality, though.
Click to expand...
Replying to the both of you since It’s about personality .. I think his relationship with Erik had become too toxic but he seems to be doing fine under Enzo ..

Perhaps he could keep himself in check under Ruben in a stable environment?
 
Trequarista10 said:
That would mean it costs them 25m to sign him, or 30m to not sign him, so I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Exactly, which would make the obligation to buy more sense since it’s an obligation. If you’d want to get out of that obligation then you pay more. That’s usually how contracts work in the corporate world. But football doesn’t make sense anymore in general so who knows.

Else it would just have been a standard loan with an option to buy.
 
hellhunter said:
Plus massive wages
Click to expand...

Yeah, but wages are a pretty normal thing to pay players, right.

No club would agree to pay 25m for an asset, but 30m to NOT take the asset.

That'd be like renting a car, having a set price to purchase the car if you choose, but then having to pay more than the price of the car if you choose not to buy the car. Sure, the car has running costs like insurance and petrol and repairs, but nobody is agreeing to that deal. Its wishful thinking.
 
Freak said:
Exactly, which would make the obligation to buy more sense since it’s an obligation. If you’d want to get out of that obligation then you pay more.

Else it would just have been a standard loan with an option to buy.
Click to expand...
Is it not just the semantics of the word ‘obligation’?

They have an obligation to buy him, however as a result of changing their mind they have a £5m penalty clause which allows them to break the contract.

In the same way a mortgage holder in the UK agrees to a fixed-rate deal and has all their monthly payments for the fixed-term period pre-determined, but if they wish to settle it early they usually have to pay a charge of 10% in addition to the capital repayment.

I imagine it’s a pretty standard clause but this may be the first time it’s been invoked at such a high level because he’s been that bad and clearly rubbed them up the wrong way too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.