Jump to content

Kenny McLean


Recommended Posts


£100K for us if rumours of a 10% sell-on are to be believed.

Kenny is too classy a player for ranjurs, so I hope he goes to Birmingham, but the sell-on windfall for Saints is the most important thing.

Edited by Drew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, rabuddies said:

It's only around £700k apparently which is why Harry smells a bargain. The blue bigots will have to dig deeper I think to outwit him I hope.

Aberdeen will be looking for a 7 figure sum. He is their most valuable asset now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's a 10% sell on fee I'd be satisfied if he went for half a million. Anything else is a bonus. We could do with him and McGinn getting punted this summer so they don't leave for nothing next year and we end up with nothing.

Only worry is we only get a percentage of the profit, rather than the whole fee. Means the £200k (or whatever it was) comes off whatever Aberdeen receive and we get 10% of the difference rather than the overall fee. Quite a lot of deals are structured like that these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Stu said:

If it's a 10% sell on fee I'd be satisfied if he went for half a million. Anything else is a bonus. We could do with him and McGinn getting punted this summer so they don't leave for nothing next year and we end up with nothing.

Only worry is we only get a percentage of the profit, rather than the whole fee. Means the £200k (or whatever it was) comes off whatever Aberdeen receive and we get 10% of the difference rather than the overall fee. Quite a lot of deals are structured like that these days.

So if McLean was sold for less than what we sold him for, we would get nothing  :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Stu said:

If it's a 10% sell on fee I'd be satisfied if he went for half a million. Anything else is a bonus. We could do with him and McGinn getting punted this summer so they don't leave for nothing next year and we end up with nothing.

Only worry is we only get a percentage of the profit, rather than the whole fee. Means the £200k (or whatever it was) comes off whatever Aberdeen receive and we get 10% of the difference rather than the overall fee. Quite a lot of deals are structured like that these days.

It would have been ludicrous for the then board to have allowed that scenario given the low initial fee involved. A gentleman's agreement gone too far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would have been ludicrous for the then board to have allowed that scenario given the low initial fee involved. A gentleman's agreement gone too far.


Would fit in with the rest of that transfer deal then.

More and more deals are structured like that these days. Sure I read from our former chairman on Twitter the McGinn one will be similar if he gets sold.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would have been ludicrous for the then board to have allowed that scenario given the low initial fee involved. A gentleman's agreement gone too far.


Exactly this. Gentleman's agreement was fine for both parties - but not so Aberdeen could take advantage and get a free ride.

A 10% sell on clause is bog standard these days. If that's all the board got when handing him over in good will to Aberdeen then it is pathetic.

They done well with McGinn. I certainly won't be applauding 10% from this deal, never mind any less
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Exactly this. Gentleman's agreement was fine for both parties - but not so Aberdeen could take advantage and get a free ride.

A 10% sell on clause is bog standard these days. If that's all the board got when handing him over in good will to Aberdeen then it is pathetic.

They done well with McGinn. I certainly won't be applauding 10% from this deal, never mind any less


Was either the gentleman agreement of McLean wouldn't of signed a new contract. We did right by a loyal player.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Was either the gentleman agreement of McLean wouldn't of signed a new contract. We did right by a loyal player.


Agreed. As I said already, I have no gripe with that gentlemens agreement, worked for both parties. But as we all know we gave him away cheaply to do the right thing - Aberdeen as the beneficiaries surely should not have been hard to deal with on a sell on clause?
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Agreed. As I said already, I have no gripe with that gentlemens agreement, worked for both parties. But as we all know we gave him away cheaply to do the right thing - Aberdeen as the beneficiaries surely should not have been hard to deal with on a sell on clause?


The deal was if an offer came in for that amount we would sell. Why would Aberdeen put in a bigger sell on clause? It was either accept the offer that they had shook hands on or welch on the gentlemans agreement.

If we said no and demanded a bigger sell on it would have left him disenfranchised and would of had knock of impacts for other players.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-6-25 at 1:25 PM, David Mc said:

But do not rule out Birmingham I notice.

 

Greg Stewart on a seasons long loan at Pittodrie , do we get %10 of that , as I,m sure now it won't be long til Kenny goes down to Brum to join Harry . Wonder if we get a %10 cut of any sell on clause , should this transfer deal have a sell on clause .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...