rabuddies Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 Yesterday and Alba games, presumably? Think we only got around £30K for yesterday and I think we get a fish supper for the alba games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billyg Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 36 minutes ago, rabuddies said: 2 hours ago, Drew said: Yesterday and Alba games, presumably? Think we only got around £30K for yesterday and I think we get a fish supper for the alba games. ................ and we get 10% of the profit Aberdeen make on McLean , which is diddly squat ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSS Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 12 minutes ago, billyg said: ................ and we get 10% of the profit Aberdeen make on McLean , which is diddly squat ! I heard we owe them money on the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 7 hours ago, rabuddies said: 9 hours ago, Drew said: Yesterday and Alba games, presumably? Think we only got around £30K for yesterday and I think we get a fish supper for the alba games. Fair enough. I don't know the figures, hence the question mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 10 hours ago, saintargyll said: Aberdeen will have a bigger sell on clause . . . Spose we should be grateful with what we get £320,000 £70,000 BBC money £390,000 . . . So far Wonder where all this money will go? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 Does anyone have any actual information (facts) on the transfer? As far as I can tell there is no information from either club if the deal was percentage profit or percentage of next sale. I don't think it'll make a great difference though, the funds are pocket money either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munoz Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 So we make £2500 from McLean going to Norwich? 10% of the 25k profit Aberdeen have made. I suppose it will pay for the end of season party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 3 minutes ago, munoz said: So we make £2500 from McLean going to Norwich? 10% of the 25k profit Aberdeen have made. I suppose it will pay for the end of season party. Would be better giving it to me to stick on my next bet........................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 Naw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munoz Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, faraway saint said: Would be better giving it to me to stick on my next bet........................ That's what I've won and lost this season. Think I'm about a fiver up ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 1 hour ago, bazil85 said: Does anyone have any actual information (facts) on the transfer? As far as I can tell there is no information from either club if the deal was percentage profit or percentage of next sale. I don't think it'll make a great difference though, the funds are pocket money either way. Yes The boards of both clubs, possibly the player's agent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 11 hours ago, southsidebud said: £20K should just about cover the championship champagne, cigars and t-shirts... And the new flagpole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 Apparently we get nothing from this deal as the sell on clause was 10% of any profit Aberdeen made & they bought & sold McLean for exactly the same price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazil85 Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 19 minutes ago, beyond our ken said: Yes The boards of both clubs, possibly the player's agent What an original response Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 2 hours ago, Drew said: Fair enough. I don't know the figures, hence the question mark. IIRC at the last re-organization part of the deal was less money for individual matches and more for a bigger payout depending on league position. *************** On topic a bit disappointing not to get any money from the deal but IMO it shows the price we got from Aberdeen was reasonable for the market we're in and more importantly sell-on clauses should be seen as a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 Sell on clauses are 99% of the time based on a cut of the profit the original buying club makes on selling the player. There can be exceptions of course but they are very few and far between. McGinn and McLean are both structured that way, so in Kenny's case we will get nothing or next to nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soctty Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 43 minutes ago, div said: Sell on clauses are 99% of the time based on a cut of the profit the original buying club makes on selling the player. There can be exceptions of course but they are very few and far between. McGinn and McLean are both structured that way, so in Kenny's case we will get nothing or next to nothing. I've heard of very few where it's a percentage of profit to be honest. Van Dijk's, for example, is reported as a percentage of the transfer fee rather than of the profit, as were numerous others down the years. Disappointing that we've managed to make nothing out of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 He was leaving for free in the summer anyway so we’ve not really missed out on anything. Not sure why Norwich are paying just to loan him back. Made a bit more sense with Celtic and Morgan due to the compensation issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 17 hours ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said: Last boerd were always terrible at giving away players but good at saving the club. Scott is on a different level. Aberdeen bought Kenny for £175k (or £300k depending on who you believe) with less than 6 months left on his contract and sold him for £200k with less than 6 months on his contract and in his 3 seasons he has played for the team finishing 2nd in Scotland, played European football, stepped up from Scotland U21s to the full squad and won 2 caps and is now moving into an age group where he will be at the peak of his career (most likely) over the next few years. You could argue Aberdeen have done better than our old board by getting McLean back on loan until the end of the season, but maybe we didn't have the option. Selling McLean with the same length of time left on his contract as he had at St Mirren, Aberdeen have either made a £25k profit or £100k loss on signing him. Our board can only deal with the definite offers tabled at the time. A few weeks after people moaned about only getting buttons for Lewis Morgan some of those same people moaned he isn't Scottish Premiership quality and had been 'found out' at Aberdeen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 33 minutes ago, Stu said: He was leaving for free in the summer anyway so we’ve not really missed out on anything. Not sure why Norwich are paying just to loan him back. Made a bit more sense with Celtic and Morgan due to the compensation issue. Probably stops The Rangers trying to splash out as is their way in picking him up as a freebie at the end of his contract? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soctty Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 Anyway, glad he's got his move down south, and hopefully he can have a good career down there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santaponsasaint Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 Good luck to Kenny super guy and great player. My golf partner. Thank God his football is better than his golf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 22, 2018 Report Share Posted January 22, 2018 5 hours ago, Dibbles old paperboy said: Aberdeen bought Kenny for £175k (or £300k depending on who you believe) with less than 6 months left on his contract and sold him for £200k with less than 6 months on his contract and in his 3 seasons he has played for the team finishing 2nd in Scotland, played European football, stepped up from Scotland U21s to the full squad and won 2 caps and is now moving into an age group where he will be at the peak of his career (most likely) over the next few years. You could argue Aberdeen have done better than our old board by getting McLean back on loan until the end of the season, but maybe we didn't have the option. Selling McLean with the same length of time left on his contract as he had at St Mirren, Aberdeen have either made a £25k profit or £100k loss on signing him. Our board can only deal with the definite offers tabled at the time. A few weeks after people moaned about only getting buttons for Lewis Morgan some of those same people moaned he isn't Scottish Premiership quality and had been 'found out' at Aberdeen! From memory McLean signed a 2 year contract at the start of that season and was sold due due to a gentleman's agreement as Aberdeen offered the compensation we'd have been due had he left the previous summer. I'd been going to have a rant about the rights and (mainly) wrongs of that decision but all it would have done was made me unnecessarily angry over something that happened three years ago 5 hours ago, Dibbles old paperboy said: Probably stops The Rangers trying to splash out as is their way in picking him up as a freebie at the end of his contract? Norwich could have signed him on a pre-contract just now. Same terms and they'd save themselves a few hundred grand. Maybe McLean wanted to make sure Aberdeen made some money out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mid Calder Saint Posted January 23, 2018 Report Share Posted January 23, 2018 Norwich wanted a legal commitment hence they paid a fee.A pre contract cannot be held up in court as legally binding.You just have to refer to the Richard Brittain case a few years back when with Ross County he signed a pre contract with the fake Saints and pulled out as he was entitled to do since it was proved not legally enforceable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSS Posted January 23, 2018 Report Share Posted January 23, 2018 1 hour ago, Mid Calder Saint said: Norwich wanted a legal commitment hence they paid a fee.A pre contract cannot be held up in court as legally binding.You just have to refer to the Richard Brittain case a few years back when with Ross County he signed a pre contract with the fake Saints and pulled out as he was entitled to do since it was proved not legally enforceable. It was legally enforcable and Ross Co had to pay The Fakes compo for Brittain pulling out of the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.