Jump to content

Recommended Posts


10 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

There is however current legislation that must be adhered to in signing a contract in this country. Do you disagree? 

The second part is not what I said in the slightest. 

There are for credit agreements etc, but they relate to the individuals rights, rather than to the contract.

a contract is just a set of words! The clauses cannot induce one or other parties to break the law. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

There are for credit agreements etc, but they relate to the individuals rights, rather than to the contract.

a contract is just a set of words! The clauses cannot induce one or other parties to break the law. 

I’ve never said it could, in fact my point is the exact opposite. Beyond our Ken is trying to argue that legislation doesn’t impact contract law. 

Your point about a contract not being able to include a clause to break the law is one of many ways legislation ties into a contract. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

There is however current legislation that must be adhered to in signing a contract in this country. Do you disagree? 

The second part is not what I said in the slightest. 

Name that legislation

you can’t because there is none 

you clearly misunderstand the very narrow definition that the word legislation carries 

it refers to acts of parliament not all things related to the law 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not a thing I'm afraid. We won't get any additional value if a player is part of the sell on. The contracts of McGinn and Allan would be set up in such a way as to transfer on completion of the deal. Just takes a basic understanding of legislation to know that is legally possible. 

Saints would have no claim on it whatsover to be more financially compensatied. The sell on will very clearly state we're entitled to 33% from cash transfer fees, it will not say cash and additional player movement. 

 

Did you write this contact out and keep it from Stuart Gilmour because I remember him tweeting few weeks ago he thinks it would go to a tribunal if any players were involved in the transfer of mcginn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least one person on here proving that a little knowledge makes them think that they know a lot while simultaneously proving to everyone else that they actually know nothing.

Nobody knows they full terms of the agreement apart from those involved in it, everything else is just conjecture and no spurious spouting about legislation will change that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scoring tonight can't have done his proposed move to Celtic any harm. Hopefully Celtic get a deal sorted with Hibs asap and increase our coffers to the tune of a cool £1 million.

come on Celtic get that biscuit tin opened!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought they also got a wad of cash for McArthur? However if you weren't meaning 2009 to be recent times then I would look at the guy Hamilton sold to West ham (?), the youngster Falkirk sold to a championship club both of whom were very inexperienced and the aforementioned United who sold their talent to celtic.



McArthur is now an established EPL level player, turned out to be a bargain.

The reason we never got fees like that for McGinn and the rest is cause none of them are as good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



McArthur is now an established EPL level player, turned out to be a bargain.

The reason we never got fees like that for McGinn and the rest is cause none of them are as good.
Thanks for pointing out that McArthur wasn't an established EPL player when he left Hamilton Accies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr Zo said:

Scoring tonight can't have done his proposed move to Celtic any harm. Hopefully Celtic get a deal sorted with Hibs asap and increase our coffers to the tune of a cool £1 million.

come on Celtic get that biscuit tin opened!

From a Hibs point of view , by holding on to J McGinn they have just made a fair whack of cash courtesy of his goal tonight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Soctty said:

If Hibs can get players to reduce the cash coming in, they pay us less. IT's common sense. IF they get Allan and three other players and Celtic pay £1m less, Hibs save themselves £333k.

It's basic. Hibs would like not far off £5m, as that would leave them with just over £3m. The lower it goes, the less value is in it for them selling for cash, so throw in a few players and they save on the sell on clause.

It's up to you whether you regard that as shafting us - I think it is, and think most clubs in their position would try to do the same.

Sorry mate, genuinely not being obtuse, but I don't follow. 

If Celtic pay Hibs 2.5mm, Hibs get 1.675m

If Celtic pay Hibs 1m and some players (that they may or may not actually want), Hibs get 666k. How is that beneficial to Hibs just because they also got a few of Celtic's cast offs. Genuinely lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

Sorry mate, genuinely not being obtuse, but I don't follow. 

If Celtic pay Hibs 2.5mm, Hibs get 1.675m

If Celtic pay Hibs 1m and some players (that they may or may not actually want), Hibs get 666k. How is that beneficial to Hibs just because they also got a few of Celtic's cast offs. Genuinely lost.

In their eyes it will be better to get £3million worth of players than £2million of that value in cash.

What makes them any more "cast offs" than players they would spend the equivalent in cash on?

Obviously thats a case where it would be 100% players which is a difficult deal to make but any deal involving any players is beneficial to Hibs as they split less with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the current SPFL rules.

45.    When two Football clubs, at least one of whom is a Club, exchange Players with no monetary consideration, and there exists, in a previous transfer agreement relating to one or both Players, a provision that another Club or club is due a percentage or share of an onward transfer fee, the clubs exchanging Players must place a financial valuation on the respective Players. This valuation must be agreed in writing between the Clubs and/or club concerned and Communicated to the Scottish FA in order that a calculation can be made of the percentage of that valuation or amount otherwise calculated due to the other Club and/or club.
 

46.    Should a Club, which is entitled to benefit financially from a Player's onward transfer, dispute the valuation placed on any Player in an exchange situation, or, should the Board consider that any such valuation may not be a true reflection of such Player's worth, a Compensation Tribunal will determine the value of or appropriate Compensation for the Player concerned.

So, my reading of that is that clubs can no longer get away with gerrymandering the values of players.  Comments.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, rabuddies said:

From the current SPFL rules.

45.    When two Football clubs, at least one of whom is a Club, exchange Players with no monetary consideration, and there exists, in a previous transfer agreement relating to one or both Players, a provision that another Club or club is due a percentage or share of an onward transfer fee, the clubs exchanging Players must place a financial valuation on the respective Players. This valuation must be agreed in writing between the Clubs and/or club concerned and Communicated to the Scottish FA in order that a calculation can be made of the percentage of that valuation or amount otherwise calculated due to the other Club and/or club.
 

46.    Should a Club, which is entitled to benefit financially from a Player's onward transfer, dispute the valuation placed on any Player in an exchange situation, or, should the Board consider that any such valuation may not be a true reflection of such Player's worth, a Compensation Tribunal will determine the value of or appropriate Compensation for the Player concerned.

So, my reading of that is that clubs can no longer get away with gerrymandering the values of players.  Comments.

 

That clears that up then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scoring tonight can't have done his proposed move to Celtic any harm. Hopefully Celtic get a deal sorted with Hibs asap and increase our coffers to the tune of a cool £1 million.
come on Celtic get that biscuit tin opened!

You kidding? When it comes to Celtic they want to steal Scottish teams players for next to nothing. They have history.

Share this post


Link to post
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...