₦airaland Forum

TheGoodJoe:
The point is Nacho has not progressed mainly due to Leicester City's negligence. If they want to sell, they will go to City and City will have to work with the contract, determine a price to buy and it might not favor Leicester.

City do not have to work out anything!! It's either they activate the clause or pass up on it. Simple.

TheGoodJoe:
Buy-back clauses are not that simple as they seem to be. They can get very complex at times and can be very easy as well.

---

This is from the article you posted. You posted. You posted. Do not pretend as if you can not read it.

The problem arises from if Nacho is to go. What cost will City have to buy. Not them activating the clause. If Leicester wants to sell to another club. City will have to first reject to buy Nacho before they can sell.

From the possibility of the clause of the contract, Leicester City have failed to help propel Nacho and City will have a possibility of a clause to buy at a lesser figure. Which Leicester will not want.

What are you taking about? Did you not see the article I posted that CLEARLY states the fixed amount of 50m that City can buy back Nacho for if they desire? Let me post it again in case you missed it

But with the striker now poised to officially become a Leicester player, it has emerged that Manchester City have struck an agreement which will see them given the first option to re-sign the 20-year-old if he proves a success at the King Power Stadium.

Iheanacho remains highly thought of at the Etihad Stadium, after progressing through the club's academy, and City have inserted a clause to buy him back for £50m. Leicester were happy to agree to the clause, as they will double their money in the event of the forward proving a massive hit in the East Midlands.

The same thing happened with Hermoso. Real Madrid passed up on the clause and Espanyol ended up selling him to Atletico Madrid.

TheGoodJoe:
From the article you posted.

---

For example, 'A' sells a house to 'B' and in the contract, inserts a buy-back clause. Now, when 'B' wants to sell the house to say 'C', he cannot do so before asking 'A'. 'A' has the first option of deciding whether he wants to buy back his house or not. If 'A' decides to buy back the house, he would have to pay a certain fee, stated in the contract, to 'B' to get back the property. If 'A' declines, 'B' is free to sell the house to 'C' or anyone else for a fee which both the parties agree upon.

---

As you can see, when Leicester City wants to sell, they will have to approach Manchester City and the clauses of the contract will decide the price Manchester City will buy or reject. With the way Leicester City have handled Nacho the valuation may not be in their favour. Thus making the deal not easy.

There is nothing to "decide". The clause has been set at 50m. It's either City activates it or pass up on it. If Leicester gets an offer for Nacho from Norwich, they will ask City if they are interested in activating the clause or not.

TheGoodJoe:
cc: edi287

So, just as the price of the player can go up when he is doing well, the price can go on the negative for Leicester City when Nacho is not flourishing due to him not having ample opportunity to perform.

Let us say Norwich for instance wants Nacho, Leicester City will go to Manchester City for first refusal. If from the valuation, due to the contract clauses, the value is at 10m, Leicester City will not be willing to listen to Norwich.

So, it is not as easy as farming a player out.

No that is wrong. Norwich can still get Nacho for that amount because his value has already depreciated anyway.
City are more than certain to pass on that clause if Nacho is to be sold on January. City do not have a sell on clause so they have nothing to gain from Nacho leaving either way.

TheGoodJoe:
cc: edi287

From the article you posted.


Buy-back clauses are not that simple as they seem to be. They can get very complex at times and can be very easy as well.

---

Buy-back clause is not that easy as it sounds. The main complication arises when the parent club wants to take the player back. But at what fee? Like I said above, the fee is decided before the deal happens, but it’s not that simple.

There can be different sets of fees included in the contract. Below are a few examples of how certain clauses work,

- If the player is bought back in the first two summer transfer window, the parent club would have to pay say the agreed fee. But every window after that, the club would have to pay an extra £5m.

- If the player is called up by the national team, an extra fee would have to be paid by the club.

- If the player is a striker and scores 10+ goals in the 38 league matches, then some extra fee would be included.

- If the player plays at least 60 minutes in 50% of all the matches- league, cups, European competition.

---

So what are you still trying to argue? There are factors in that contract that will make it not easy for Leicester City to farm out Nacho like that. They must meet a certain criteria or City can take Nacho below what Leicester City paid.

From the bolded above, you can clearly see that it is not as easy as selling a player without a contract linking him to a selling club. Especially with Leicester City not given Nacho room to prove himself.

Finito.

Nacho's buy back clause is simple and straight forward like most buy back clauses these days
Its quite simple really - if Nacho wants to leave - Leicester will let City know and if they want to activate it - they will. If not, they'll pass and Nacho can be sold to whomever.
All the factors you mentioned aren't part of all buy back clauses. We all know from reports that Nacho's is straight forward.
Nacho is not going for anything more than the 25m Leicester paid for him. Why would city activate a buy back clause double that amount?

charlesemeka85:
Mk una chill for this Eze matter abeg. Eze tell una say him no Wan play for super eagles? Abi Rohr tell una him no dey monitor him? Players that play u21 competitions for their country of birth change allegiance so what's the fuss about?

The earlier the better. Simple. Integrate the guy before 2022 WC.

Preetychina22:
I don't argue with idiots. I have better things to do with my time.
If you're desperate for an argument doing call your father and argue with him.

Nah call YOUR father and tell him how much of an idiot you are.
AKA is a Xenophobe because he clapped back after insults from fools like you.

TheSuperNerd:
How can I vex when this below happened moments ago...

Hehehehehehe... Son of Man is excited

LOL guess I'm lucky. Good win for ndi tigers.

Preetychina22:
Psycho, you've never crossed your village borders.
Clearly, you know NOTHING about South Africans. I don't have time going back and forth. Just shut up.

You have nothing reasonable to say. Leave it at that.
Take your own advice and shut the Bleep up.

jihday:
I feel he thinks he's not better than what we have presently (Iwobi) which is true, but then he should have been invited even if na backup

I mean with the options we have outwide at the moment - this is understandable.
I'm talking about when he played Iwobi outwide. Eze would've been a great option through the middle.
I still think we need him.

TheSuperNerd:
Later dem go call me the Epistle King (which is true by virtue of my marathon writeups sometimes)... but just negodu... biko just see Edi287's post above me now... bia Edi... kilode naa?

LOL sorry o. I copied more than I wanted to. No vex

TheGoodJoe:
I am saying if a club wants to buy Nacho, they have to agree to have the 50m buy back clause in the new contract.

Here is an article on buy back clauses

Decoding the buy-back clause and how it works in football
First ever buyback clause activated was way back in 1983. Harsh Biyani 08 Jul 2017, 16:18 IST

Barcelona recently triggered the buy-back clause and got Gerard Deulofeu back from Everton for £10.5m
Buy-back clauses are not that simple as they seem to be. They can get very complex at times and can be very easy as well. Let us start by understanding the buyback clause in a layman's term. It is a provision in a contract which gives the seller of the property the first option to repurchase the property under certain conditions.

[b]For example, 'A' sells a house to 'B' and in the contract, inserts a buy-back clause. Now, when 'B' wants to sell the house to say 'C', he cannot do so before asking 'A'. 'A' has the first option of deciding whether he wants to buy back his house or not. If 'A' decides to buy back the house, he would have to pay a certain fee, stated in the contract, to 'B' to get back the property. If 'A' declines, 'B' is free to sell the house to 'C' or anyone else for a fee which both the parties agree upon.

This is exactly how buy-back clause works in football with a few changes. The main purpose of inserting a buy-back clause in the transfer agreements is to give the selling club a sense of security of being able to repurchase a player should he excel in the future. The buyback clause has to be agreed before the player can make a transfer. It may or may not be removed after a certain time period or conditions depending on the contract agreed.

No other club except the selling club can pay the fee agreed while negotiating and in maximum cases, the player would have to go back to the parent club when they call for him. The player does not have a say in it and is powerless. [/b]


Manchester United have the option of re-signing Depay for £35m thanks to the buy-back clause option
Buy-back clause is a good way for the player to showcase his talent rather than being wasted at the parent club. When a club feels that they have a good player at their disposal but are not able to utilise him up to his potential, but feel that the player would turn out to be good in the future, they sell the player to another club with a buy-back clause.

This usually happens to the academy players who are unable to join the first team but have abilities that need proper nurturing. It does not happen in the case of older players because let’s face it, there is no sense in doing so also and in maximum cases, it does not happen.

The buy-back clause is also used as a tool to make the selling club listen to the buying club. This is the best way for the smaller clubs to have players from the big clubs play for them. It is a win-win situation for all the parties concerned- the selling club, the buying club and the player, not to forget the agent as well.

An interesting case happened in the 2014-15 season involving Toby Alderweireld, Atletico Madrid defender on loan to Southampton for the season. Both the clubs had an agreement that although being a loan deal, Southampton had the option of purchasing the defender for around £7m. Although it was not a buy-back clause, it did give the Saints the option of making the loan deal permanent.

Now in the following summer transfer window, Tottenham bid £11.5m for the defender which Atletico accepted. Southampton wanted to exercise the option of making the loan deal permanent. It is believed that Atletico compensated Southampton so that the player could move to Spurs.

Buy-back clause is not that easy as it sounds. The main complication arises when the parent club wants to take the player back. But at what fee? Like I said above, the fee is decided before the deal happens, but it’s not that simple.

There can be different sets of fees included in the contract. Below are a few examples of how certain clauses work,

- If the player is bought back in the first two summer transfer window, the parent club would have to pay say the agreed fee. But every window after that, the club would have to pay an extra £5m.

- If the player is called up by the national team, an extra fee would have to be paid by the club.

- If the player is a striker and scores 10+ goals in the 38 league matches, then some extra fee would be included.

- If the player plays at least 60 minutes in 50% of all the matches- league, cups, European competition.

Now you may wonder what happens if a third club comes along with a bigger offer than the original club was offering. For this, there is something known as a cancellation clause. This is also discussed during negotiations whether or not to be inserted it in the contract. If there is a cancellation clause included and the selling club pays the amount to the parent club, then the selling club can sell the player for a higher fee to the third (interested) club.

Let us consider the Atletico and Saints case, which I mentioned above, to understand this better with a slight change. Let’s assume that Atletico sold Alderweireld to Saints with a buy-back and a cancellation clause included. Now, when Tottenham bid £11.5m for the player, the Saints, having the cancellation clause included, paid a certain fee to Atletico and then sold the player to Tottenham.

Had the cancellation clause not been included, Southampton would not have the power to negotiate right away with Spurs because of the buy-back clause. They would have to wait for an answer from Atletico and then go ahead according to the circumstances.

It is interesting to note that buy-back clauses are becoming more common than loan options. This is a good sign as it benefits the player the most.

Suppose a player was sent on a season-long loan and after coming back from the loan spell, he is still unable to break into the first team. The player would have to start from scratch all over again when he is sent out on loan again to another team this time. This way the player keeps getting loaned and is never able to break into the first team.


Luther Blissett was the 1st player to be bought back by Watford using the buyback clause
The first example of buy-back clause being activated dates back to 1983 as reported by the Guardian. It involves England striker Luther Blissett. The player was sold by Watford to AC Milan in the summer of 1983. While in Milan, the striker scored just 3 goals in 22 appearances and there were rumours that Milan confused Blisset with John Barnes. Italian journalist, Gabriele Marcotti, however, believes that it was not true. Blissett was later sold back to Watford for £550,000 after spending one season in Italy.

Now check this article on Nacho's move to Leicester

But with the striker now poised to officially become a Leicester player, it has emerged that Manchester City have struck an agreement which will see them given the first option to re-sign the 20-year-old if he proves a success at the King Power Stadium.

Iheanacho remains highly thought of at the Etihad Stadium, after progressing through the club's academy, and City have inserted a clause to buy him back for £50m. Leicester were happy to agree to the clause, as they will double their money in the event of the forward proving a massive hit in the East Midlands.

Kelechi Iheanacho scoring for Man City CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES
It is understood that Leicester have secured Iheanacho's signature ahead of Tottenham Hotspur, West Ham United and Monaco, and the deal represents a huge coup for new manager Craig Shakespeare. Iheanacho, 20, could make his Leicester debut in Friday's friendly against Borussia Monchengladbach at the King Power Stadium.[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][/font]
The buy back clause isn't what is stopping Nacho from moving.

TheGoodJoe:
I am saying if a club wants to buy Nacho, they have to agree to have the 50m buy back clause in the new contract.

LOL no that's not how it works. Once City passes up on it, that's the end of it.
Either they activate it or pass up on it

TheGoodJoe:
It is a mountain because it requires a club signing a player of huge potential and not getting returns for the true value if the player excels.

As I said, I believe it will take a club to accept the clause or City to drop it (which I do not see happening) for a transfer to sale through.

Let me get this straight - are you saying that if and when Leicester wants to sell Nacho, City would activate his buy back clause or what?

TheGoodJoe:
If City would pass it up as you are making it, it would not be put there in the first place.

They put in in case he fulfilled his potential. He clearly hasn't and City have moved on.
Clubs pass up on buy back clauses many times. Madrid did with Hermoso who had a buy back clause of less than 10m.

ornicus:
Trump did not see anything.south Africa has always been a hotbed of crime. It had the world's rape capital for 5 years running if I recall.This one pass indomie generation ignorance

Trump fan boys will look for anything to suck his dick by...

TheGoodJoe:
That does not nullify the buy back clause. That is what I am saying. The buy back clause makes it difficult to just farm out Nacho because any buying club has to deal with it. Whether Nacho is playing or not does not cancel it. The clause is a security in case Nacho's career propels in the near future. City will want that security because they believe in his potential, not current status.

They really don't. City will definitely pass up on it at the moment. Thats the point I'm trying to make. They have no need to activate it.

TheGoodJoe:
I hope you know Manchester City bought Angelino back even though we have Zinchenko and Mendy? Manchester City activated the buy back clause this season.

I am not saying Manchester City needs Iheanacho or are going to buy him back. He is like a gamble. If by any chance Iheanacho hits the anticipated peak due to the assessed potential, he would be a huge bargain just like Angelino.

So, selling Iheanacho would not be easy as you want to make it.

WE are talking 50m here...thats a big outlay regardless of how crazy the market is.
The thing is we don't know Rodgers plan for Nacho long term. He isn't going to bench Vardy anytime soon.
Would you spend 50m on a bench player when you have a WC striker and a very capable back up around? Let's not forget Sterling can play as a CF too.
It just doesn't add up. 50m is too much to gamble on - inflation or not.

charlesemeka85:
Bros let's keep sentiment aside, coady is better than all the center halves we can boast of both capped and uncapped with tomori inclusive. Tomori is a greenhorn learning his trade and is yet to be tested in a full season of top flight football.

He only made Chelsea team this season because of the transfer ban if not he wouldn't have made Chelsea bench let alone seeing game time

Coady mostly plays in a back 3 Sha. I heard that's why he wasn't invited to the English NT.

Humility017:
the painful thing those who even work with him... as assistants don't even know what's happening... I bet they can read games too.
someone like me should be working with Rohr would have sell the idea of calling up Eberechi Eze to him since...

some of this coaches don't know it all..

His assistants are useless. Ive been saying that since.

Leonbonapart:
ignoramus

Fxcktard. Crack baby.

Leonbonapart:
I don't do any of their music. But bros the blood of those people be upon you and your albino AKA.

He boldly wrote in SA language "your mother's cunt" not once not twice.

He's clearly in support of it and also said "stay in your country "

You're an outlaw before me. You can never be a Nigerian.

I'd rather be an "outlaw" all day than support foolishness. This talk is nothing new.
Why didn't you bring up the tweets of people threatening to kill him and comparing him to R Kelly before that? He has every reason to react the way he has.

Sterope:
Sorry, I don't follow.

If that is the case, Nigerians need to calm down.

They attacked him first before he said that.

Ycee started all this foolishness. All he had to do is condemn the attacks without roping someone in unnecessarily. The guy is a retard.

Leonbonapart:
mumu. Go to twitter and read all his tweets of yesterday. Unfortunate human being

Bring a screenshots of all his tweets and let's analyze it logically here.
Your hero Ycee is a fool. Find another role model.

TheGoodJoe:
Manchester City have not stopped believing Nacho's potential. If Leicester City felt they do not have a reasonable back up, Nacho would make the match day squads. They have chosen to accommodate the English boy, Demarai Gray by opting to give him games up to.

City do not need Nacho. The ship has sailed. I assure you they'll pass on that buy back clause. I mean, what's the point? It's not like they'll make a profit if they buy him back and sell to another club like Madrid did with Morata.
It's absolutely pointless. They have Aguero and G Jesus. No need for Nacho.

Sterope:
Exactly, I don't find this comment innocent. It is not his to say. He is basically reguguatating what his criminals SA brothers are telling foreigners. It is an insensitive and intolerant comment.

Nah he got threatened first. Look at what he said before that tweet.
People were threatening to kill him if he comes to naija.

Leonbonapart:
if these are the kind of people getting killed in SA, guys let's pull back they're worth killing.

You're disgrace to everything that has breath

You are an even bigger disgrace for supporting Ycee.
I hope your views gets misinterpreted and you get attacked unnecessarily like AKA in your workplace.
You are worth getting killed by Fulani herdsmen and SARS.

Sterope:
I deleted my comment brcaut well AKA tweeted 'stay in your country'

This is what and why he said it.

Joebie:
The case with Ebere Eze is that if we lost him to England it would be because we were never serious about getting him.

I mean I don't know what Rohr is thinking. No one can argue we lack creativity in midfield.

Sterope:
Someone tweeted regret over a football match, suddenly it is xenophobia and every one is foaming in their mouths

That fraud Ycee was just looking for clout. There was absolutely no need to bring up those tweets.
Ycee is a retard and will remain one in the afterlife.

faceland:
You are more likely to be killed by SARS, Fulani Herdsmsn, etc than that ever happening to be.
You are the bigger disgrace. Aturu.

It is only on Nairaland that i would cross the path of a mentally disturbed person like this guy. What an abomination that me and this type of person would exchange message online.

Its almost 3am, make I do waitn bring me online today

Shut up clown. Next time don't start what you can't finish.