[Albion] Where is Alexis going? (Liverpool - for an undisclosed fee...)

Tyrone Biggums said:

You can meet his request for moving to a certain club.

But why would you have a "clause" that doesn't allow for any negotiations for having triggers to make the price of his sale increase over time when he has so much potential to succeed?

That's why having a set price so he can leave sound so very stupid business wise and nothing like how we operate.

Click to expand...

The Wizard said:

‘Understand’ makes him sound like he’s in the know, absolute berk that guy is.

Click to expand...

hans kraay fan club said:

Was Alexis actually going to be out of contract THIS summer as some are suggesting, rather than 2024?

Pretty sure he had a year left - otherwise the signing of the new deal would have been madness on his part.

Click to expand...

axscott said:

Click to expand...

wellquickwoody said:

Not wishing to be rude, but exactly how many footballers contracts have you actually seen?

Click to expand...

MJsGhost said:

If there's one thing we know about Tony Bloom, it's that he looks at the big picture and does what's best for the club in the long term. He is a pragmatic, analytical man who has literally made a living out of weighing up risk and probability.

When faced with the prospect of a player not extending a contract at all in order to eventually leave on a free/at a big discount, would he agree to a contract albeit with a clause that isn't a "release clause" per se, but does make the situation more certain for the player, should specified criteria (including something about size of fee and probably timing) be met?
Sounds like smart negotiation to me - a bit of give and take where the club moved from their ideal position (Alli Mac signs long-term with nothing like a release clause) to something in the middle. Importantly, the player carries on happily for the remainder of the season and our push for Europe wasn't derailed. Same for Caicedo I presume (though his agents took a little more 'persuading' to see sense). It still fits with the idea that the club 'doesn't like release clauses' (in the usual sense), but that they will entertain something similar as long as the club retains an element of control.
My guess (and it's absolutely that) is that the 'release' fee gets incrementally higher as time passes and the window draws to a close. E.g. £50m in June, £60m in July, £70m in August. That would be an incentive to get the deal done, enabling us the time to get the right replacement in, rather than a mad trolley dash with inflated prices at the end of the window when clubs know we're desperate. That could save as much as is 'lost' by the Alli Mac's price being lower and crucially allows time for new signings to be integrated.

Click to expand...

Baldseagull said:

Alternative to a release mechanism with a less than optimal fee in his new contract would maybe have been no new contract, and Alexis leaving for even less this summer, due to the short contract and risk of him leaving for free in 12 months. It seems the club avoided the risk of him leaving in January and disruptng our season, and gained some extra value for any interest in him this summer. Alexis gained an increased wage, and permission for his Dad to go and talk to clubs that might want him and work out where he might prefer to be next.
Club gets a bit more in fee, and the deal done early so no shock exit late in the window.
Mac Allister gets long period to decide which club might suit him best, and to discuss terms.
This seems fair all round, sad as we are to see him go.

Click to expand...

The Wizard said:

Have you ever heard of a release clause that’s anything like what he said?

On a day where there is pink elephants flying north, when the sun and the moon are in perfect alignment Alexis will be allowed to leave, furthermore if he has hair longer than 1/16th inch around the circumference of his bollocks he will be allowed to leave for half the price.

I’d imagine if his agent/father had approached and suggested this type of term the club would have reported them to the FA given they clearly already have an agreement in place with Liverpool.

Click to expand...

Triggaaar said:

You've misunderstood the situation. The new contract is not what's restricting how much we can gain, the restriction was that he only had a year left if we didn't agree it. He could be going for less than £40m without the new contract.

Click to expand...

Tyrone Biggums said:

Or he could have been going for 60 million. Like Mount could.

Click to expand...

Kalimantan Gull said:

My guess is the release clause is more a minimum fee clause, i.e. we'll let you go for bids over 45m, but we'll accept the largest one. It may well be however that Mac is so determined to go to Liverpool and nowhere else it doesn't matter if Chelsea bid higher, so the minimum fee becomes in effect a release clause.

Click to expand...

Tim Over Whelmed said:

All the Liverpool chatter; last minute bid by Man Citeh

Click to expand...

The Wizard said:

Have you ever heard of a release clause that’s anything like what he said?

On a day where there is pink elephants flying north, when the sun and the moon are in perfect alignment Alexis will be allowed to leave, furthermore if he has hair longer than 1/16th inch around the circumference of his bollocks he will be allowed to leave for half the price.

I’d imagine if his agent/father had approached and suggested this type of term the club would have reported them to the FA given they clearly already have an agreement in place with Liverpool.

Click to expand...