Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Watford to get £225,000 from Buckley sale



Bladders

Twats everywhere
Jun 22, 2012
13,672
The Troubadour
.....thought I'd get this pointless thread started before ElderlyWilliam did
 












Remember the days when we used to raid Watford for their best young talent. Now they have 3 strikers Deeney, Vydra and Forestieri better than any one of ours
 








hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
61,094
Chandlers Ford
That £225,000 is the only money our club will be departing with till next summer.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Stockdale, Toko and Ward all came free did they? (and the three more still to sign)
 


GT49er

Well-known member
Feb 1, 2009
46,489
Gloucester
If £225000 is accurate, it's rather worrying.....partly because if the club is desperate to keep the sale as an "undisclosed fee" it must be even less keen for us to know how the 15% we have to pay to Watford is worth!

Even more so in that if £225000 is right, the fee was only £1.5 Million, not the £2. 5 Million widely reported - and £1.5 Million WOULD be bad business.

Edit: My mistake - of course, it's 15% of the profit, not the total fee. Apologies all round.
 
Last edited:


Skylar

Banned
Jul 29, 2014
799
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Stockdale, Toko and Ward all came free did they? (and the three more still to sign)

Hope you're right Hans because I can see this board and non board members getting seriously ****ed off. Fans have no say on here or in homes or pubs but they do with their feet. All these new fans will desert in their droves if they aren't intertained on the pitch and that's going to be a massive wake up call for the ckub.
 




Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
55,576
Back in Sussex
If £225000 is accurate, it's rather worrying.....partly because if the club is desperate to keep the sale as an "undisclosed fee" it must be even less keen for us to know how the 15% we have to pay to Watford is worth!

Even more so in that if £225000 is right, the fee was only £1.5 Million, not the £2. 5 Million widely reported - and £1.5 Million WOULD be bad business.

Sell-on clauses are calculated on the profit on a sale, so here 15% * (£2.5m - £1m).
 




seagullsovergrimsby

#cpfctinpotclub
Aug 21, 2005
43,690
Crap Town
If £225000 is accurate, it's rather worrying.....partly because if the club is desperate to keep the sale as an "undisclosed fee" it must be even less keen for us to know how the 15% we have to pay to Watford is worth!

Even more so in that if £225000 is right, the fee was only £1.5 Million, not the £2. 5 Million widely reported - and £1.5 Million WOULD be bad business.

Edit: My mistake - of course, it's 15% of the profit, not the total fee. Apologies all round.

Although Peterborough have sold Assambalonga to Forest for £5.5M they still have to give Watford over £2M because there was a 50% sell on fee.
 






Man of Harveys

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
18,731
Brighton, UK
I wonder which of our players Watford will end up buying with this windfall?

Whoever happens to take their fancy, presumably.
 


Do we insert sell on clauses on the players we sell?

You'd hope so - if Ulloa knocks in 15 for the Foxes this season his value will double
 








The Camel

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2010
1,519
Darlington, UK
You'd hope so - if Ulloa knocks in 15 for the Foxes this season his value will double

I'd like to have a bet that Ulloa or Buckley will never sell on for more than has been paid for them in this window.

Got the max amount for an aging striker and a clearly injured and slow winger.

If Ulloa was 23 or 24 his upside would be huge.

He'll be 30 when Leicester try to sell him. 30 year old strikers don't go for 8m+ (very often)
 
Last edited:



Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here