It is the same, just that in Spain release/buyout clauses aren't obligative for foreign clubs. That means that while they can't reject a Spanish club to pay it (i.e Real can just pay the money and say feck off to them) they aren't forced to accpept the offers from non-Spanish clubs and in those cases the player has to pay the money himself.
Ander Herrera is a Manchester United Player!
- Thread starter pocco
- Start date
- Status
Woodward probably bought the wrong camera.
Eh? Then why doesn't United pay the money directly to Bilbao and avoids all the tax issue? It's a release clause.
EDIT: Ok, the above post by Revan explains it.
Well this is fun, we thought everything was going so smoothly and the announcement was coming today.
It seems as though we have nothing to worry about, it just means we have to wait until Friday, no biggie.
It seems as though we have nothing to worry about, it just means we have to wait until Friday, no biggie.
To be fair, it could just be tweets along the lines of 'feck it, my benefit claim was rejected'.
Not really. A buy out is a contract termination. A release is a price that must be accepted by a club if a bid matching, or more is made.
You missed my point entirely. Im saying eventually players will see what happens when you try to leave and start to think twice about signing in the first place, they already have a limited number of players to choose from and they will only make it even more limited by pissing off players because they want to move on.
what happened is, we arn't sure if that happened
I agree with you. We might be wrong, but from this situation, that seems to be the case.
Well that helps clear a lot of things up. Thanks!!
The A and B things are the two options I mentioned earlier.
Either
A) The player already terminated his contract the moment he submitted the paperwork. Or
B) It doesn't matter anymore because the player intends to terminate his contract anyway and pay the full compensation amount.
Because it was a transfer bid that matched the buy out clause amount. It was not an actual triggering of the buy out clause itself. There are a lot of procedures and steps when it comes to triggering an actual buy out for the player. Especially by foreign clubs.
Last edited:
Same thing, It ensures the club get the value of the player plus his contract value as a minimum and they can enforce it to any offers so that they dont lose out on potential revenue from the deal.
Buy-Out meaning you are buying out the clause, offering them the full value of the player that then releases him from his contract.
Release Clause meaning you have paid out the funds to the club to the full value of the players worth therefore they must release him.
Subtle but essentially the same.
They could do exactly that if is was a release clause.
No they are not, they seems the same when we talk about high fees clause but for players who play in liga adelante and have clause around 1 or 2 millions it's totally different because they have enough money to buy themselves out of their contracts, and become free agent.Don't be pedantic
They are essentially the same thing.
And a club is forced to accept an offer who meets the release clause, it's not the case for a buy out clause.
I see, but the result will still be the same!
Sorry, you seem to be right. I never knew of the Spanish/foreigner angle and hence misinterpreted what a release clause.
As reported he already deposited the sum at LFP. Not it's a legal matter to push through really.
Because it's not a release clause. A buyout and release clause are different. Release clause allows a player to speak/sign to a club if a certain amount of money is offered. A buyout is where a club buys his contract out. To do that, in Spanish system, he has to deposit the money to the Spanish league who will cancel his contract with his current club.
Clubs usually get around this by negotiating a transfer around the buyout clause. How ever in Bilbao case, they do not want to sell, so they are forcing the player to buy out his contract.
Think players will probably see the fact they're a well run club who're competing in the CL over anything tbh. Not all players join a club with the intention of leaving at some point, it's happened before with them aswell it isn't a recent thing, players will know what goes on at the club and how they're go about their business. This won't change a thing for them.
http://www.mundodeportivo.com/20140...posita-la-clausula-rescision_54411313541.html
Mundo Deportivo claiming Herrera has deposited the termination clause for his contract.
Mundo Deportivo claiming Herrera has deposited the termination clause for his contract.
People are saying Bayern's chase and acquisition of Martinez took a couple of months of legal wrangling and problems, which could mean the same for us, but wasn't Martinez the first time anyone outside of Spain had activated the buy-out clause? If so, they were exploring new grounds so to speak. Now we're going down the same route, shouldn't it be a lot quicker to get the deal done now, as we pretty much know what to expect thanks to Bayern? I could be wrong, but I seem to remember people saying Bayern were the first club to do that.
They are the same really. The wording is just different. As people have explained above.
Could be the same, hopefully is, but the thing is, it's messier, very complicated, and could involve paying millions more in taxes and solidarity payments.I see, but the result will still be the same!
Even yet, Bilbao could refuse to accept the money and make it more complicated(which they couldn't with a release clause), like they did with Martinez, and the league had to put a bit of pressure on them.
It's bloody annoying, that's for sure.
Not really, because EU and FIFA regs are on our side - Bayern did a lot of the groundwork on this. There is a complication, the LFP are basically treated as invisible (in tax terms) when money moves between Spanish clubs, or players etc. They may not be deemed invisible if the money comes from a non-member - again it's something lawyers can have fun with.
That's not what people have explained.
If you worry about ethics, then most of the transfers are wrong because they are "de facto" breaches of contracts. What i tried to explain to you is a legal and in a way business side of it. There is no ethical or moral component there.
Not sure why we haven't contacted the Bayern lawyers to make this think as easy as possible, as they'd already have the experience, maybe we have?
well i think thier is, having a player at your traing groud before a deal is in place isnt morally right, even buy fooball standards.
You may call it "buy out" or "release clause", it does not matter(because the original term in spanish anyway) as long as you understand the nature of this clause. It's not a sum of money that one club need to offer the other in order for transfer to go through.Ok whatever
I'm not going to argue over minor things like this. Im not Bilbao
Not really. A buy out is the minimum compensation you have to pay to terminate a contract.
A release clause is a minimum transfer fee that the club is compelled to accept if that amount or more is offered by another club.
These subtle differences make a lot of difference in legal matters. Contract termination has many caveats to deal with in practice. Release clauses don't. Not to mention there're many issues apparently with foreign clubs triggering the clause. Or at least that's my understanding of it.
Come on Woody, give Bilbao your left nut to finalise the deal.
The bid was rejected earlier in the week, for all this to happen (him being here, training ground etc.) we'll have come to an agreement somewhere in between. Athletic are just doing this to save face.
Indeed. Though because the Bayern transfer never went to law or tax court, some of the guidance/rulings would only be provisional. There's also a 4 year statute of limitations on tax in Spain, so it'll be another couple of years before Bayern/Martinez know for sure if there's going to be another twist in the story.
But the principle is true. Whether we planned to go back for Herrera or nor, we probably have done the legal groundwork to know how to use a forced release if we have to.
Please be true.
That's fine, Bilbao keep their player, however that poor boy is left to hang out to dry yet again. He is the one I feel sorry for he has been messed about no end.
How reliable are they?
feck this.. I'm off for a hike in the mountains - expecting this thread to have grown to epic proportions when I'm back!
So they may still have to pay tax? or have I misunderstood.
Exceptional when it comes to Barcelona. Good with the rest of the league. Obviously, they have less links into the Madrid clubs.
That's where you mistaken, because the deal is in place. As soon as Ander activated his release clause he activated the breach of contract. It does not matter what Athletic wants or thinks about it. They probably had their chance to go via transfer route and they declined United, maybe weeks ago, who knows. The fact is United offered Ander a help with becoming a free agent if he will sign for United. That's not a transfer from club to club. Legally we will be signing Ander as a free agent, that is after all legal dust settles.
- Status