Antoine Griezmann| Signs a new contract till 2022

[P-Nut]

That'll only work if Athletico play ball, when they're banned from transfers. My guess is as good as yours. We'll see.

True but that's why we'd have to pay more than the release clause to do it in installments so they are still benefitting.

Can you explain this playing ball for me? Cause I keep seeing it pop up. Bilbao didn't play ball, but it didn't stop us, so how would they stop us?

It was in reply to my post. The problem for United at the moment is that to activate the release clause we need to pay the amount in full. Even for a club as big as ours that will have an impact. If we negotiate paying more with Atletico they may consider letting us pay in installments as they are making more money, they just don't get it all at once.

Obviously they could say no deal and then we have to decide whether to pay it all up front or not.

 

[pseudo_canadian]

For the uninformed:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Garethw]

It stops them from neither. It stops them from registering players.

Thanks mate.

 

[Walters_19_MuFc]

This should be wrapped up very soon then?

 

[VP89]

We are stinking rich, I don't think that is an issue at all. If he wants to come, and we want him, then there is nothing they can do.

No club is that rich to have 80 odd million stashed away in cash. Transfers are normally always paid in installments.

 

[Summit]

It was in reply to my post. The problem for United at the moment is that to activate the release clause we need to pay the amount in full. Even for a club as big as ours that will have an impact. If we negotiate paying more with Atletico they may consider letting us pay in installments as they are making more money, they just don't get it all at once.

Obviously they could say no deal and then we have to decide whether to pay it all up front or not.

I honestly believe that is the only way we'd get him anyway. Do you not think Madrid would have made us pay the full clause, regardless of the ban? They want to hold on to their player, so will make it hard for any club to get him.

 

[Garethw]

As far as I'm aware, no. I think it just stops them from registering new players. They can still buy players (see Barcelona with Turan), they just wouldn't be able to register and play them.

I'm sure someone more knowledgable than me could clarify, though.

You were right! Thanks mate.

 

[Nate Dogg]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Summit]

No club is that rich to have 80 odd million stashed away in cash. Transfers are normally always paid in installments.

Nearly, but not always. Madrid paid £80 for Ronaldo in one lump sum 8 years ago. We have the money.

 

[The Man Himself]

We are stinking rich, I don't think that is an issue at all. If he wants to come, and we want him, then there is nothing they can do.

100M Euros vs say 30-40M Euros will still a big impact on financial statement for the year.

 

[pseudo_canadian]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Ball bag doesn't know shite.

 

[pseudo_canadian]

100M Euros vs say 30-40M Euros will still a big impact on financial statement for the year.

With the stream of revenues United has? Not really. Their financials are pretty robust.

 

[Mark McMaw]

That ban is even more reason for him to go he owes nothing to the club and why should his personal career take a hit because the club messed up of the pitch.

 

[KM]

Alright since people are asking it again and again. Here it goes.

1) Atletico's transfer ban doesn't effect their ability to sell the players. They can also buy players if they want too but they can't register them before 1st Jan 2018
2) Griezman has a buyout clause of 100m Euros. If United wants it and Griezmann wants to leave then he'll be an United player. Atletico can't stop him.
3) There'll be no tax on the buyout clause(the tax laws were changed). United will have to pay 100m Euros for his service and nothing more.

Threadmarking it so people don't ask the same question again and again.

 

[VP89]

Nearly, but not always. Madrid paid £80 for Ronaldo in one lump sum 8 years ago. We have the money.

Where was it written that Real paid upfront?

 

[DanClancy]

Surely this means he's more certain to leave? I thought he said something the other day about wanting to win trophies? If he did and they can't register any new players because of the ban surely this increases his motivation to leave. He's not going to hang around because he feels sorry for them.

 

[Summit]

Where was it written that Real paid upfront?

In Sir Alex's book.

 

[WPMUFC]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

considering Ballbag was probably the "Sky source" for the laughable De Gea scoop last night that was debunked within seconds. I'd like to see him banned from this forum.

 

[Mister_Stubbs]

Pay the release clause, offer Griezy a shit load of money and get the deal done.

 

[VP89]

In Sir Alex's book.

Ah, fair enough. But Im sure that wasn't easy for the club and made it harder to wrap up.

 

[cyberman]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Up until the interview, Ballague thought Antoine was staying put for a year waiting for Real to bid for him.
What a clown

 

[Peanut Butter]

Alright since people are asking it again and again. Here it goes.

1) Atletico's transfer ban doesn't effect their ability to sell the players. They can also buy players if they want too but they can't register them before 1st Jan 2018
2) Griezman has a buyout clause of 100m Euros. If United wants it and Griezmann wants to leave then he'll be an United player. Atletico can't stop him.
3) There'll be no tax on the buyout clause(the tax laws were changed). United will have to pay 100m Euros for his service and nothing more.

Threadmarking it so people don't ask the same question again and again.

Good stuff. He has just gone to a 8/10 now.

I reckon we have already activated the release clause too.

 

[SfcNervion]

Atletico are trying to negotiate a new deal with Griezmann (which implies a new tag on the buyout clause). Griezmann is currently on around 7.5 million euros/year, which is not even close to being the highest paid in Atletico. Atletico has to show him the money. At the same time, there's always a chance of him making himself impossible for Atletico and force his way to England. 4-5 months ago, I personally never believed that there would be much of a chance to buy him if Atletico's ban continued, but I was wrong, since Griezmann has yet not implied that he would stay loyal if the ban continued. However, the real struggle here is to get through to Atletico, especially with this ban they'll be similarly painful as Bilbao when it comes to negotiating. It is not as simple as just activating the buyout clause, since it means that you have to pay up 100 million euros at once, which is something rarely done by any club. Usually these high price tags are paid off partially in 2-3 consecutive summers. Lucky for us (who wants to see Atletico getting weaker), United are fully capable of doing us a favour and snatching Griezmann, despite the price tag. This saga will be interesting, since it has turned into a race between Atletico and United

 

[Satissh12]

May be they will do deals where they can loan out the player to the parent club for half a season (provided that club is not in CL)

 

[salford_]

I think the ban makes it more likely he stays tbh. He loves Atleti and Simeone and knowing they cant replace him if he goes, think he will give them 1 more year so as not to leave them high and dry.

 

[Womp]

Atletico are trying to negotiate a new deal with Griezmann (which implies a new tag on the buyout clause). Griezmann is currently on around 7.5 million euros/year, which is not even close to being the highest paid in Atletico. Atletico has to show him the money. At the same time, there's always a chance of him making himself impossible for Atletico and force his way to England. 4-5 months ago, I personally never believed that there would be much of a chance to buy him if Atletico's ban continued, but I was wrong, since Griezmann has yet not implied that he would stay loyal if the ban continued. However, the real struggle here is to get through to Atletico, especially with this ban they'll be similarly painful as Bilbao when it comes to negotiating. It is not as simple as just activating the buyout clause, since it means that you have to pay up 100 million euros at once, which is something rarely done by any club. Usually these high price tags are paid off partially in 2-3 consecutive summers. Lucky for us (who wants to see Atletico getting weaker), United are fully capable of doing us a favour and snatching Griezmann, despite the price tag. This saga will be interesting, since it has turned into a race between Atletico and United

I read that the laws changed and taxes aren't applied to buy-out clauses anymore?

 

[dwd]

Are buyout clauses negotiated often?

No, but doesnt this mean we have to pay it all in one sum now or would that have been the case anyway?

 

[Womp]

It will make the deal harder for us though imo. I don't see us willing to pay 100m up front. Like the Pogba deal, we'd most likely pay it in installments, but Atleti won't want that and will do everything they can to keep him now. Even if Griezmann wants to come, unless we pay them up front, it won't be easy.

 

[SfcNervion]

I read that the laws changed and taxes aren't applied to buy-out clauses anymore?

Yes, I changed my post, I realised that as soon as I had already posted. Cheers

 

[The Man Himself]

With the stream of revenues United has? Not really. Their financials are pretty robust.

Financials are robust but still an extra 60M Euros or so will have impact on margins and bottomline. My point is not on not being able to afford or that it will cause financial issues to club in short or long term, but with company now being listed (or for that matter otherwise also), finance people at club won't like that additional expense to account for in this year.

 

[P-Nut]

I honestly believe that is the only way we'd get him anyway. Do you not think Madrid would have made us pay the full clause, regardless of the ban? They want to hold on to their player, so will make it hard for any club to get him.

I think if we offered them an extra 10m or so but staggered say half of the payment then they might consider it. It would look miles better to our accountants as well.

 

[Crackers]

Can you explain this playing ball for me? Cause I keep seeing it pop up. Bilbao didn't play ball, but it didn't stop us, so how would they stop us?

We can pay their release clause, up front I think. I don't think we can pay it in installments.
We could agree to pay them more than the release clause, but in smaller installments (I'm guesstimating this).

Basically, will they allow us to pay a bigger fee, in smaller amounts, or force us to take the release clause and pay it all up front? And release clauses in Spain are fraught with taxes.

 

[dakingpin1999]

Atletico are banned from transfers and if they sell griezmann they will struggle big time next season. I think their plan was to sell griezmann and buy lacazette and they need the money for the new stadium as well. Lets see what happens. If utd pay the buy out clause then atletico dont have any say

 

[shaky]

I think the ban makes it more likely he stays tbh. He loves Atleti and Simeone and knowing they cant replace him if he goes, think he will give them 1 more year so as not to leave them high and dry.

Hey Antoine, listen, the people who run our club have been up to some dodgy shenanigans and we now can't sign any players, so the future isn't looking great here, probably no trophies coming our way soon. Anyway, how do you fancy putting your progress on hold for a bit and hanging about to help us ride out this mess that wasn't your making. All it will cost you is about 20% of your remaining top level career and probably around £5m in lost wages.

 

[VorZakone]

The football business is cold. Griezmann doesn't have to feel sorry for them and stay, if he wants to leave he'll leave.

 

[Summit]

We can pay their release clause, up front I think. I don't think we can pay it in installments.
We could agree to pay them more than the release clause, but in smaller installments (I'm guesstimating this).

Basically, will they allow us to pay a bigger fee, in smaller amounts, or force us to take the release clause and pay it all up front? And release clauses in Spain are fraught with taxes.

Apparently not anymore. Tax laws have changed.

 

[Crackers]

Apparently not anymore. Tax laws have changed.

I didn't see the threadmarked post until after I posted mine. Hopefully we get this sorted soon

 

[Schmiznurf]

Bloody hell, people panicking as though Athletic can do anything besides beg AG to stay.

 

[Crackers]

Bloody hell, people panicking as though Athletic can do anything besides beg AG to stay.

Muppets gonna muppet

 

[VP89]

Maybe Woody was just waiting for the official ban confirmation, so he knows whether to take the big briefcase or collection of smaller ones to Atletico