Erling Haaland | Dortmund player

He'sRaldo

Full Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,155
1. I can't really comment on the de Ligt saga since I did not really follow that. I wonder why players would want Raiola as their agent if he does not act in their interest though.

2. I don't mean from Dortmund but the hypothetical situation that he did sign for United with a release clause. Why would he be in a hurry to leave there if he was doing well? Just because he has a release clause?

3. I guess this doesn't really make sense to discuss since you misunderstood me for the second point :)
There are so many reasons a player could be unsettled in his current club, acting like success is the only reason is naive.

Someone like Ronaldo won the league and CL in Man Utd, and still wanted Real Madrid. Won the CL 3 times in a row, then still chose to go to Juve. Would you put a 60M release clause in Ronaldo's contract, even if you were guaranteed success?

Neymar is another example. Huge release clause, treble win, and still decided to leave for reasons other than success. There's no guarantees, the clause just puts the club on the back foot in all scenarios, negotiation and otherwise.
 

Tom Cato

Full Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
1,821
I find this claim of the release clause being small time a bit hysterical. What's even more small time is rejecting a highly rated player because despite being a big club you're scared he'll want to leave at the first chance.

We must have a pretty big inferiority complex if we were so certain he wouldn't stay beyond a couple of years.
The release clause for a player like Haaland is projecting to be, is astronomically lower than he will command on the open market. If you somehow believe Manchester United are going to be strong armed into signing a player and allow his release clause to be so low that any club with ambition can trigger it, you are absolutely out of your mind.

First off, the optics are absolutely horrible. The players and agents can dictate the terms on when a player can leave a club. It opens up a pandoras box where other players and talent will demand the same, as to remain in complete control of where they play at any given time relatively speaking. For a club like Manchester United to be forced to let their potential golden boy leave for what in todays market is the price of a good midfielder.. That is absolutely never going to happen. You automatically devalue the clubs status if you allow clauses like that.

Dortmund accepted the clause because they know very well they are a selling club. They sell players they want to keep frequently. Every time they put up a CL quality team on the pitch, Bayern München or some European club with financial muscles simply swoop in and buy their players. Compared to MUFC, Dortmund is poor, and Ill get back to why that matters. As this entire saga has nothing to do with sports.

Mino Raiola and a couple others have in recent years managed to create a new structure in player transfers, where agents earn insane profits from player transfers. The norm used to be clubs agree on fee, agent gets a reasonable fixed fee, end of story. Now you have these superagents that commission incredible sums, and actively move their players between rich clubs. All while increasing the players wages, and their own cut of the transfer fees. Allowing a lowball release clause hands control of the players future over to the player, and leaves the club helpless. If a bidding club offers the release clause, they have no say in the players future. You are essentially asking the clubs to start allowing players to dictate contract length, not vice versa.

For the clubs, this is all about asset management. The value of your assets dictate everything from share value to potential bank loans, loan obligations what have you. A lowball release clause potentially devalues the asset. That is one part of the consideration. Clubs have very different standings in international markets and they have a certain status to uphold to attract business. One of those is how the club is perceived. Allowing yourself to becoming a selling club like Dortmund, who internatonally is a pretty small club compared to Real Madrid or even Arsenal, devalues the whole franchise.

The other part is the precedent that I've already mentioned. You allow one, more will come. No one wants a situation like that.

Now: Signing Haaland to a release clause in a vacuum, means nothing. Its one player that we can lose for under 50% of his value in 2 years. Maybe. In a vacuum, this isnt a big deal. The deal becomes important when talent number 2 wants the same clause. And player number 3. And player number 2349. If artificially low clauses become the norm, club lose all control of their assets longevity, and they never will or should allow that to happen.

So the arguments for this?

"Oh ArE YoU AFraiD hE wILl LeAvE??" - No. But you don't want a summer transfer window where you have to replace CR7 because Real Madrid triggered his release clause in August and good luck finding a replacement.
"JusT siGn HiM TO a neW cONtracT" - No club will play lottery with a incredibly valuable asset like that. This is never part of real life, and will never happen.

"hE reJEcteD the ClUB L0l l0sEr - signed, Manchester United fan" - That might be, I don't know what happened and neither do you. But we do know that the release clause around £60 million is real, and that makes the player signing here a non starter to begin with. For most top6 clubs in the big leagues, the release clause is Christmas Morning for clubs looking for a player like Haaland. It's like discovering a Bugatti Veyron hiding behind the "Everything 70% off" in the discount shelves at Walmart.

"WE COULD HAVE USED THE PLAYER NOW ARE YOU RET****D" - Go wash your mouth!
 
Last edited:

Swarm

Full Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
584
Location
Germany
Supports
Borussia Dortmund
There are so many reasons a player could be unsettled in his current club, acting like success is the only reason is naive.

Someone like Ronaldo won the league and CL in Man Utd, and still wanted Real Madrid. Won the CL 3 times in a row, then still chose to go to Juve. Would you put a 60M release clause in Ronaldo's contract, even if you were guaranteed success?

Neymar is another example. Huge release clause, treble win, and still decided to leave for reasons other than success. There's no guarantees, the clause just puts the club on the back foot in all scenarios, negotiation and otherwise.
I am of course not advocating that a player having a release clause is a great thing for a club. It isn't and it can lead to very unpleasant situations. Would I take a peak Ronaldo with a release clause knowing he will leave for less than his market value? feck yeah, that would be awesome :lol: But then again, that is the Dortmund fan speaking there and maybe United's standing would not allow that. In that case it probably boils down to how deep in the shit you see yourselves and if choosing that pride/standing over sporting success is a good or a bad thing. There opinions can be and obviously are differing. I am not close enough to United to have an educated opinion there, from Dortmund's perspective right now I am over the moon for having a lad like Haaland. Not sure how I will feel in two years time though :lol:
 

Handré1990

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
3,518
Location
In hibernation
Yeah cause if it's not one extreme it has to be the other extreme. Very naive.
No, he’s right. If your scenario is correct, then that is the actual implication.

From the rumours started, the word was in all the papers in Norway that he’d take his time and decide around Christmas. It was reported that United and Dortmund were the alternatives, never did anyone here in Norway (who’s worth their salt anyway) claim we had reached an agreement with him. This all came after he’d gone to BVB. It’s really a pointless exercise having this discussion, but that’s my impression from following the saga as close as anyone. It was pointed out very early that Haaland’s main priority was playing time in a better league and a good environment for his development.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
26,144
Location
Manchester
No, he’s right. If your scenario is correct, then that is the actual implication.

From the rumours started, the word was in all the papers in Norway that he’d take his time and decide around Christmas. It was reported that United and Dortmund were the alternatives, never did anyone here in Norway (who’s worth their salt anyway) claim we had reached an agreement with him. This all came after he’d gone to BVB. It’s really a pointless exercise having this discussion, but that’s my impression from following the saga as close as anyone. It was pointed out very early that Haaland’s main priority was playing time in a better league and a good environment for his development.
:lol:
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
26,144
Location
Manchester
So the implication that Raiola got involved and helped changed Haalands mind = Haaland is brain dead and Raiolas puppet.

I wish life was as simple as some of you guys make out it is. Jesus wept.
 

He'sRaldo

Full Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,155
I am of course not advocating that a player having a release clause is a great thing for a club. It isn't and it can lead to very unpleasant situations. Would I take a peak Ronaldo with a release clause knowing he will leave for less than his market value? feck yeah, that would be awesome :lol: But then again, that is the Dortmund fan speaking there and maybe United's standing would not allow that. In that case it probably boils down to how deep in the shit you see yourselves and if choosing that pride/standing over sporting success is a good or a bad thing. There opinions can be and obviously are differing. I am not close enough to United to have an educated opinion there, from Dortmund's perspective right now I am over the moon for having a lad like Haaland. Not sure how I will feel in two years time though :lol:
Maybe it is the Dortmund fan talking. The way I see it, you should be aiming to be the club that triggers that 60M clause after he's done his development, at which point you can offer him huge wages instead of a release clause.

IMO that's how a top club should do it, and by evidence of none of the other clubs besides Juve chasing him even with a low clause at Salzburg, they probably think the same way.

And yeah, I don't think Man Utd have become so small that we jump at every talent and offer clauses, when there will for sure be a new talent next year, and hidden gems, and so on. There are so many ways to build a team, such a clause is not worth the hassle.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
26,144
Location
Manchester
Maybe it is the Dortmund fan talking. The way I see it, you should be aiming to be the club that triggers that 60M clause after he's done his development, at which point you can offer him huge wages instead of a release clause.

IMO that's how a top club should do it, and by evidence of none of the other clubs besides Juve chasing him even with a low clause at Salzburg, they probably think the same way.

And yeah, I don't think Man Utd have become so small that we jump at every talent and offer clauses, when there will for sure be a new talent next year, and hidden gems, and so on. There are so many ways to build a team, such a clause is not worth the hassle.
Very good post
 

Swarm

Full Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
584
Location
Germany
Supports
Borussia Dortmund
The release clause for a player like Haaland is projecting to be, is astronomically lower than he will command on the open market. If you somehow believe Manchester United are going to be strong armed into signing a player and allow his release clause to be so low that any club with ambition can trigger it, you are absolutely out of your mind.

First off, the optics are absolutely horrible. The players and agents can dictate the terms on when a player can leave a club. It opens up a pandoras box where other players and talent will demand the same, as to remain in complete control of where they play at any given time relatively speaking. For a club like Manchester United to be forced to let their potential golden boy leave for what in todays market is the price of a good midfielder.. That is absolutely never going to happen. You automatically devalue the clubs status if you allow clauses like that.

Dortmund accepted the clause because they know very well they are a selling club. They sell players they want to keep frequently. Every time they put up a CL quality team on the pitch, Bayern München or some European club with financial muscles simply swoop in and buy their players. Compared to MUFC, Dortmund is poor, and Ill get back to why that matters. As this entire saga has nothing to do with sports.

Mino Raiola and a couple others have in recent years managed to create a new structure in player transfers, where agents earn insane profits from player transfers. The norm used to be clubs agree on fee, agent gets a reasonable fixed fee, end of story. Now you have these superagents that commission incredible sums, and actively move their players between rich clubs. All while increasing the players wages, and their own cut of the transfer fees. Allowing a lowball release clause hands control of the players future over to the player, and leaves the club helpless. If a bidding club offers the release clause, they have no say in the players future. You are essentially asking the clubs to start allowing players to dictate contract length, not vice versa.

For the clubs, this is all about asset management. The value of your assets dictate everything from share value to potential bank loans, loan obligations what have you. A lowball release clause potentially devalues the asset. That is one part of the consideration. Clubs have very different standings in international markets and they have a certain status to uphold to attract business. One of those is how the club is perceived. Allowing yourself to becoming a selling club like Dortmund, who internatonally is a pretty small club compared to Real Madrid or even Arsenal, devalues the whole franchise.

The other part is the precedent that I've already mentioned. You allow one, more will come. No one wants a situation like that.

Now: Signing Haaland to a release clause in a vacuum, means nothing. Its one player that we can lose for under 50% of his value in 2 years. Maybe. In a vacuum, this isnt a big deal. The deal becomes important when talent number 2 wants the same clause. And player number 3. And player number 2349. If artificially low clauses become the norm, club lose all control of their assets longevity, and they never will or should allow that to happen.

So the arguments for this?

"Oh ArE YoU AFraiD hE wILl LeAvE??" - No. But you don't want a summer transfer window where you have to replace CR7 because Real Madrid triggered his release clause in August and good luck finding a replacement.
"JusT siGn HiM TO a neW cONtracT" - No club will play lottery with a incredibly valuable asset like that. This is never part of real life, and will never happen.

"hE reJEcteD the ClUB L0l l0sEr - signed, Manchester United fan" - That might be, I don't know what happened and neither do you. But we do know that the release clause around £60 million is real, and that makes the player signing here a non starter to begin with. For most top6 clubs in the big leagues, the release clause is Christmas Morning for clubs looking for a player like Haaland. It's like discovering a Bugatti Veyron hiding behind the "Everything 70% off" in the discount shelves at Walmart.

"WE COULD HAVE USED THE PLAYER NOW ARE YOU RET****D" - Go wash your mouth!
I may not agree fully with everything you say here but it is well put and I tend to agree with most of it. As was mentioned numerous times before, after the Götze transfer to Bayern Dortmund made it a policy to never again include a release clause in their players contracts and I was a big fan of that policy. Now it seems to be common knowledge that Haaland is indeed the first player since Götze to receive such a release clause (while our management does not comment on contract and transfer details I am sure they would have refuted the clause otherwise) even if I am a little surprised that you seem so sure of knowing how high it actually is.
Generally I am not too happy with this development either because I agree with your sentiment of the precedent that is being set. At the same time I also feel like this has given us (Dortmund) the opportunity to get a much needed quality striker that is already helping us immensely. He will probably be helping in achieving our goals for 1-2 more years, so that I am happy about. Losing him for a comparatively low fee afterwards is something that the clubs management has to anticipate. That is one of the points where I would disagree with your assessment concerning the devaluation of an asset. Sure it does devalue the asset but that is something you can consider in your budgetary planning. And it is not like you are losing money there, especially if you are devalueing an asset you would otherwise not have at all.

So as mentioned before, I understand why United would not want to go for such a deal, I find it questionable to an extent even for Dortmund. (I also believe that it was the player who made a conscious decision to join Dortmund before going to one of the giants but this discussion can of course still be had). So in my opinion it boils down to whether United value short to medium term sporting capabilities over potential loss of standing. I believe a player like Haaland could have helped you reach your sporting goals and I don't believe he necessarily would have used a clause to leave the club but I fully understand if people don't like the precedent to be set.
 

Handré1990

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
3,518
Location
In hibernation
So the implication that Raiola got involved and helped changed Haalands mind = Haaland is brain dead and Raiolas puppet.

I wish life was as simple as some of you guys make out it is. Jesus wept.
Alright tough guy. First of all, he didn’t just get involved. He was involved in Haaland’s transfer to Salzburg, he isn’t even his official agent, and was brought in as some sort of a transfer consultant. They brought him in, he didn’t just show up to hijack the player.

Second, Haaland doesn’t seem like a puppet at all. He’s a very assured young man, with very clear priorities and ambitions. Your constant harping about how you ‘know’ what happend by quoting English speaking journos makes you come across as more than a little deluded in this instant. If you’re going to be condecending, best get your facts straight. You’re the one who’s acting like there’s only one possible answer to this.

I never claimed to be sure of any of this, I haven’t spoken to the boy, which is the only way to get the whole picture. I also don’t understand your laughing emoji, what is funny about that? The PL is a harder place for a 19 yo than the German league, still miles above Austria.
 
Last edited:

Swarm

Full Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
584
Location
Germany
Supports
Borussia Dortmund
Maybe it is the Dortmund fan talking. The way I see it, you should be aiming to be the club that triggers that 60M clause after he's done his development, at which point you can offer him huge wages instead of a release clause.

IMO that's how a top club should do it, and by evidence of none of the other clubs besides Juve chasing him even with a low clause at Salzburg, they probably think the same way.

And yeah, I don't think Man Utd have become so small that we jump at every talent and offer clauses, when there will for sure be a new talent next year, and hidden gems, and so on. There are so many ways to build a team, such a clause is not worth the hassle.
Yeah I was being serious when I said it was the Dortmund fan talking :) Also I agree that what you are describing would be the dealings of a top club if maybe not their only way of doing business. The question is whether United is that kind of top club right now. I really don't mean to knock them too much, reputation wise and financially they definitely are but over the last years of a sporting drought it seems like the perception may have shifted a bit. The club seems to struggle to attract the players they need (which may of course be down to incapable management and not club standing with players but then again one definitely influences the other).
So in the end I think we are pretty much on the same page here, lets just see how the clubs and players develop :)
 

ThierryHenry14

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
744
Supports
Arsenal
So the implication that Raiola got involved and helped changed Haalands mind = Haaland is brain dead and Raiolas puppet.

I wish life was as simple as some of you guys make out it is. Jesus wept.
Yep. His father also has no idea how the footballing world works, no idea how evil Raiola is to his clients, and has absolutely no clue how to give advise to his son for his career based on his own experience. Also buying a player for 17m and guarantee return for 60M, a 350% return in investment in 3 years is a horrible idea for BVB as well, while the player scored 11 goals in 7 games in the first month.
 

He'sRaldo

Full Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,155
Yeah I was being serious when I said it was the Dortmund fan talking :) Also I agree that what you are describing would be the dealings of a top club if maybe not their only way of doing business. The question is whether United is that kind of top club right now. I really don't mean to knock them too much, reputation wise and financially they definitely are but over the last years of a sporting drought it seems like the perception may have shifted a bit. The club seems to struggle to attract the players they need (which may of course be down to incapable management and not club standing with players but then again one definitely influences the other).
So in the end I think we are pretty much on the same page here, lets just see how the clubs and players develop :)
We haven't had as bad a drought as one would think, it's more that the quality of football has deteriorated. Of course, the big 2 haven't been won, but we've won just about everything else in between.

Attraction-wise as well, we have beaten rivals to players consistently, sometimes signing very highly-regarded players (and all that without release clauses). They may not have worked out as we liked on the pitch, but we have attracted them for sure. I would say it's in very recent times that for some reason perception is starting to shift towards what really hasn't been reality.

In any case, based on recent history alone, I don't think we've had problems to the level you're saying, just looking at the evidence. Thus, we don't really need to make such drastic changes to our policies and start including such detrimental clauses.
 

Bebestation

Full Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
1,075
Supports
An adult TV Channel
:lol:

Why these random fans act like they have been seeing what's been going on all this time is so funny!

At the end of the day, he had the opportunity to come here and he rejected that A) because he thought Dortmund was a better place to build his career at that age or B) he regarded a clause in his contract more important than the opportunity to join United.

Either way he rejected us when he clearly had the opportunity to accept us without clauses like nearly every bloody player does.

Now chill out. He's a great young player but he rejected us because whether it was A or B - it was a rejection either way.
 

Swarm

Full Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
584
Location
Germany
Supports
Borussia Dortmund
We haven't had as bad a drought as one would think, it's more that the quality of football has deteriorated. Of course, the big 2 haven't been won, but we've won just about everything else in between.

Attraction-wise as well, we have beaten rivals to players consistently, sometimes signing very highly-regarded players (and all that without release clauses). They may not have worked out as we liked on the pitch, but we have attracted them for sure. I would say it's in very recent times that for some reason perception is starting to shift towards what really hasn't been reality.

In any case, based on recent history alone, I don't think we've had problems to the level you're saying, just looking at the evidence. Thus, we don't really need to make such drastic changes to our policies and start including such detrimental clauses.
I just may have been reading too much in the caf, you could get the impression you guys are on the brink of relegation listening to some ;) I think in a vacuum the Haaland deal would have been good for you as well but considering the implications it may not have been worthwhile, I agree.
 

DVG7

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2019
Messages
1,277
I would have expected him to end up at Bayern, but from what I can tell that club hasn’t had any dealings with Raiola, and he seems like the type of person they would avoid doing business with.

Despite a path Being laid out before him already, I would love to just see him stay at Dortmund (outwith coming to UTD) as he would become a legend, play in front of some of the best fans in Europe and be regularly challenging In Europe. There’s a lot to like about that club, couldn’t blame anyone for falling in love with playing for them, just ask Marco Reus.
 

Swarm

Full Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
584
Location
Germany
Supports
Borussia Dortmund
Yep. His father also has no idea how the footballing world works, no idea how evil Raiola is to his clients, and has absolutely no clue how to give advise to his son for his career based on his own experience. Also buying a player for 17m and guarantee return for 60M, a 350% return in investment in 3 years is a horrible idea for BVB as well, while the player scored 11 goals in 7 games in the first month.
I hope you realize that Dortmund paid significantly more than just the release clause Haaland had in his contract at Salzburg. Sign on fees for all parties involved almost definitely more than double what you are quoting.
 

kaiser1

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 26, 2018
Messages
372
Supports
Bayern Munich
If Man Utd had got Haaland, why do you think he would leave in 2022 even with the release clause?

1. Either Man Utd cannot match his wage demands
2. Man Utd is not matching his sporting demands, i.e are not doing well on the field and he wants a club that will make him win big titles
3. The coach is not playing him in the right position to maximize his potential

If any of those conditions above hold, then ask yourself why should he stay?

Haaland could come, Man Utd get a better coach, play scintillating football, become dominant in the league and Europe, Haaland gets paid his market value. At that point why won't he extend?

Or Is it that you think your club would be in a rut, he would want to go elsewhere but you can use the contract to hold him hostage

I am a Bayern fan when Bayern got Ribery I thought he would be off to Madrid in a few seasons, he ended up staying for long
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
19,878
The release clause for a player like Haaland is projecting to be, is astronomically lower than he will command on the open market. If you somehow believe Manchester United are going to be strong armed into signing a player and allow his release clause to be so low that any club with ambition can trigger it, you are absolutely out of your mind.

First off, the optics are absolutely horrible. The players and agents can dictate the terms on when a player can leave a club. It opens up a pandoras box where other players and talent will demand the same, as to remain in complete control of where they play at any given time relatively speaking. For a club like Manchester United to be forced to let their potential golden boy leave for what in todays market is the price of a good midfielder.. That is absolutely never going to happen. You automatically devalue the clubs status if you allow clauses like that.

Dortmund accepted the clause because they know very well they are a selling club. They sell players they want to keep frequently. Every time they put up a CL quality team on the pitch, Bayern München or some European club with financial muscles simply swoop in and buy their players. Compared to MUFC, Dortmund is poor, and Ill get back to why that matters. As this entire saga has nothing to do with sports.

Mino Raiola and a couple others have in recent years managed to create a new structure in player transfers, where agents earn insane profits from player transfers. The norm used to be clubs agree on fee, agent gets a reasonable fixed fee, end of story. Now you have these superagents that commission incredible sums, and actively move their players between rich clubs. All while increasing the players wages, and their own cut of the transfer fees. Allowing a lowball release clause hands control of the players future over to the player, and leaves the club helpless. If a bidding club offers the release clause, they have no say in the players future. You are essentially asking the clubs to start allowing players to dictate contract length, not vice versa.

For the clubs, this is all about asset management. The value of your assets dictate everything from share value to potential bank loans, loan obligations what have you. A lowball release clause potentially devalues the asset. That is one part of the consideration. Clubs have very different standings in international markets and they have a certain status to uphold to attract business. One of those is how the club is perceived. Allowing yourself to becoming a selling club like Dortmund, who internatonally is a pretty small club compared to Real Madrid or even Arsenal, devalues the whole franchise.

The other part is the precedent that I've already mentioned. You allow one, more will come. No one wants a situation like that.

Now: Signing Haaland to a release clause in a vacuum, means nothing. Its one player that we can lose for under 50% of his value in 2 years. Maybe. In a vacuum, this isnt a big deal. The deal becomes important when talent number 2 wants the same clause. And player number 3. And player number 2349. If artificially low clauses become the norm, club lose all control of their assets longevity, and they never will or should allow that to happen.

So the arguments for this?

"Oh ArE YoU AFraiD hE wILl LeAvE??" - No. But you don't want a summer transfer window where you have to replace CR7 because Real Madrid triggered his release clause in August and good luck finding a replacement.
"JusT siGn HiM TO a neW cONtracT" - No club will play lottery with a incredibly valuable asset like that. This is never part of real life, and will never happen.

"hE reJEcteD the ClUB L0l l0sEr - signed, Manchester United fan" - That might be, I don't know what happened and neither do you. But we do know that the release clause around £60 million is real, and that makes the player signing here a non starter to begin with. For most top6 clubs in the big leagues, the release clause is Christmas Morning for clubs looking for a player like Haaland. It's like discovering a Bugatti Veyron hiding behind the "Everything 70% off" in the discount shelves at Walmart.

"WE COULD HAVE USED THE PLAYER NOW ARE YOU RET****D" - Go wash your mouth!
Christ someone's having a bad day
 

ThierryHenry14

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
744
Supports
Arsenal
I hope you realize that Dortmund paid significantly more than just the release clause Haaland had in his contract at Salzburg. Sign on fees for all parties involved almost definitely more than double what you are quoting.
This model works so well for BVB for far from Dembele, Pulisic, Sancho, Haaland to Reyna. Just too bad BVB can't match the wages offered by the big big club so can't keep the talent in house. Just wonder if there is any chance Hakimi will join BVB at the end of his loan.
 

Tom Cato

Full Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
1,821
Just to underline my previous post:


Club Brugge had an agreement with Molde over Erling Haaland in 2018, according to
@hlnsport
. Transfer fee of €5m. Dad Alf Inge would get €500,000, Mino Raiola asked a commission of 30% on the next sale. Club thought that was too much.


Mino Raiola. Collecting 30% of a transfer fee. Still not thinking he's holding clubs to ransom?
 

B20

HEY EVERYONE I IGNORE SOMEONE LOOK AT ME
Joined
Aug 23, 2003
Messages
24,404
Location
Disney Land
Supports
Liverpool
Just to underline my previous post:


Club Brugge had an agreement with Molde over Erling Haaland in 2018, according to
@hlnsport
. Transfer fee of €5m. Dad Alf Inge would get €500,000, Mino Raiola asked a commission of 30% on the next sale. Club thought that was too much.


Mino Raiola. Collecting 30% of a transfer fee. Still not thinking he's holding clubs to ransom?
How is that not third party ownership?
 

0le

Full Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2017
Messages
2,492
He'll surely think twice the next time he negotiates with our management.
You say that with sarcasm but there are already a few clubs that do not deal with him. If he continues, he will burn bridges with most of the top clubs and ultimately lose his best clients.
 

Acrobat7

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
1,354
I would have expected him to end up at Bayern, but from what I can tell that club hasn’t had any dealings with Raiola, and he seems like the type of person they would avoid doing business with.
Bayern‘s way of playing doesn‘t fit Halaand in the slightest. The “he is going to Bayern“ is just a lazy narrative.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
26,144
Location
Manchester
Yep. His father also has no idea how the footballing world works, no idea how evil Raiola is to his clients, and has absolutely no clue how to give advise to his son for his career based on his own experience. Also buying a player for 17m and guarantee return for 60M, a 350% return in investment in 3 years is a horrible idea for BVB as well, while the player scored 11 goals in 7 games in the first month.
Are you rambling to yourself or just on drugs?
 

ThierryHenry14

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
744
Supports
Arsenal
Raiola is not even his agent. He is just hired to help get Haaland the best deal. I don't believe that Haaland's camp will accept the 30% of the future transfer value goes to Raiola instead of the player's family. It makes no sense.
 

Samid

follows Pogue around, fixing his images
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
25,493
Location
Oslo, Norway

Premier League is totally on his mind. If we play our cards right (Top 4/EL and Sancho in the summer) then we've put ourselves in a fantastic position to land him when he leaves BVB.
 

AshRK

Full Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
6,091
Location
Canada
The boy is smart. He made a wise move by not joining United or Juve and choosing a club where he will guaranteed get to play and have less pressure on him. Future is looking extremely bright for the kid. I wouldn't be even surprised if he leaves end of next season if not this season.
 

Resch

Full Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
Messages
210
Location
Salzburg, Austria
As good as he is, you have to ask you self, if you could trust someone, who has agreements with a club, just to join another one. Not the kind of character I want at my favorite club.
 

Inigo Montoya

Leave Wayne Rooney alone!!
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
25,110
As good as he is, you have to ask you self, if you could trust someone, who has agreements with a club, just to join another one. Not the kind of character I want at my favorite club.
He’s young. Hopefully the next decision he makes will be independent of Raiola.

I think this one was the better move for the present though. He’d have got battered in the PL
 

Fosu-Mens

Full Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
3,516
Location
Fred | 2019/20 Performances
He’s young. Hopefully the next decision he makes will be independent of Raiola.

I think this one was the better move for the present though. He’d have got battered in the PL
Raiola will most likely be involved. I think Haaland praised him in some interview for always protecting his clients.

Raiola is the bad cop in the player-agent relationship, and he is taking the flack for PP wanting out. Creating pressure on United to get rid of PP due to toxicity.
 

Bebestation

Full Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
1,075
Supports
An adult TV Channel

Premier League is totally on his mind. If we play our cards right (Top 4/EL and Sancho in the summer) then we've put ourselves in a fantastic position to land him when he leaves BVB.
Exactly. He just put a halt on his move to the PL because it didn't seem right.

Whilst United needed him at the moment even as a neutral I can see an individual shouldn't choose us over over going from Austria to the bundesliga to a team like leipzeig or Dortmund.

Personally & its purely my opinion - this rejection he put on us has me in good hope that the inevitable move to the PL will be between City or United - either to follow his father's footsteps or finish off what he didn't get to start.

Lets hope he continues to progress so he gives his best years to us.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
2,685
Location
DKNY
It would not surprise me if he ends up in Serie A as Ronaldo’s successor. The low release clause means that more clubs than the usual suspects will be able to go for him. And Juventus will have no qualms paying Raiola his big fee.
 

MadDogg

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
10,275
Location
Manchester Utd never lose, just run out of time
Just to underline my previous post:


Club Brugge had an agreement with Molde over Erling Haaland in 2018, according to
@hlnsport
. Transfer fee of €5m. Dad Alf Inge would get €500,000, Mino Raiola asked a commission of 30% on the next sale. Club thought that was too much.


Mino Raiola. Collecting 30% of a transfer fee. Still not thinking he's holding clubs to ransom?
How accurate is that source? As far as I know Raiola had nothing to do with them until the Haaland family bought him in to help make this current move happen.
 

Bwuk

Full Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
12,546
He should be what we spend our budget on in Summer 2021.

We’ve no chance this summer, let’s solve the rest of the issues in the squad and then attempt to get him. It’d probably suit Dortmund to sell him before the release clause comes into play.
 

Tom Cato

Full Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
1,821
Those kinds of transactions are assigned a monetary value for tax purposes. Agents will claim their slice of the pie .
There is a good reason swap deals are almost never done. They are inherently very complicated. It's never a straight swap.

How accurate is that source? As far as I know Raiola had nothing to do with them until the Haaland family bought him in to help make this current move happen.
Raiola had been working on the Haaland transfer for a year according to himself. This journo is one of the more reputable ones in Europe