Erling Haaland

Widow

Full Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
1,520
Location
Can't spell Mkhitaryan
You'd think he ws the second coming going off some of the comments on here.

For that kind of money I'd want a player that gets bums off seat...Messi/Ronaldo.

Sure he's good but let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Also, he comes with plenty of drama and a cnut of a agent that in a few years time will be looking to move him on again.
 

Noodle

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
177
Supports
Chelsea
I agree with the Bundesliga defense league this time.

€175m to BVB
€40m to Raiola
€20m to papa Haaland
€30m/wages to Haaland over 5 years

(€385m over 5 seasons, at the end of which they would try to move to Spain)

Yeah, good luck with that after 2 Covid seasons !
Tweaking the figures slightly to play devils advocate

€150m to BVB (I think this would be enough at double his release clause)
€30m to Raiola
€15m to papa Haaland

€195m or £166m over 5 years without wages (£33m per season)...You'd likely recoup that on a sale in 5 years so long as he doesn't run his contract down or suffer a major injury/loss of performance, therein lies the risk with Raoila.

Wages i'd expect around £300-350k maximum that we could offer to add on to the above but with moving the right players on we'd not only save a tonne on wages but also a lot of the initial fee. We don't need many players this summer so a £50-£100m net spend would be manageable.

That's before we even touch on the commercial and performance related revenue he could bring. Yes it's a gamble but i think it's one we could afford if we were willing to go all in on one player. The question is whether this one player is worth the 2/3 other signings you could make for the same money
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
42,274
Location
Birmingham
Well with the transfer fee being around 70m next year, that's a lot of money saved that will probably end in the agent + players hands anyway.

Lets be honest whoever signs him is going to pay a LOT
The singular reason there will be more competition for him next year is that the entire cost of the operation will be cheaper for any club. Clubs are not just going to hand 70m to his agent because they saved it on fees to Dortmund. If Chelsea are willing to pay Dortmund what they want now and the agents what they want, he will move this summer cause that works for everyone.
 

Noodle

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
177
Supports
Chelsea
The singular reason there will be more competition for him next year is that the entire cost of the operation will be cheaper for any club. Clubs are not just going to hand 70m to his agent because they saved it on fees to Dortmund. If Chelsea are willing to pay Dortmund what they want now and the agents what they want, he will move this summer cause that works for everyone.
Whoever gets Haaland for £66m next season is going to be laughing, even with the agents fees and wages that is a hell of a deal. I can see there being at least 6-7 clubs fighting it out if his form continues.
 

peridigm

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
10,462
Whoever gets Haaland for £66m next season is going to be laughing, even with the agents fees and wages that is a hell of a deal. I can see there being at least 6-7 clubs fighting it out if his form continues.
Help me understand how release clauses in Germany work. If one club, say Aston Villa, pony up £66m, and he does not want to go there, he does not have to be sold. If multiple clubs agree to pay the £66m, but one club, let's say Chelsea, offer £100m, can Dortmund refuse to sell him to the club only offering the £66m? In other words, can there still be a bidding war with a release clause? If Chelsea, Bayern, RM, and City all offer the same £66m, it's his choice as to where he wants to go.
Bigger wage packet wins with him I'd guess.
 

Noodle

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
177
Supports
Chelsea
Help me understand how release clauses in Germany work. If one club, say Aston Villa, pony up £66m, and he does not want to go there, he does not have to be sold. If multiple clubs agree to pay the £66m, but one club, let's say Chelsea, offer £100m, can Dortmund refuse to sell him to the club only offering the £66m? In other words, can there still be a bidding war with a release clause? If Chelsea, Bayern, RM, and City all offer the same £66m, it's his choice as to where he wants to go.
Bigger wage packet wins with him I'd guess.

I believe anyone who meets the £66m can sign the player regardless of what Dortmund want. So then it's purely down to the player to choose who he wants.

I think the bidding war will most likely be down to wages/agents fees
 

Jam

Full Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
730
Help me understand how release clauses in Germany work. If one club, say Aston Villa, pony up £66m, and he does not want to go there, he does not have to be sold. If multiple clubs agree to pay the £66m, but one club, let's say Chelsea, offer £100m, can Dortmund refuse to sell him to the club only offering the £66m? In other words, can there still be a bidding war with a release clause? If Chelsea, Bayern, RM, and City all offer the same £66m, it's his choice as to where he wants to go.
Bigger wage packet wins with him I'd guess.
Bingo.

This season Dortmund can refuse or accept any bids.

Next season if you bid £66m then you automatically move to personal terms with Haaland. Dortmund has no say.
 

RkkMan

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
1,327
Am I the only one who doesn't buy Haaland's clause next year being what's branded in the media?(or it being as low as £66m? I'm seeing papers saying it's in the range of £70-80m)
Kinda like how we thought Sancho's contract was expiring in 2022 only for Zorc to stun everyone in the CAF that it's 2023. Wouldn't be shocked if something came out of Dortmund that it's actually a clause in and around £100m which puts them in a pretty relaxed position to reject all offers
 

Tony247

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
5,210
Money being quoted for haaland is the proof that traditional footballing formation is fecked in the era of Guardiola. Haaland is no greater than say RVN, Drogba or RVP. But look everywhere, now there is hardly any young traditional center forward. Even Brazilians who used to produce in dozens ain't anymore. CFs have become rarest of rare commodity these days. 150m just club fee ffs!

Had there been a dozen good young CF in the market then haaland's value would not be more than 80m.
 

RedDevil@84

Full Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
14,683
Help me understand how release clauses in Germany work. If one club, say Aston Villa, pony up £66m, and he does not want to go there, he does not have to be sold. If multiple clubs agree to pay the £66m, but one club, let's say Chelsea, offer £100m, can Dortmund refuse to sell him to the club only offering the £66m? In other words, can there still be a bidding war with a release clause? If Chelsea, Bayern, RM, and City all offer the same £66m, it's his choice as to where he wants to go.
Bigger wage packet wins with him I'd guess.
If Villa say 66M and Chelsea say 100M, and player says Villa is my choice, Dortmund can't say we will sell you to highest bidder.

Bidding war can happen if the player agrees.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
3,234
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Am I the only one who doesn't buy Haaland's clause next year being what's branded in the media?(or it being as low as £66m? I'm seeing papers saying it's in the range of £70-80m)
Kinda like how we thought Sancho's contract was expiring in 2022 only for Zorc to stun everyone in the CAF that it's 2023. Wouldn't be shocked if something came out of Dortmund that it's actually a clause in and around £100m which puts them in a pretty relaxed position to reject all offers
Think it has to do with differences in currency getting lost in translation. Most reports have it at €80m, which is £68m.
 

Ali Dia

Full Member
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
7,918
Location
Souness's Super Sub/George Weahs Talented Cousin
Whoever gets Haaland for £66m next season is going to be laughing, even with the agents fees and wages that is a hell of a deal. I can see there being at least 6-7 clubs fighting it out if his form continues.
Might very well start to drop off a bit without Sancho and while they bed their new winger in. It might not be noticeable against the fodder in the league but in the trickier ties and the CL? Its a definite possibility.
 

Hansi Fick

Full Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
2,018
Supports
FC Bayern
Help me understand how release clauses in Germany work. If one club, say Aston Villa, pony up £66m, and he does not want to go there, he does not have to be sold. If multiple clubs agree to pay the £66m, but one club, let's say Chelsea, offer £100m, can Dortmund refuse to sell him to the club only offering the £66m? In other words, can there still be a bidding war with a release clause? If Chelsea, Bayern, RM, and City all offer the same £66m, it's his choice as to where he wants to go.
Bigger wage packet wins with him I'd guess.
First of all, it's not a Germany-specific thing as such.
Unlike in Spain, where every player contract legally has to have a buy-out clause with a certain amount, most contracts in Bundesliga don't have release clauses, and so the release clauses that exist are always a product of a specific negotiation. It's the same in PL, basically, even if it's an even less used tool there.

And then, we don't really know how each individual of these clauses work, since they're part of the negotiated contract and not public information. And so we don't really know Haaland's either, if it exists.
But yeah, basically, as the general understanding is and as it's been reported, if a club pays a certain amount within a specified timeframe (in this case probably until 1st July 2022 or so) the clause is triggered and Haaland can leave - if he chooses, to any club he chooses (though of course in theory it could be more specified in the actual contract, to exclude certain clubs or confine it to (a) certain club(s) etc.).
Dortmund then, apart from acknowledging that the money has been paid/formally offered and the release clause triggered, would have no say in it (and it wouldn't make sense to offer them more money either).

Am I the only one who doesn't buy Haaland's clause next year being what's branded in the media?(or it being as low as £66m? I'm seeing papers saying it's in the range of £70-80m)
Kinda like how we thought Sancho's contract was expiring in 2022 only for Zorc to stun everyone in the CAF that it's 2023. Wouldn't be shocked if something came out of Dortmund that it's actually a clause in and around £100m which puts them in a pretty relaxed position to reject all offers
There's been some conflicting numbers reported, which isn't too surprising given the nature of transfer news, however I could imagine, though I'm really only speculating, that the size of the release fee might have risen due to certain Haaland's achievements or benchmarks reached (number of games, of goals, cup win, something like that).

Generally, the fact that top strikers are in such high demand and command such high fees should also make us reflect on what the money which clubs get for selling one of them is actually worth. People claim that it's in BVB's interest to sell now if they can get more money, but what good does that excess money actually do?
It could be put this way, the higher a received fee gets, the less worth are the €€ at the upper end of the fee when it comes to reinvesting in a decent replacement.
 
Last edited:

Rektsanwalt

New Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
640
Supports
Schalke 04
Help me understand how release clauses in Germany work. If one club, say Aston Villa, pony up £66m, and he does not want to go there, he does not have to be sold. If multiple clubs agree to pay the £66m, but one club, let's say Chelsea, offer £100m, can Dortmund refuse to sell him to the club only offering the £66m? In other words, can there still be a bidding war with a release clause? If Chelsea, Bayern, RM, and City all offer the same £66m, it's his choice as to where he wants to go.
Bigger wage packet wins with him I'd guess.
No, he’s not a slave, so he’s not sold technically. The new club pays a sum, which the player and his former club agreed on, to release him from his old contract so that he’s able to sign a new one. The contract gets terminated or nullified if the player and the new club both agree and the sum is paid. There can be no bidding war, as its in the player‘s hand to decide who the new club will be. He’s not cattle. If there was a bidding war, the player would actually be fecking over his new club, which will never happen.
your conclusion is right. If they pay the clause and the player agrees, the deal is done, the old contract is nullified and a new one between the player and the new club is made.
 

Bleu

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 27, 2021
Messages
35
Supports
New England Revolution
Tweaking the figures slightly to play devils advocate

€150m to BVB (I think this would be enough at double his release clause)
€30m to Raiola
€15m to papa Haaland

€195m or £166m over 5 years without wages (£33m per season)...You'd likely recoup that on a sale in 5 years so long as he doesn't run his contract down or suffer a major injury/loss of performance, therein lies the risk with Raoila.

Wages i'd expect around £300-350k maximum that we could offer to add on to the above but with moving the right players on we'd not only save a tonne on wages but also a lot of the initial fee. We don't need many players this summer so a £50-£100m net spend would be manageable.

That's before we even touch on the commercial and performance related revenue he could bring. Yes it's a gamble but i think it's one we could afford if we were willing to go all in on one player. The question is whether this one player is worth the 2/3 other signings you could make for the same money
One world class signing would be better then 3 “okayish” signings for Chelsea. You already have a deep strong squad, adding more means nothing to your team because you can only field 11 players at a time, the bench is already good enough for a second team let alone adding more for the first team. What your team is missing is that iconic player, the striker who is the pinnacle of your team to elevate you to world class… not another player for competition in positions that are already set!
This is why the Hakimi transfer made no sense to me. You have Reece James and Azpilicuetta isnt that old in age, he can certainly play in the RB/RWB role for a couple more years. I dont buy the Reece James to CB talk, waste of a talent if so.
 

Rajiztar

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
546
Supports
Chelsea
Chelsea agreed the financial package with Haaland and his reps a few weeks back. Its the usual issue of trying to agree a fee with dortmund and getting dortmund to agree to sell. That will probably drag on all summer. Then you have to try to get riaola to agree not to have a minimum fee release clause in the contract.

Smart by Chelsea to try to go for him this summer knowing they have a free run at him. Spainish and italian giants have no money. PSG have other priorities. Bayern like Utd will wait for next summer to see if they can get him at release clause fee. That only leaves City who dont seem to be too interested and want Kane instead.

So definitely worth Chelsea trying. They might not pull it off but you can understand why they would try.
If chelsea already agreed personal terms few weeks back then he will be chelsea player by now mate. May be some negotiations going on is my guess.But the money quoted for his signing I want to see from official account it is done.
No, he’s not a slave, so he’s not sold technically. The new club pays a sum, which the player and his former club agreed on, to release him from his old contract so that he’s able to sign a new one. The contract gets terminated or nullified if the player and the new club both agree and the sum is paid. There can be no bidding war, as its in the player‘s hand to decide who the new club will be. He’s not cattle. If there was a bidding war, the player would actually be fecking over his new club, which will never happen.
your conclusion is right. If they pay the clause and the player agrees, the deal is done, the old contract is nullified and a new one between the player and the new club is made.
Yes exactly so why buying club needed to convince player first. Buying club can pay whatever they want to selling club but if player not interested then there is no way deal will be materialised.

Latest example was hakimi. Player wanted to join psg and chelsea tried to convince him but player rejected chelsea proposal and now he joined psg happily.

Normally legally, buying club ask permission from selling club to talk with player. Convince player,agree personal terms then go back to selling club agree fees, how money will be paid partially or fully then agreement will be signed if selling club agreed with buying club proposal.
 

Rektsanwalt

New Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
640
Supports
Schalke 04
If chelsea already agreed personal terms few weeks back then he will be chelsea player by now mate. May be some negotiations going on is my guess.But the money quoted for his signing I want to see from official account it is done.

Yes exactly so why buying club needed to convince player first. Buying club can pay whatever they want to selling club but if player not interested then there is no way deal will be materialised.

Latest example was hakimi. Player wanted to join psg and chelsea tried to convince him but player rejected chelsea proposal and now he joined psg happily.

Normally legally, buying club ask permission to talk with player who is playing for selling club. Convince player,agree personal terms then go back to selling club agree fees, how money will be paid partially or fully then agreement will be signed if selling club agreed with buying club proposal.
Yeah. Although reality is very complex and the player‘s agent can - also from a legal pov - play a huge role. There is a lot of money involved, so people are being advised properly.
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
42,274
Location
Birmingham
My understanding is that release clauses are not binding in Germany. Ultimately, I expect them to honour whatever agreement they have with Haaland.
 

Hansi Fick

Full Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
2,018
Supports
FC Bayern
My understanding is that release clauses are not binding in Germany. Ultimately, I expect them to honour whatever agreement they have with Haaland.
Not sure if serious, probably not, but just to be sure, if the contract has a release clause obviously it's binding :lol:
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
42,274
Location
Birmingham
Not sure if serious, probably not, but just to be sure, if the contract has a release clause obviously it's binding :lol:
Essentially, the courts won't recognise it if Dortmund decide to renege on it. Not sure though.
 

Hansi Fick

Full Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
2,018
Supports
FC Bayern
Essentially, the courts won't recognise it if Dortmund decide to renege on it. Not sure though.
How do you come to that conclusion? Release clauses are not illegal, they're practiced regularly, if one is agreed and in the contract, what chance would BVB have in court?
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
42,274
Location
Birmingham
How do you come to that conclusion? Release clauses are not illegal, they're practiced regularly, if one is agreed and in the contract, what chance would BVB have in court?
I have mixed it up. B/O clauses are mandatory in Spain but not in Germany. Not that they are not enforceable.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
431
Supports
Hannover 96
How do you come to that conclusion? Release clauses are not illegal, they're practiced regularly, if one is agreed and in the contract, what chance would BVB have in court?
Maybe confusion because of the Sancho deal? If the release clause is part of the contract it is legally binding, but Sancho did not have that but just an agreement with the club. That agreement could have been ignored by Dortmund as it was just a promise, not a contract.
 

Adcuth

Full Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
3,358
Isn't that called "tapping up"?
Was under the impression that you get permission from the selling club first then speak to the player through agents. If that permission isn't granted but you still contact them, then thats "tapping up". Could be wrong though.
 

Zaphod2319

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
997
Supports
Chelsea
Was under the impression that you get permission from the selling club first then speak to the player through agents. If that permission isn't granted but you still contact them, then thats "tapping up". Could be wrong though.
Riola really blurred that line with his Alfie and Me tour this summer meeting with prospective clubs including Chelsea, Man City, Real Madrid, and a few others.
 

Dave Smith

Full Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2019
Messages
1,121
Supports
Anything anti-Dipper
Don't see Håland going anywhere this season. Dortmund will want too much and his agent will want the same amount as he would get next season.
 

Adcuth

Full Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
3,358
Riola really blurred that line with his Alfie and Me tour this summer meeting with prospective clubs including Chelsea, Man City, Real Madrid, and a few others.
Figured dortmund allowed that since he's got a cheap clause next year. Then again, its Raiola so probably not
 

podurban2

Full Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,469
Location
Stockholm
How is it beneficial for a players such as Haaland to have an agent like Raiola, who takes such a large fee in a deal? Haaland can choose any club in the world, and become the best paid player in the team pretty much anywhere bar Barcelona. Enlighten me, because from my viewpoint you are basically paying this guy millions.
 

Matriac

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
1,135
:lol::lol: Maybe legend is not the right word. Icon or ex player. He was made famous by the Roy keane tackle but at the end of the day he is an ex city player with no love lost for United. Would he want his son to play for United if all clubs? Highly unlikely
The father wouldn't mind if Erling joins United at all, he's been quoted saying that any allegiances like that doesn't really matter when it comes to making a professional decision about your career. Plus he played with Ole in the national team and their families are friends.

in my earlier post below I link to the article(s) where he said those things.
This is an older article from when he was at Salzburg, but pretty sure the opinion hasn't changed since then.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...orwegian-starlets-Manchester-United-move.html

It's the Daily Mail, but they are reacting to him speaking to Norwegian media. Here is a google translated url to that original article.


The core of it is this part:

But even though the senior played for Manchester United's rivals, he does not rule out that Erling Braut Haaland may consider playing for the team that is now led by Ole Gunnar Solskjær.

- It would have just been nice. It is important to distinguish between being a supporter and a job. So I have a very relaxed relationship with that. It's a little different when it's serious, he concludes.
Nice is a bad translation here cause he uses a dialect word. Swell would probably fit better.
 

Matriac

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
1,135
whats all this talk, is he really leaving?
Nah, I don't believe it for a second. Not this season.

He would have if Dortmund failed to qualify for CL. And his father/agent did the tour when it looked unlikely they would (7 points behind with 7 matches to go, having lost lots. But then they won all 7.)

After they secured CL-footy (since he wants to break records) it has gone completely quiet again from his camp.

No reason to move this summer for a huge fee when they can demand parts of that fee as sign-on bonus next year in stead.
 

Ramshock

CAF Pilib De Brún Translator
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
41,910
Location
Swimming against a tide of idiots and spoofers
Nah, I don't believe it for a second. Not this season.

He would have if Dortmund failed to qualify for CL. And his father/agent did the tour when it looked unlikely they would (7 points behind with 7 matches to go, having lost lots. But then they won all 7.)

After they secured CL-footy (since he wants to break records) it has gone completely quiet again from his camp.

No reason to move this summer for a huge fee when they can demand parts of that fee as sign-on bonus next year in stead.
Chelsea can feck off
 

passing-wind

Full Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
2,705
whats all this talk, is he really leaving?
I think Haaland leaving is a possibility if a club is willing to pay. 175 million to Dortmund plus a supposed 40 million to Raiola. Haaland is promising but he's certainly not worth paying over 200 million with everything totalled. Every possibility he comes to English league and doesn't replicate his form in Germany.
 

DiMaria

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 18, 2014
Messages
52
The father wouldn't mind if Erling joins United at all, he's been quoted saying that any allegiances like that doesn't really matter when it comes to making a professional decision about your career. Plus he played with Ole in the national team and their families are friends.

in my earlier post below I link to the article(s) where he said those things.
I recall Ole talking about Alfie in a recent interview when they asked him about Haaland (Erling) and he explained how Erling has some of his dad’s serious qualities and that ever since he brought him on as a teenager it was clear that he would be something special. I got the impression that Ole is still hopeful of signing him after that interview. And like I already said if we have any hope of signing him it’s because of ole’s rapport with him. But still I would be a lot more optimistic if he had a different agent...Didn’t he come out to criticize Ole at some point because of the pogba situation? (Mina that is)
 

Matriac

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
1,135
I think Haaland leaving is a possibility if a club is willing to pay. 175 million to Dortmund plus a supposed 40 million to Raiola. Haaland is promising but he's certainly not worth paying over 200 million with everything totalled. Every possibility he comes to English league and doesn't replicate his form in Germany.

If a club was willing to pay €200m for him, why wouldn't Haaland just wait another season for his buyout of €80m to be active, and say that he wants ~€100m as a sign on fee package (split between himself and his agents). They technically get him cheaper at €180m and the Haaland's make a lot more money than if he goes this summer.

Since they managed to put in place such a cheap buyout clause (which was fair at the time as there was no guarantee he would do so well in Germany, and become CL topscorer, plus they already got a bargain for him via his buyout from RB Salzburg) then why shouldn't he and his team do what they can to exploit the situation as much as possible?