Olise being sold for £8m?

[Clyde1998]

PSG are now linked with Olise: https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2 ... ael-olise/

Under FIFA's 'Solidarity contribution' rules, we'd be entitled to 2.5% of any transfer fee (on top of any agreed sell on clauses with Crystal Palace).

[Hendo]

PSG are now linked with Olise: https://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2 ... ael-olise/

Under FIFA's 'Solidarity contribution' rules, we'd be entitled to 2.5% of any transfer fee (on top of any agreed sell on clauses with Crystal Palace).

Cool, so £2.5m then

[YorkshireRoyal99]

At least any sizeable fee (which you'd assume it would be) would mean we'd pocket a decent amount from that as well. It may not be what we'd have hoped for, but if it does turn out to be a seven figure fee (not including add ons) then that would be of great benefit to us going into next season as well.

[Royal_jimmy]

I still feel so pissed off with how we lost him for so little money. I was saying back then he was worth £20-25m yet some of you idiots were happy to let him go for £2-4m I'm glad those who said that don't own us.

[tidus_mi2]

I still feel so pissed off with how we lost him for so little money. I was saying back then he was worth £20-25m yet some of you idiots were happy to let him go for £2-4m I'm glad those who said that don't own us.

You're gonna have to pull up quotes because this sounds like utter bollocks that you've just made up.

[Royal_jimmy]

I still feel so pissed off with how we lost him for so little money. I was saying back then he was worth £20-25m yet some of you idiots were happy to let him go for £2-4m I'm glad those who said that don't own us.

You're gonna have to pull up quotes because this sounds like utter bollocks that you've just made up.

It isn't, why not just search for it yourself?

[Sutekh]

I still feel so pissed off with how we lost him for so little money. I was saying back then he was worth £20-25m yet some of you idiots were happy to let him go for £2-4m I'm glad those who said that don't own us.

You're gonna have to pull up quotes because this sounds like utter bollocks that you've just made up.

It isn't, why not just search for it yourself?

Lots of discussion here

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=190267&hilit=Olise+Palace&start=20

and

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=188226&p=5131639&hilit=Olise+leeds&sid=2a13d15597a6c882aaccb379cc7ecde2#p5131639

(By the way I like Hendo’s suggestion, in the above, at rumoured Leicester interest, for £25m + Demari Gray + Olise back on loan)

But the fact remains he was sold at what I think was a gross undervaluation because there was a release clause put into his contract. However the reason as to why that clause was there is unknown. It might have been an agent playing “hard ball” and saying his client would only sign if such a clause for this value was in the contract or it might be someone at the Reading end putting his finger in the air and plucking a random figure as a “sweetener clause” to get Olise to sign and it’s therefore a possibility the player may have signed if the release clause was a lot more. We do not know and are unlikely to be told.

However it should be remembered that at the time the agreement was signed Michael was not a first team regular and was only on the very fringes of things though I think it should have been obvious to any experienced coach of young players how talented he was. Therefore my take on it is that, unless the clause was agent led and non negotiable from that perspective, that the club, and I know this is going to be hard to believe, might have made a right mess of the whole thing.

[Hound]

Almost certainly his agent. There was a lot of chat he wouldn’t sign at all. We did well to get 8m I suspect

Anyway an extra 1m or so would be very handy right now

[tidus_mi2]

I still feel so pissed off with how we lost him for so little money. I was saying back then he was worth £20-25m yet some of you idiots were happy to let him go for £2-4m I'm glad those who said that don't own us.

You're gonna have to pull up quotes because this sounds like utter bollocks that you've just made up.

It isn't, why not just search for it yourself?

Because you're the one making the claim.

[From Despair To Where?]

I dont know about £25m but Jimmy was definitely the one saying we should offer an unproven 18 year old £15k a week

[YorkshireRoyal99]

You're gonna have to pull up quotes because this sounds like utter bollocks that you've just made up.

It isn't, why not just search for it yourself?

Lots of discussion here

https://www.royals.org/forum/viewtopic. ... e&start=20

and

https://www.royals.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 2#p5131639

(By the way I like Hendo’s suggestion, in the above, at rumoured Leicester interest, for £25m + Demari Gray + Olise back on loan)

But the fact remains he was sold at what I think was a gross undervaluation because there was a release clause put into his contract. However the reason as to why that clause was there is unknown. It might have been an agent playing “hard ball” and saying his client would only sign if such a clause for this value was in the contract or it might be someone at the Reading end putting his finger in the air and plucking a random figure as a “sweetener clause” to get Olise to sign and it’s therefore a possibility the player may have signed if the release clause was a lot more. We do not know and are unlikely to be told.

However it should be remembered that at the time the agreement was signed Michael was not a first team regular and was only on the very fringes of things though I think it should have been obvious to any experienced coach of young players how talented he was. Therefore my take on it is that, unless the clause was agent led and non negotiable from that perspective, that the club, and I know this is going to be hard to believe, might have made a right mess of the whole thing.

It would make you wonder though why wouldn't ever agent do that with every young player? I just don't believe the Olise and his agent wouldn't have been happy with a new, improved deal, with an improved release clause if we could offer it. I think the biggest factor for me was that we didn't have the flexibility to offer him a new deal.

A new deal for the player can also be more lucrative for the agent, with increased agent fees for the duration of his contract (if it ever gets that far), fees for a bigger transfer fee etc. I don't see why it would just be in his agents interest to keep his deal low. If we could have offered a better deal with a £25m release clause, it doesn't mean we would have sold for that, we could have sold for ~£20m, it just means we'd have to accept £25m if that came in. Overall, win for the player, better wage, win for the agent, better agent fee, win for the club, financially more beneficial.