Hob Nob Anyone?

Woodcote Royal wrote:Surely the price is going to come down to whatever is in the release clause of his latest contract.

Having said that, £3m is a laughable figure from those who clearly have no clue of his potential value or ability.

He's 25, destined for the top flight and has every chance of establishing himself in the starting 11 of a lower Premiership side sooner rather than later.

As such, £5m in today's climate would be a great deal that Brighton could yet pull off. They should be thankful they have a decent manager with an eye for a bargain. Why their arrivals aren't piling in beggars belief.

Just because we were sh*t last season doesn't make Liam Moore less of a player.

A decent striker in part exchange would be very nice. As yet another top player who is destined for better things, I wish him well.

The Moore of the previous season looked to be worth more than £3 million but the Moore of last season wouldn't warrant any more than what we paid for him.
It depends upon which version any potential buyer thinks of him.
Leicester were not that keen to keep him and I still think the jury is out on whether he is up to Premier League standard.

As for part-exchange, I think back to that dreadful transaction with QPR when they palmed us off with the ridiculous Meaker as part of the Simon Osborn deal so hope the club treads warily if offered Goldson, Hemed or Baldock-wouldn't mind Solly March as a straight swap.

Victor Meldrew wrote:

Woodcote Royal wrote:Surely the price is going to come down to whatever is in the release clause of his latest contract.

Having said that, £3m is a laughable figure from those who clearly have no clue of his potential value or ability.

He's 25, destined for the top flight and has every chance of establishing himself in the starting 11 of a lower Premiership side sooner rather than later.

As such, £5m in today's climate would be a great deal that Brighton could yet pull off. They should be thankful they have a decent manager with an eye for a bargain. Why their arrivals aren't piling in beggars belief.

Just because we were sh*t last season doesn't make Liam Moore less of a player.

A decent striker in part exchange would be very nice. As yet another top player who is destined for better things, I wish him well.

The Moore of the previous season looked to be worth more than £3 million but the Moore of last season wouldn't warrant any more than what we paid for him.
It depends upon which version any potential buyer thinks of him.
Leicester were not that keen to keep him and I still think the jury is out on whether he is up to Premier League standard.

As for part-exchange, I think back to that dreadful transaction with QPR when they palmed us off with the ridiculous Meaker as part of the Simon Osborn deal so hope the club treads warily if offered Goldson, Hemed or Baldock-wouldn't mind Solly March as a straight swap.

I thought Leicester were keen on him but he wanted to leave for first team football and they didn't want to stand in the way of his career?

Whilst it’s correct the jury’s still out on him being premier league standard, Leicester still didn’t want to lose him. They wanted to loan him out again and he wasn’t having any of it, hence we signed him on a permo. The deal took a month to complete because of it.

TiagoIlori wrote:Whilst it’s correct the jury’s still out on him being premier league standard, Leicester still didn’t want to lose him. They wanted to loan him out again and he wasn’t having any of it, hence we signed him on a permo. The deal took a month to complete because of it.

this. They clearly thought he was potentially PL standard, but they didn't think he was good enough at that point to play him. He's two season's more experienced now though.

Woodcote Royal wrote:Surely the price is going to come down to whatever is in the release clause of his latest contract.

If you will allow me to be pedantic for a moment - release clauses don't involve money, they are agreements between players and clubs that a player become available to leave if certain targets are not met.

I assume you meant buy out clause, but they are simply not all that common in English football. They exist in Spain as it is the law there to have one, it's to do with employment law and was brought in in the mid 80's to allow an individual to buy themselves out of their employment contract and move jobs. Buy out clauses in a footballers contract is actually illegal in France, though there have been a small handful of cases where a club and player have come to a seperate legal agreement over a buy out fee and dealt with it outside of the players contract.

In English football it's just not a big part of the culture. players and agents see it as a restriction on the players availability to other clubs and in a short career where transfers set you up for life that is not a good thing. Occasionally players demand a buy out clause, they negotiate a 'low' fee to help them be more appetising to onlooking clubs, in exchange the player takes a lower wage to compensate the club and maybe the clause is only active for so long or increases over time, sometimes based around motivating the player to their maximum.

Winston Biscuit wrote:

Woodcote Royal wrote:Surely the price is going to come down to whatever is in the release clause of his latest contract.

If you will allow me to be pedantic for a moment - release clauses don't involve money, they are agreements between players and clubs that a player become available to leave if certain targets are not met.

I assume you meant buy out clause, but they are simply not all that common in English football. They exist in Spain as it is the law there to have one, it's to do with employment law and was brought in in the mid 80's to allow an individual to buy themselves out of their employment contract and move jobs. Buy out clauses in a footballers contract is actually illegal in France, though there have been a small handful of cases where a club and player have come to a seperate legal agreement over a buy out fee and dealt with it outside of the players contract.

In English football it's just not a big part of the culture. players and agents see it as a restriction on the players availability to other clubs and in a short career where transfers set you up for life that is not a good thing. Occasionally players demand a buy out clause, they negotiate a 'low' fee to help them be more appetising to onlooking clubs, in exchange the player takes a lower wage to compensate the club and maybe the clause is only active for so long or increases over time, sometimes based around motivating the player to their maximum.

I don't think release clause, in its modern usage, cannot be applied to what ypu are calling a buyout clause.
For example with Zidane gone the media has been referring to Klopps "release clause" being 27 million and that Pochettino doesn't have a "release clause" rather than using buyout clause.
It may be wrong to use it but everyone seems to anyway!

Well, sections of the media are vilifying Raheem Stirling for getting a tattoo so frankly, the media know shit.

Improved bid from Brighton allegedly

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/ ... liam-moore

We want £15m for him according to the chronicle. If we get 8 figures let alone 15m it’s daylight robbery

Only way I think this would be worth while would be if baldock, Goldson and a million or so was involved. The couple of million can then go towards another striker/ dm

Of course we want 15m for him. Realistically won’t get it

Does seem destined to happen eventually though

I say balls the PL clubs, they are swimming in money, if they want our price asset pay through the nose for him, simples.

Swings and roundabouts. We do it to enough clubs ourselves.

Moore seems professional enough, but he'll want what's best for his career and that isn't staying at a club that's spent 3 of the last 4 years fighting against relegation from the Championship when there are Premier League teams knocking at the door, offering first team football.

I wouldn't begrudge him it and I'd seriously consider any offer over £5m.

Did we agree a "moving on" fee with Leicester when we bought him? If so, what percentage of any fee we get for Moore will have to passed onto Leicester. If it is 20%, and we sell him for £5 million, it dosn't look so attractive does it?

If we get a decent offer we should sell, we can get a Championship quality replacement and still have much leftover to improve the squad which will be far more beneficial to our goals of getting promoted.

The Royal Forester wrote:Did we agree a "moving on" fee with Leicester when we bought him? If so, what percentage of any fee we get for Moore will have to passed onto Leicester. If it is 20%, and we sell him for £5 million, it dosn't look so attractive does it?

Was no report of one at the time

5m would be very low I think. Reckon it will settle at 7-8m

If there is a sell-on clause, a player exchange transfer is a way of bi-passing it as the value of the make weight is intangible..

Full story

http://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/sport ... urces_say/

At least Gourlay and Tevreden say the right things. OK so unlikely to be £15m in the end, and may contain add ons etc. if/when he does go to bring it up, but it can’t be substantially less otherwise they’ll look like right spanners. Personally think half of that is a good figure but a straight swap for Goldson and Baldock or Hemed could be good as well.

For the record Moore joined Reading from Leicester in August 2016 for an undisclosed fee thought to be around £1.5m, unaware of any addons or sellon fees but none of the reports I saw at the time made mention and usually there is something.

Hemed and £3m would be sufficient

loyalroyal4life wrote:Hemed and £3m would be sufficient

for Brighton, maybe.