Latest Rumours Lee Sawyer coming in but with 100% sell-on percentage

[CHEMICO FC]

Ive heard that Lee Sawyer is signing for us and if he is sold in within so many years Chelsea reiceve all the transfer fee.Very good sause.I think this would be a great move for us as we havent got any money to spend on players.Also i think lee could play for england at some point in his carrer.

 

[Interpol Shrimper]

Here's hoping your right Chemico.
I know you've got previous in very accurate insider info.
Surely a contender for the L1 team of the year if he does sign permanently!

 

[Somerset Ex-TTB]

Ive heard that Lee Sawyer is signing for us and if he is sold in within so many years Chelsea reiceve all the transfer fee.Very good sause.I think this would be a great move for us as we havent got any money to spend on players.Also i think lee could play for england at some point in his carrer.

Don't understand? 100% sell on clause? What if he is a total star and is sold for a couple of mil? Does that mean we get nothing?

Be great if he signed though.

 

[BaileytheQuitter]

Would love him to sign although the thought of not getting any transfer fee would be worrying.

However i'd rather have that than not have him at all!

 

[Pubey]

seems like a strange deal, i haven't heard of any others with time-limited 100% sell on percentage (if this it what it is). i can understand chelsea wanting to make sure they get some money if he comes good... but it screws us over big time, perhaps we are really hard up and this is the only way we can get hold of him

 

[Clinton Baptiste]

Sorry but dont think we will ever see him in a Southend shirt again, like Fed hes too good for us.

 

[Shrimper2thecore]

seems like a strange deal, i haven't heard of any others with time-limited 100% sell on percentage (if this it what it is). i can understand chelsea wanting to make sure they get some money if he comes good... but it screws us over big time, perhaps we are really hard up and this is the only way we can get hold of him

Chelsea probably want silly money for him. Say this sell on is for 3 years, I would hope to keep him long beyond that anyway!! Having him is the main thing!! I would take this

 

[Alex]

Simple, if he does perform and plays well for us we wont need to sell him, whats the point in selling a 1st team player for no profit and getting £0.00. We wont sell and Chelsea make nothing. Stupid transfer idea.

 

[Mick]

Such an idea is seriously flawed. Simply not workable.

 

[Mr Gilbo]

That is only if we have control of who we sell too. We may have to make all bids known to Chelsea who then decide whether to except or not.

 

[OldBlueLady]

himChelsea probably want silly money for him. Say this sell on is for 3 years, I would hope to keep him long beyond that anyway!! Having him is the main thing!! I would take this

Not the impression from the AGM or comments made on here - Sawyer and HRK are the two most reasonably within our reach financially. Don't know about the 100% sell on thing - sounds a bit of an outrageous idea and I'd be surprised at RM with all his financial whizz agreeing to that.

 

[londonblue]

Not the impression from the AGM or comments made on here - Sawyer and HRK are the two most reasonably within our reach financially. Don't know about the 100% sell on thing - sounds a bit of an outrageous idea and I'd be surprised at RM with all his financial whizz agreeing to that.

I dunno. We get a player in for nothing. Pay him his wages, and if we sell him, recoup that money, and then pass on the rest to Chelsea. It also depends on whether it's profit or sales revenue.

That said, I think we'd be mad to do it. If Sawyer becomes a player that sells for a lot, then we should be able to take some credit for that, and therefore realise some of the profit ourselves.

Mind you, it does sound like someone has made this up...

 

[leeblue]

bow lox a hundred percent sell on

 

[Shrimpador]

Not the impression from the AGM or comments made on here - Sawyer and HRK are the two most reasonably within our reach financially. Don't know about the 100% sell on thing - sounds a bit of an outrageous idea and I'd be surprised at RM with all his financial whizz agreeing to that.

It sounds like a long-term loan but badged up as a transfer.
If we can’t afford the fee Chelski are after then it’s better than nothing.
I can see it happening as we’d get him for a nominal fee.
Maybe Chelski would even have first refusal to buy him back.
No risk for us unless he gets long-term injured but no ££ upside either if he turns out to be a superstar.

 

[South Bank Hank]

On the face of it, totally unworkable due to the lack of incentive for us to ever sell the player. It could work though if other special terms were included in the contract and you'd have to assume that they would be if both parties were going to enter into such a deal. One thing would be certain in that we'd have to agree on how a decision to sell would be reached. I imagine this would most likely be when bids reached a certain level, say £1m. We might also agree that we didn't have to sell before a certain date.

I don't buy the argument that, if Sawyer becomes a superstar, we get nothing. Hardly nothing if he performs on the pitch all season and leads us to promotion. As someone said above, it just comes across as a longer-term loan deal. For that, I'd shake their hand off right now. I'd prefer us to call all the shots and potentially make future money on him, but if that prevents us signing the player in the first place, we're hardly missing out on that.

All that said, despite Chemico's previous good calls on these things, this doesn't sound likely to me. Sign Sawyer? Maybe. Sign him on such a strange deal? Doubtful, though I'd love to be proved wrong.

 

[McNasty]

How do you think Mr Abramovich has so much money ? We are not dealing with a pussy-cat here. (Libel laws stop me from posting true thoughts)

 

[palexander]

Yea, I cannot see the major issue over this.

I think we'd agree Sawyer is a great talent and could 'maybe' already step into a CCC side, so if we got him in any circumstance it would be a coup.

Chelsea will know they have a talent, that may be worth (at this moment) realistically £150,000 - £300,000 tops due to his age and lack of experience.

If he came to us and we got promoted (this year or next) and had a good season in the CCC (by this time being a well known player), then you could be looking at around £2m+ for him. Makes sense for Chelsea to wait and get what they think he will be potentially worth, rather than give him away for nothing now.

And I agree with Chelsea on this (if true) - they spend a lot of money on coaching and looking after their youngsters, but lets face it, very few will ever break into the first team (their best youth player still cannot make it in Scott Sinclair - yet he is at least top CCC class). So rather than nurturing these talents, then giving them away (in effect) to lower league clubs, then we may well see lots of these sorts of deals.

Same with Man U, they release an awful amount of youth players each year, that have probably been at Old Trafford for 4,5,6+ years already - thats a lot of investment for which Utd see no return.

I would take this deal right now (if it is being offered) as it may well stand us in good stead for similar deals in the future with Chelsea. I'd be well happy if Chelsea were our feeder club!

 

[class]

If this is true, don't suprised to find that if we were to sell him later for 'mega bucks', that the mega bucks actually is a very small initial fee bulked up by some very lucrative clauses and add on %'s. Chelsea are then only entitled to the initial fee.

 

[Andy_S]

I'd be very doubtful that we'd get absolutely nothing for him. Ron simply wouldn't agree to that, why would he?

 

[The General]

I'd be very doubtful that we'd get absolutely nothing for him. Ron simply wouldn't agree to that, why would he?

And even if it did happen - he wouldn't admit it!