Hickey’s at the wheel

[Hairdryer]

1 hour ago, stevie1874 said:

If Hearts were to sell him, It might be better selling him to a Southampton rather than a top English club with a sell on clause. If he is a success the bigger clubs come calling at mega bucks and if he’s already at a big club then no sell on clause. 

Totally agree 

[FarmerTweedy]

10 hours ago, Last Laff said:

 

Yes because the club didn’t benefit from giving Craig Gordon, the last player with this amount of potential, a massive wage rise.  The last thing we need it the player to give the excuse he wasn’t valued or wanted enough when his head will be spinning all over the place. 

Did you miss the bit where we ended up in administration thanks to giving wages we couldn't actually afford to players? 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Can we just enjoy Hickey as a player without imagining what transfer fee we might get for him? We don't need the money and we all accept he will move at some point so let's enjoy watching one of the few bright spots in this team.

[graygo]

1 hour ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Can we just enjoy Hickey as a player without imagining what transfer fee we might get for him? We don't need the money and we all accept he will move at some point so let's enjoy watching one of the few bright spots in this team.

 

What's wrong with doing both?

[1971fozzy]

so Celtic get a sell on fee ? Shock horror.

its what happens nowadays.

[NB GIN]

3 hours ago, hmfcbilly said:

Never done celtic any harm selling van dijk to Southampton. Longer term, I reckon we would get more money via a sell on as he will likely have more chance to develop at Southampton than man city. I'd rather he stayed for 2 or 3 more seasons at least and continued to develop with hearts though

Yes would be the most beneficial way if it worked out the same 

He is a terrific young player but I am not sure how good he will become too early to say. If we were offered a few million he will be sold for sure. 

[on&up2017]

7 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

It's perfectly clear. 

 

We paid no money up front and celtic agreed to a sell on clause. 

 

At the time it suited both clubs. 

 

It's perfectly clear. 

Couldn't be clearer tbh. 

 

 

As I stated in my original post, no forward thinking and bad business.

 

A 30% sell on clause is pretty much unheard of. There has been the odd bigger % sell on but 10, 15 or 20% at a push for the majority of contractual agreements. Levein obviously hasn’t been convinced Hickey has enough potential to sell on for any real money, he hasn’t identified his talent as a top scout or football knowledge would. So, instead of having the foresight to pay say 50-100k, at a guess, if and when sold we would now find ourselves paying out many times that if the story out there is true. 

[GavK1012]

4 hours ago, 1971fozzy said:

so Celtic get a sell on fee ? Shock horror.

its what happens nowadays.

 

Think you are missing the point...

 

Nowt to do with a sell on clause or otherwise...it surrounds purely the scuzzbag club benefiting... 😔

[i wish jj was my dad]

4 hours ago, on&up2017 said:

As I stated in my original post, no forward thinking and bad business.

 

A 30% sell on clause is pretty much unheard of. There has been the odd bigger % sell on but 10, 15 or 20% at a push for the majority of contractual agreements. Levein obviously hasn’t been convinced Hickey has enough potential to sell on for any real money, he hasn’t identified his talent as a top scout or football knowledge would. So, instead of having the foresight to pay say 50-100k, at a guess, if and when sold we would now find ourselves paying out many times that if the story out there is true. 

Imagine how understanding our support would be if we gave Celtic £100k for a laddie who never developed enough to kick a ball for the first team. 

Edited October 2, 2019 by i wish jj was my dad

[Bull's-eye]

4 hours ago, on&up2017 said:

As I stated in my original post, no forward thinking and bad business.

 

A 30% sell on clause is pretty much unheard of. There has been the odd bigger % sell on but 10, 15 or 20% at a push for the majority of contractual agreements. Levein obviously hasn’t been convinced Hickey has enough potential to sell on for any real money, he hasn’t identified his talent as a top scout or football knowledge would. So, instead of having the foresight to pay say 50-100k, at a guess, if and when sold we would now find ourselves paying out many times that if the story out there is true. 

 

That explains why "****in LEVEIN" signed him right enough. 

Signed him because he thought he would be Shit, there we are folks, problem solved, "****in LEVEIN" is purposely signing duds but somehow got this one wrong.        

 

 

[JamboAndrew]

I may have missed it. Is it an actual fact, the 30% sell on fee? Or is it one of those bits of gossip that must be true as it shows Levein to be some sort of short sighted bumbling moron getting everything wrong again?

[Seymour M Hersh]

4 minutes ago, JamboAndrew said:

I may have missed it. Is it an actual fact, the 30% sell on fee? Or is it one of those bits of gossip that must be true as it shows Levein to be some sort of short sighted bumbling moron getting everything wrong again?

 

It may be, although neither club has confirmed it is as far as I know. 

[DH1986]

If and when Hickey decides to leave we need to be smarter than Celtic......

 

Loan him to the buying club for the remainder of his contract but we get a loan fee for him.....say around £400,000 below what we value him at.

 

Then when he signs for the club on a permanent basis we get the standard £400,000 compensation fee and Celtic get 30% of that paltry sum whilst we keep the loan fee minus the Hickey familys cut.

 

It may be morally questionable but I can’t see how it would be breaking the terms of a sell-on agreement.

 

Edited October 2, 2019 by DH1986

[fabienleclerq]

26 minutes ago, DH1986 said:

If and when Hickey decides to leave we need to be smarter than Celtic......

 

Loan him to the buying club for the remainder of his contract but we get a loan fee for him.....say around £400,000 below what we value him at.

 

Then when he signs for the club on a permanent basis we get the standard £400,000 compensation fee and Celtic get 30% of that paltry sum whilst we keep the loan fee minus the Hickey familys cut.

 

It may be morally questionable but I can’t see how it would be breaking the terms of a sell-on agreement.

 

 

Or we punt him for the biggest fee we can and add in a sell on clause for ourselves. 

[¼½¾]

35 minutes ago, DH1986 said:

If and when Hickey decides to leave we need to be smarter than Celtic......

 

Loan him to the buying club for the remainder of his contract but we get a loan fee for him.....say around £400,000 below what we value him at.

 

Then when he signs for the club on a permanent basis we get the standard £400,000 compensation fee and Celtic get 30% of that paltry sum whilst we keep the loan fee minus the Hickey familys cut.

 

It may be morally questionable but I can’t see how it would be breaking the terms of a sell-on agreement.

 

How would you feel if Cardiff did that to us with Callum Paterson?

[kc1874]

The media will be desperate for Celtic to gain as much as possible from any sell - in doing so they might force any potential sale price up

[JamboAndrew]

2 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

It may be, although neither club has confirmed it is as far as I know. 

There is a lot of bewailing the hearts management regarding something that may not be true and we have no real evidence of. (I don't take anything in  that rag as evidence)

[Coco]

1 hour ago, Lemongrab said:

How would you feel if Cardiff did that to us with Callum Paterson?

 

Or for Ryan Edwards where we have a 'hefty' sell on

[Spoleto]

3 hours ago, JamboAndrew said:

I may have missed it. Is it an actual fact, the 30% sell on fee? Or is it one of those bits of gossip that must be true as it shows Levein to be some sort of short sighted bumbling moron getting everything wrong again?

 

No, it's just the children creating another drama for them all to have a wee tantrum over.

 

Groundog day on The Terrace.

[shed1874]

2 hours ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

Or we punt him for the biggest fee we can and add in a sell on clause for ourselves. 

 

Sometimes the obvious is the most difficult, £200M is the tag if we are looking to make a statement hopeful that would end interest as I would prefer him at Hearts. If Hickey becomes involved in a bidding war your looking for a PSG to step up with a realistic £8-25M bid.

 

The Celtic getting money issue only applies to them know little about financing youth football that allowed Hickey to progress.

 

Why shouldn't a club get something out of the deal is the question.

 

Is it hatred towards Celtics youth or do people only want Hearts to given money. 

 

Would it be an issue if Hickey came from Edinburgh blacks ?

 

Edited October 2, 2019 by shed1874

[JamboAndrew]

35 minutes ago, Spoleto said:

 

No, it's just the children creating another drama for them all to have a wee tantrum over.

 

Groundog day on The Terrace.

I've stopped reading posts the moment I see speculative stuff blamed on incompetent, short sighted, evil etc... Levein.

 

I've found myself reading a lot less Kickback recently.

[fabienleclerq]

1 hour ago, shed1874 said:

 

Sometimes the obvious is the most difficult, £200M is the tag if we are looking to make a statement hopeful that would end interest as I would prefer him at Hearts. If Hickey becomes involved in a bidding war your looking for a PSG to step up with a realistic £8-25M bid.

 

The Celtic getting money issue only applies to them know little about financing youth football that allowed Hickey to progress.

 

Why shouldn't a club get something out of the deal is the question.

 

Is it hatred towards Celtics youth or do people only want Hearts to given money. 

 

Would it be an issue if Hickey came from Edinburgh blacks ?

 

 

It's because it's celtic, theyll get a fee for a player we got for nothing. We'll get him playing fir us pick up 70% and hopefully a sell on again. Lesson learned and we need to follow suit if we release players. 

[Mikey1874]

10 hours ago, on&up2017 said:

As I stated in my original post, no forward thinking and bad business.

 

A 30% sell on clause is pretty much unheard of. There has been the odd bigger % sell on but 10, 15 or 20% at a push for the majority of contractual agreements. Levein obviously hasn’t been convinced Hickey has enough potential to sell on for any real money, he hasn’t identified his talent as a top scout or football knowledge would. So, instead of having the foresight to pay say 50-100k, at a guess, if and when sold we would now find ourselves paying out many times that if the story out there is true. 

 

What St Mirren got for John McGinn 

[Bazzas right boot]

10 hours ago, on&up2017 said:

As I stated in my original post, no forward thinking and bad business.

 

A 30% sell on clause is pretty much unheard of. There has been the odd bigger % sell on but 10, 15 or 20% at a push for the majority of contractual agreements. Levein obviously hasn’t been convinced Hickey has enough potential to sell on for any real money, he hasn’t identified his talent as a top scout or football knowledge would. So, instead of having the foresight to pay say 50-100k, at a guess, if and when sold we would now find ourselves paying out many times that if the story out there is true. 

 

 

Aye but we have the player and get 70% of any fee?

 

So if it was 20% you would shrug your shoulders , but because it is 10% more you want ( or maybe it was another poster) an explanation by the club and are in a bit of a tizz.

 

 

It's a bit of a dull one if true ( I have no information on the in and outs of the negotiations at the time) , but we have the player and are in control of the situation. If he makes us £1m or £100m it will have been good business, even if that mob get some money as well.

 

I've gave you my reasoning as has many others, if you want to get all excited about it then crack on, just seems pointless.

[Last Laff]

2 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Aye but we have the player and get 70% of any fee?

 

So if it was 20% you would shrug your shoulders , but because it is 10% more you want ( or maybe it was another poster) an explanation by the club and are in a bit of a tizz.

 

 

It's a bit of a dull one if true ( I have no information on the in and outs of the negotiations at the time) , but we have the player and are in control of the situation. If he makes us £1m or £100m it will have been good business, even if that mob get some money as well.

 

I've gave you my reasoning as has many others, if you want to get all excited about it then crack on, just seems pointless.

 

We get 60% the player gets 10% unless he requests a transfer.  60% of a few for the best player we may produce this side of the millennium is criminal.  

[Last Laff]

17 hours ago, FarmerTweedy said:

Did you miss the bit where we ended up in administration thanks to giving wages we couldn't actually afford to players? 

 

Do we always just shit ourselves as a club because twenty odd years of miss management led to administration aye? 

[TheBigO]

23 minutes ago, Last Laff said:

 

We get 60% the player gets 10% unless he requests a transfer.  60% of a few for the best player we may produce this side of the millennium is criminal.  

Criminal. Deary me.

 

There are a couple of threads at the moment with individuals making right dingles of themselves.

[shed1874]

3 hours ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

It's because it's celtic, theyll get a fee for a player we got for nothing. We'll get him playing fir us pick up 70% and hopefully a sell on again. Lesson learned and we need to follow suit if we release players. 

 

Everyone is in same boat. None knew Hickey would be a revelation, they hope that they get a potential player shaping the youth into a product. This is his first pro season very unexpected its a lot different than getting a player who made a few appearance then got stolen by us for free. Look Hearts have the key  to unlock the Hickey mystery one day they will open up a bit and we find out. 

The money goes to youth, Hearts had him first the Celtic story is not official so we wait

[Last Laff]

9 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

Criminal. Deary me.

 

There are a couple of threads at the moment with individuals making right dingles of themselves.

 

Yes. Daylight robbery to be precise. 

[The Old Tolbooth]

The more that Celtic get the better, because that means Hearts get even more too! Then we can stick our own clause into the sale of Hickey and recoup what Celtic got from us from the original sale, and then some! I don't get why folk are getting their knickers in a twist over this, it's how business works. 

Edited October 2, 2019 by The Old Tolbooth

[shed1874]

53 minutes ago, The Old Tolbooth said:

The more that Celtic get the better, because that means Hearts get even more too! Then we can stick our own clause into the sale of Hickey and recoup what Celtic got from us from the original sale, and then some! I don't get why folk are getting their knickers in a twist over this, it's how business works. 

 

Hearts explained the situation with Hickeys father.

 

Hearts are also flattered at any interest bringing attention to the club free publicity raising the profile. A smart mind already knows the way ahead awaits the right timeline knows the value and the correct manner to deal with this interesting scenario. We are not open or actively seeking to court potential suitars, other people are doing the Talk 

Edited October 2, 2019 by shed1874

[The Old Tolbooth]

2 minutes ago, shed1874 said:

 

Hearts explained the situation with Hickeys father.

 

Hearts are also flattered at any interest bringing attention to the club free publicity raising the profile. A smart mind already knows the way ahead awaits the right timeline knows the value and the correct manner to deal with this interesting scenario. We are not open or actively seeking to court potential suitars, other people are doing the Talk 

 

Absolutely agree mate, Hickey is ours and hopefully going nowhere, he's a very bright light in our team just now. 

[shed1874]

3 minutes ago, The Old Tolbooth said:

 

Absolutely agree mate, Hickey is ours and hopefully going nowhere, he's a very bright light in our team just now. 

 

We have very talented young players that need to play regular hense why loans are extremley important in developing the man from a boy. Its Hickey we are in awe of its incredible how a player at school can be such a key part of this seasons match day experience. Big money if as I'm aware on the near horizon

 

'If' is the buzzword on most things Hearts related, no one knows what way it's going to go. We do know Hearts and Hickeys father have the control of the wheel at this moment.

[Bazzas right boot]

2 hours ago, Last Laff said:

 

We get 60% the player gets 10% unless he requests a transfer.  60% of a few for the best player we may produce this side of the millennium is criminal.  

 

Criminal..... 

 

Ffs. 

 

He would get 10% no matter what anyway. 

 

So as I alluded to, folk would be ok with 20% going to celtic and 10% going to the player, that's normal in their eyes. 

 

However, 30% and 10% is criminal, folk are freaking out and demanding explanations. 

 

Feckin hell. 

Edited October 2, 2019 by Smith's right boot

[Last Laff]

10 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

Criminal..... 

 

Ffs. 

 

He would get 10% no matter what anyway. 

 

So as I alluded to, folk would be ok with 20% going to celtic and 10% going to the player, that's normal in their eyes. 

 

However, 30% and 10% is criminal, folk are freaking out and demanding explanations. 

 

Feckin hell. 

 

I didn’t demand anything?  It’s shoddy business though in my opinion. 

[shed1874]

2 minutes ago, Last Laff said:

 

I didn’t demand anything?  It’s shoddy business though in my opinion. 

 

Hickey is a school boy ffs

Edited October 2, 2019 by shed1874

[Last Laff]

29 minutes ago, shed1874 said:

 

Hickey is a school boy ffs

 

Is he still at school like? 

[shed1874]

1 minute ago, Last Laff said:

 

Is he still at school like? 

Yes

[gjcc]

This place, honestly.  

People were wary to say the least about paying a fee for Shankland, it’d have been apocalyptic on here if we’d paid similar to get an unproven 16 year old. 

 

You just have to look at our own academy to see past players that show promise but end up not making the grade. 

 

Hearts took a (relatively) free punt and it looks to have paid off. Celtic took a punt and it looks to have paid off. 

 

 

[The Future's Maroon]

As a few have pointed out, not too fussed about any sell on clause Celtic have...all we need to do is make sure we add a sell on clause ourselves and it counters what we lose to Celtic.

[shed1874]

14 minutes ago, The Future's Maroon said:

As a few have pointed out, not too fussed about any sell on clause Celtic have...all we need to do is make sure we add a sell on clause ourselves and it counters what we lose to Celtic.

 

Hickey was at Hearts went to Celtic back to Hearts. If gossips want to be fictitious malicious then they will find out.

 

legally Hickey's developed by Hearts

 

Add

 

Hearts may feel a moral conviction to pay Celtic youth money

Edited October 2, 2019 by shed1874

[shed1874]

11 minutes ago, farin said:

 

Absolute rubbish. 

Aaron was at Celtic for 4 years prior to re-signing for us & was development by them. Celtic are legally entitled to the development fee as per the rules set out. 

 

Show me the contract

 

It's a rolling contract at youth it began with us 

Edited October 2, 2019 by shed1874

[shed1874]

You are trolling me like the clique controls you.

 

Are you seriously stupid

[shed1874]

1 minute ago, farin said:

 

Clique ? Trolling ? Seriously stupid ?. 

 

You've lost me there. Care to elaborate your post ?.  

 

You were sound before I asked you about how you had  the budge out images , you told me you saved them from somewhere. I accepted it. Now and since your like fly up my hole along with a few other flies buzzing about me

 

As far as how many posts I have, the riddles from me. I decide my path in life my opinion isn't such an ache no punch and Judy here.

Show me the timeline dated contract maybe move along or think about stopping the digs . you decide.

[Morgan]

15 minutes ago, shed1874 said:

You are trolling me like the clique controls you.

 

Are you seriously stupid

[shed1874]

1 minute ago, Morgan said:

 

Rise up and be counted

[Morgan]

Just now, shed1874 said:

 

Rise up and be counted

Aye, ok.

 

 

[shed1874]

Just now, Morgan said:

Aye, ok.

 

 

 

Not so quick to get back to me Ace Of Hearts or did you forget in your moment of bliss ?

 

Yes to you he is Eamonn is that correct. Maybe you can re-joice on it with one of the clique

 

I already saw the potential trolling

You come across in the worst light.

 

 

What?

 

 

[Section Q]

5 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

Criminal..... 

 

Ffs. 

 

He would get 10% no matter what anyway. 

 

So as I alluded to, folk would be ok with 20% going to celtic and 10% going to the player, that's normal in their eyes. 

 

However, 30% and 10% is criminal, folk are freaking out and demanding explanations. 

 

Feckin hell. 

If the player is successful at say Southampton and gets a big money deal to another club we would likely have a sell on fee.

[shed1874]

1 minute ago, farin said:

 

Are you the guy that was banned from here a few weeks ago for threatening another poster on here. ?

Think it was @jake. 

 

You are trolling my hole

 

Wheres  the proof of the contract the made up 30 % or anything I know is garbage

 

No ****ing idea what you have in your mind.

 

Is it because I won't buy Murray's book ?