Hickey - signs for Bologna

[jambo89]

8 hours ago, FarmerTweedy said:

You didn't highlight any such thing though, nothing in what you posted earlier supported your point about 'default positions' in any way, you just put your own interpretation on it.

 

You're right that the specifics of the deal had to be agreed between both parties, but unless whoever was negotiating from celtic's side was stunningly incompetent, they'd have made sure their sell-on clause covered all money Hearts receive for Hickey in the future, not just the initial payment. As SaintJambo pointed out, if that wasn't the case we could have agreed a deal with Bologna where we got one pound up front and the rest of the £1.5m (or however much it actually was) if and when he played his first game for them. In your scenario, celtic would then have been totally screwed! If you really think celtic would have been quite that daft, fair enough! 

 

 

It stated hat the most common arrangement is the situation I mentioned. Not going to argue over semantics of “most common” and “default position” but feel free.

[Francis Albert]

I don't remember reading much about  any examples of these cascaded transfer windfalls. If it is common wouldn't a few small clubs have made for them substantial sums after getting lucky with the first transfer of a player who went on to make it big? Are there any examples?

[SUTOL]

50 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I don't remember reading much about  any examples of these cascaded transfer windfalls. If it is common wouldn't a few small clubs have made for them substantial sums after getting lucky with the first transfer of a player who went on to make it big? Are there any examples?

 

I believe (from reading on this thread) that the %'s of transfer fees end if the player runs down their contract and doesn't then get sold to a new club. Not sure what happens if they renew their contract with their current club either, that may 're-set' any past transfer deals. 

 

 

[The Treasurer]

I'm sure Dundee Utd and maybe even Queens Park, got a share of the fee when Andy Robertson joined Liverpool from Hull (or wherever he was) 

[FarmerTweedy]

3 hours ago, jambo89 said:

It stated hat the most common arrangement is the situation I mentioned. Not going to argue over semantics of “most common” and “default position” but feel free.

It didn't state that at all, you just interpreted it that way.

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

I read at the time it was 15% 

 

Isnt the reason we agreed a sell on fee initially with Celtic being to avoid paying any up front fee to them?

[Rogue Daddy]

11 hours ago, FarmerTweedy said:

It's really not that complicated, but people seem determined to try to make it so! Celtic will (almost certainly) be entitled to 30% of any money we ever get from Bologna for Hickey. We will (almost certainly) be entitled to whatever %age we agreed with Bologna of any money they receive for Hickey in the future. It's then up to Bologna to agree, or not, a sell-on deal if they do sell Hickey in the future. If Bologna get £10m for him initially, they're due us maybe £2m (assuming our deal with them is for 20%). If Bologna then later get another £5m, they're due us another £1m. And so on.  We were already due celtic 30% of the initial £1.5m we got, I.e. £450k. If we get another £2m in, we're due them another £600k. If we then get another £1m, we're due them another £300k.  To sum up, (if we do actually have a sell-on with Bologna) we will (almost certainly) get x% of whatever money Bologna ever receive for him. Celtic will (almost certainly) get 30% of whatever money we ever receive for him. If there are another half a dozen transfers for Hickey with sell-on clauses, all that matters is we'll (almost certainly) get our %age of every amount Bologna ever see for him, and celtic will then be due their cut of the money we get.

This is my understanding also... although, are Italians not notorious by trying to kybosh this sort of thing by 'loaning' a potential target (to get their money) and then let the player go for 'free' at the end of the loan period... thereby cutting the chain. Definitely not ITK on this type of thing so i could be way off the mark... but i think it was spoken about on here at the time of his transfer.

[Saint Jambo]

2 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

I don't remember reading much about  any examples of these cascaded transfer windfalls. If it is common wouldn't a few small clubs have made for them substantial sums after getting lucky with the first transfer of a player who went on to make it big? Are there any examples?

 

I've provided an example further up the thread and in the past provided other examples. I didn't find it hard to find examples when I did a quick google search.

 

Because of the cascade, the amounts can end up being fairly small. For example if Celtic had a 30% sell on with us and we had a 20% sell on with Bologna, Celtic would only get 6% of the fee Bologna receive and that is with unusually high sell on fees. If Bologna sold to say Tottenham and that had another 20% sell on fee, then when Tottenham sold Hickey, Celtic would be due 1.2% of the fee.

 

At any point where the player moves without a sell on fee, whether under freedom of contract or because a club takes the whole fee upfront, the chain is broken. So say instead of us selling Hickey for £1.5m+20% sell on fee, we have sold him for £2m, then when Bologna (hypothetically) sold him to Tottenham for £10m we wouldn't get any further money and so neither would Celtic because they are only getting a cut of money we receive. Their deal is with us not Bologna.

[Saint Jambo]

On 19/10/2021 at 09:42, jambo89 said:

The qoute below is from the book of sports arbritation:-

 

'In its most common use, the sell-on clause is inserted in transfer contracts between two clubs, whereby the selling club, against a lower immediate transfer fee, retains the right to a certain percentage of a potential future transfer fee of the player to a third club.'

 

Quoting this as there still seem to be confusion about what it means. If it said "retains the right to a certain percentage of a potential future immediate transfer fee of a player to a third club" then interpreting it as only applying to the initial some paid in the subsequent transfer would be correct. But it doesn't. It is a percentage of the future full transfer fee the second club receives from the third club. The transfer fee is made up of all the money received in relation to the transfer, whether paid as the initial fee, later installments, performance related add-ons, or revenue from sell-on clauses.

[section s heart]

2 hours ago, The Treasurer said:

I'm sure Dundee Utd and maybe even Queens Park, got a share of the fee when Andy Robertson joined Liverpool from Hull (or wherever he was) 

When there's talk of McGinn moving from Villa, there's reference to Hibs and St Midden getting a cut

[Francis Albert]

7 hours ago, The Treasurer said:

I'm sure Dundee Utd and maybe even Queens Park, got a share of the fee when Andy Robertson joined Liverpool from Hull (or wherever he was) 

So one " I am sure" example. 

 

There must be many others surely. 

 

Why would clubs be shy of reporting that the have made money from previous transfer deals with these terms?

[Francis Albert]

5 hours ago, section s heart said:

When there's talk of McGinn moving from Villa, there's reference to Hibs and St Midden getting a cut

Talk of and reference to.

If these cascading terms are common why are there so few if any actual examples?

 

 

 

 

[adso7]

6 hours ago, section s heart said:

When there's talk of McGinn moving from Villa, there's reference to Hibs and St Midden getting a cut

I've no idea of specifics of any deal so no idea what st mirren negotiated with Hibs.

 

I think though there is a percentage payable to the club that developed a player when they transfer throughout their career. Not sure exactly how it works but I think this is a thing. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by adso7

[Francis Albert]

Another start and 96 minutes tonight in a 2 nil home win vs Cagliari. Playing midfield apparently. Yellow card.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Francis Albert

[Cruyff]

50 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Another start and 96 minutes tonight in a 2 nil home win vs Cagliari. Playing midfield apparently. Yellow card.

LWB/LM 

 

 

 

[spacerjoe]

4 hours ago, Cruyff said:

LWB/LM 

 

 

 

Imagine starting with 8 defensive players. I feel sorry for those Bologna fans having to watch that.

[Harry Potter]

4 hours ago, spacerjoe said:

Imagine starting with 8 defensive players. I feel sorry for those Bologna fans having to watch that.

They won 2-0, a wins a win.

[tian447]

5 hours ago, spacerjoe said:

Imagine starting with 8 defensive players. I feel sorry for those Bologna fans having to watch that.

 

They must be quite happy with Arnoutovic up front though. 

 

Baller, even if he is a moody wee shite. 

[Cruyff]

6 hours ago, spacerjoe said:

Imagine starting with 8 defensive players. I feel sorry for those Bologna fans having to watch that.

 

[Famous 1874]

Saw some idiot on twitter arguing with the one of the podcasts who suggested that Hickey was a tad unlucky to miss out in the squad.

 

The user said that because Hickey is naturally left footed, he is simply unable to play right back because ‘it’s international football’. There really are some idiots out there. 

[OTT]

1 hour ago, Famous 1874 said:

Saw some idiot on twitter arguing with the one of the podcasts who suggested that Hickey was a tad unlucky to miss out in the squad.

 

The user said that because Hickey is naturally left footed, he is simply unable to play right back because ‘it’s international football’. There really are some idiots out there. 

 

I think the emergence of Patterson has made the RB slot a bit tougher now. Not saying Hickey can't stake a claim to it, but Clarke might be hesitant despite Hickey's ability to use both feet. 

 

He should be knocking on the door now though. Serie A football and a first team regular? Real shame there is such depth at LB because in any other decade he'd have been a shoe in. 

[Rogue Daddy]

2 hours ago, Famous 1874 said:

Saw some idiot on twitter arguing with the one of the podcasts who suggested that Hickey was a tad unlucky to miss out in the squad.

 

The user said that because Hickey is naturally left footed, he is simply unable to play right back because ‘it’s international football’. There really are some idiots out there. 

Correct... arguably the best player at the recent Euro Championship was the Italian LWB - he was right footed! Cracking player! Spinazolla I think his name was.

[Famous 1874]

2 hours ago, OTT said:

 

I think the emergence of Patterson has made the RB slot a bit tougher now. Not saying Hickey can't stake a claim to it, but Clarke might be hesitant despite Hickey's ability to use both feet. 

 

He should be knocking on the door now though. Serie A football and a first team regular? Real shame there is such depth at LB because in any other decade he'd have been a shoe in. 

Agreed mate. I’d have him in for O’Donnell but can (reluctantly) understand why Clarke has kept the majority of the squad the same. 

[Jeff]

4 hours ago, Famous 1874 said:

Saw some idiot on twitter arguing with the one of the podcasts who suggested that Hickey was a tad unlucky to miss out in the squad.

 

The user said that because Hickey is naturally left footed, he is simply unable to play right back because ‘it’s international football’. There really are some idiots out there. 

 

O Donnell is neither footed

[Mikey1874]

Hickey might still be a bit away from getting in the squad.

 

But it won't do him any harm to be playing as a more attacking wing back in a system pretty similar to Scotland's. 

[DG_HMFC]

10 hours ago, tian447 said:

 

They must be quite happy with Arnoutovic up front though. 

 

Baller, even if he is a moody wee shite. 

 

He's 6ft 2'. Defo moody though

[tian447]

1 hour ago, DG_HMFC said:

 

He's 6ft 2'. Defo moody though

 

Smaller than me, so I reserve the right to call him wee

 

[DG_HMFC]

17 hours ago, tian447 said:

 

Smaller than me, so I reserve the right to call him wee

 

 

 I was going to say unless he's smaller than you but I couldn't be bothered typing it

[August Landmesser]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aaron-hickey-wanted-ac-milan-25385719

Aaron Hickey is a transfer target for Serie A title challengers Milan - according to a report in Italy.

The 19-year-old has turned heads with his brilliant displays for Sinisa Mihajlovic's side and is regarded as one of the finest young talents in the top tier of Italian football.

And he could be be facing a transfer call with Milan viewing him as the perfect option to back-up their superstar left-back Theo Hernandez.

The report states concern over Ballo Toure's development and believe the former Hearts star is the perfect man to develop under their best player.

And Hickey could be catapulted into the first team quickly with Hernandez expected to be on the radar of the likes of Real Madrid next summer.

Calcio Dangolo states: "Due to Covid-19, Theo Hernandez has missed three games against Porto, Bologna and Torino, giving coach Stefano Pioli the opportunity to try the new signing from Monaco, Ballo Touré, on the left wing.

 

"The Senegalese player, however, did not convince either the team or the fans, especially in the defeat against Porto where the defender found himself in difficulty several times.

 

"Paolo Maldini and the Rossoneri management are thinking of sending him out on loan to play more consistently and gain confidence in his own means.

"In the Rossoneri's sights is Aaron Hickey, indicated by the Rossoneri entourage as an ideal alternative to the French international to preside over the left side lane."

Hickey has been linked with former team Celtic but it appears increasingly likely he will be out of the reach of his former club, as Bologna were asking for £6.8m before his incredible leap this season.

[August Landmesser]

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

Maybe good enough for the Scotland U21 bench.

Aye, will have to serve his time though.

 

(unless he takes the short-cut of signing for Rantic)

[The Old Tolbooth]

Loving the part where Celtic are priced out of buying him back, just another player they had that they could really do with right now, it's brilliant to see them messing this up just now. 

[The Old Tolbooth]

Btw, do we have a sell on clause? 

[Rogue Daddy]

10 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Maybe good enough for the Scotland U21 bench.

🤣🤣

[Martin_T]

I hope he stays at Bologna for at least another season, if he gets over 50 starts in Serie A under his belt it will be better for his long term development.

[jamboinglasgow]

On 02/11/2021 at 16:28, OTT said:

 

I think the emergence of Patterson has made the RB slot a bit tougher now. Not saying Hickey can't stake a claim to it, but Clarke might be hesitant despite Hickey's ability to use both feet. 

 

He should be knocking on the door now though. Serie A football and a first team regular? Real shame there is such depth at LB because in any other decade he'd have been a shoe in. 

 

I do think right back is going to be a tough position for players to come into in near future. There is a lot of good prospects at right back now. Obviously Nathan Paterson has come in done well there despite his inexperience. Harrison Ashby is 19 years old and on the fringe of the West Ham first team (is often on the bench.) Calvin Ramsay is getting a lot of attention as well there.

 

Anthony Ralston is starting to get a lot of backing in the press for his performances this season (never thought I would say that, always thought he was a poor player.) 

 

I was listening to a podcast which talked to a guy I follow on twitter who does updates on Scots players abroad. He was talking about Hickey though felt he was laying into Hickey's weaknesses a bit too heavily and then following it up with "but he is a good player." But he did think that Hickey has barely played right back so its a big ask for him to suddenly play there internationally. 

[King prawn]

39 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Maybe good enough for the Scotland U21 bench.

[Cruyff]

Defo should stay at Bologna for a bit longer. He's now established as a first team regular, I can't see Bologna selling right now for less than 9million but another season or this summer, we might be saying 20million plus if top clubs are looking at him.

If we have a 20% sell on clause, we could be in the money. 

[hmfc_liam06]

1 hour ago, Martin_T said:

I hope he stays at Bologna for at least another season, if he gets over 50 starts in Serie A under his belt it will be better for his long term development.

 

Agreed, in all honesty he's not ready for the step up to AC Milan. Not a slight on the boy but he needs to learn his craft a bit more before a move like that happens.

[broxburnjambo]

There is a sell on clause, but its not percentage based. Its a fixed amount. 

[Naisys Tackle]

1 hour ago, jonesy said:

Maybe good enough for the Scotland U21 bench.

 

Can't see him getting in the full national side anytime soon sadly. 

[Naisys Tackle]

2 minutes ago, broxburnjambo said:

There is a sell on clause, but its not percentage based. Its a fixed amount. 

 

Why didn't we go percentage?  That's a shocker if so.

[Drew Wallace]

i reckon he would just fine at AC Milan but i aint no expert TBF

[Tazio]

35 minutes ago, broxburnjambo said:

There is a sell on clause, but its not percentage based. Its a fixed amount. 

How would that work? Say it is fixed at £1m and Bologna sold him in the future for £500k if his firm dropped we get it all and a written apology? 

[Naisys Tackle]

45 minutes ago, jonesy said:

A loan move to Celtic in 7 years’ time will change all that!

I don't think that will help move KT or Robertson either. 

[Cruyff]

46 minutes ago, Robbies Tackle said:

 

Can't see him getting in the full national side anytime soon sadly. 

He's just unfortunate that Scotland have 2 world class Left Backs that still have years left in the tank. He'll defo get in squads but unlikely that he is going to be first choice until Robertson is over the hill. 

[Martin_T]

49 minutes ago, Robbies Tackle said:

 

Why didn't we go percentage?  That's a shocker if so.

 

Presumably because we had to next to no leverage to negotiate?

[Naisys Tackle]

14 minutes ago, Tazio said:

How would that work? Say it is fixed at £1m and Bologna sold him in the future for £500k if his firm dropped we get it all and a written apology? 

 

Would imagine if they sell for a certain amount (say £5m) or more it triggers us getting a £1m.  Shite business tbh.

[Naisys Tackle]

Just now, Martin_T said:

 

Presumably because we had to next to no leverage to negotiate?

 

Bologna wasn't the only club interested though.  We already sold for peanuts with almost half to Celtic. 

[Martin_T]

1 minute ago, Robbies Tackle said:

 

Bologna wasn't the only club interested though.  We already sold for peanuts with almost half to Celtic. 

 

Granted, but IIRC the player was soon to be out of contract or may already have been so, so it was his decision where his future lay.

[Heartsofgold]

58 minutes ago, broxburnjambo said:

There is a sell on clause, but its not percentage based. Its a fixed amount. 

This is the 1st time I've heard this opinion.

 

Personally, I think it's doubtful it's a fixed amount.  Most sell on figures are % of fee for the very reason that the selling club are looking to capitalise on a prospects development.  Plus the fact that the sell on clause we had/have with Celtic was for 30%.  

 

It's been widely reported that there is a sell on clause in his contract but we, as speculating supporters, have absolutely no idea what the terms of this are.