If carlsberg did transfer threads.....This would be it!

[bobo the clown]

Some sources stating Ream was on 20k a week. Presumably, we won't be paying up his contract so that's a huge amount in wages gained.

Forgive my ignorance, but why wouldn't we be paying up his contract?

My underastanding of this, is the club 'owe' him nigh on £2m quid and QPR are giving us the opportunity reduce that to £600.00

In my naivety I'd expect a player signs for another club and he ceases to be your employee and you stop paying him ... plus any fee received.

Do you believe that the negotiations mean we pay him up as if he'd worked through ? Jeez.

[LeverEnd]

I know you don't like the lad Boris but surely it's taking it a tad too far to suggest he's going to walk away with the lions share of the cash and leave us with peanuts?

[boltonboris]

Some sources stating Ream was on 20k a week. Presumably, we won't be paying up his contract so that's a huge amount in wages gained.

Forgive my ignorance, but why wouldn't we be paying up his contract?

My underastanding of this, is the club 'owe' him nigh on £2m quid and QPR are giving us the opportunity reduce that to £600.00

In my naivety I'd expect a player signs for another club and he ceases to be your employee and you stop paying him ... plus any fee received.

Do you believe that the negotiations mean we pay him up as if he'd worked through ? Jeez.

Well that's contractual isn't it? He's contracted to work for us for another 2 years at a set wage up until the end of that contract - It works both ways..

It hapened with Sam Ricketts.. We 'sold' him for £500k, but owed him close to a million, we wrote off about £450k or so, just to get him off the books and save half the portion of his wage bill

The only way would be contract termination, but that's usually a result of the player handing in his transfer request, as that is his way of saying, keep the cash, I'm quitting my job

[boltonboris]

I know you don't like the lad Boris but surely it's taking it a tad too far to suggest he's going to walk away with the lions share of the cash and leave us with peanuts?

He's entitled to it, so fair enough - As far as I'm aware, the only way we'll get a good deal from it, is if Tim forgoes the remainder of his contract from us - I wouldn't if I was him

Never stopped Robbie Fowler getting filthy rich from doing it to Liverpool and Leeds

[Bijou Bob]

He's under contract to us. Generally, as I understand it, if the player or agent request a move, they forfeit the rest of their contract. I suspect the fee is only 1.4 mil as they have taken on responsibility for any bonuses or wages owing.

I'm bitterly disappointed if 1.4 million is the full amount, but if that enables us to loan Hooper or Campbell, I'll take it. Pity it was 10 days too late to bag Alf.

[Whookam]

Well that's contractual isn't it? He's contracted to work for us for another 2 years at a set wage up until the end of that contract - It works both ways..

It hapened with Sam Ricketts.. We 'sold' him for £500k, but owed him close to a million, we wrote off about £450k or so, just to get him off the books and save half the portion of his wage bill

No, Ricketts was a mutual termination. We agree to give him a lump sum of his remaining contract, in doing so we're gambling that we're not going to end up paying his full contract. He agrees to it on the basis that he wants to play football but will have to accept a lower wage. His gamble is that the pay-off + wage is the same as or greater than what he was on.

In the case of a sale the contract with the player is cancelled when he signs for his new club, though there may be loyalty bonuses paid and in some cases the selling club can continue to pay a percentage of the player's wage if the contract offered is less than they were previously on.

[Whookam]

is if Tim forgoes the remainder of his contract from us - I wouldn't if I was him

Tim's contract with us also specifies that he plays football for us...

[bobo the clown]

Some sources stating Ream was on 20k a week. Presumably, we won't be paying up his contract so that's a huge amount in wages gained.

Forgive my ignorance, but why wouldn't we be paying up his contract?

My underastanding of this, is the club 'owe' him nigh on £2m quid and QPR are giving us the opportunity reduce that to £600.00

In my naivety I'd expect a player signs for another club and he ceases to be your employee and you stop paying him ... plus any fee received.

Do you believe that the negotiations mean we pay him up as if he'd worked through ? Jeez.

Well that's contractual isn't it? He's contracted to work for us for another 2 years at a set wage up until the end of that contract - It works both ways..

It hapened with Sam Ricketts.. We 'sold' him for £500k, but owed him close to a million, we wrote off about £450k or so, just to get him off the books and save half the portion of his wage bill

The only way would be contract termination, but that's usually a result of the player handing in his transfer request, as that is his way of saying, keep the cash, I'm quitting my job

I obviously don't know the details but he's contractually entitled to his wage ... while employed by us.

On signing for another club we'd cease being his employer. So would be entitled to stop paying him

I can understand that any negotiations may mean we pay something to him ....and who knows what clauses are in the contract ... but in any normal World (& yes, I know) on leaving an employer you don't have continuing rights.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

As is often the case, Boris is right

T-Ream is contracted to summer 2017. If we take £20kpw as accurate, that's £2m we owe him. £2m we have signed a legal contract to say we will provide.

What sometimes happens - but not always – is that as part of the fee, the buying club buy out his contract, in part or full. So if QPR are happy to pay him £20kpw, they could take up his contract in full - but that £2m cost to them would be part of the negotiations (understandably: it's coming off QPR's bottom line not ours). If they only want to pay him £15kpw, they could buy that part of his contract but we'd still owe him £500k – plus any of the myriad bonuses which get written into contracts these days.

It's really not as simple as paying a transfer fee plus a weekly wage, and then it all goes away when the player moves club. It's not as simple as when you or I move jobs, and the old boss stops paying us. Ream and BWFC entered into a binding fixed-term contract. Sometimes exit clauses are written in by one or both parties, sometimes they're not. This kind of stuff is often what holds up transfers.

Maybe, for instance, it's possible that Fulham offer £1.75m but won't pay as much of his contract off as QPR, so the deal overall is better for us. Or maybe Ream doesn't fancy Fulham as much as QPR, perhaps because they won't pay him as much.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

He's under contract to us. Generally, as I understand it, if the player or agent request a move, they forfeit the rest of their contract.

...which is why players will go to all possible lengths to not request a transfer. Ream didn't, and to be fair to him he didn't indulge in any of the other stuff that players will do (leaking stories, missing training, antagonising staff) to maximise their Sterling.

[Hoboh]

As is often the case, Boris is right

T-Ream is contracted to summer 2017. If we take £20kpw as accurate, that's £2m we owe him. £2m we have signed a legal contract to say we will provide.

What sometimes happens - but not always – is that as part of the fee, the buying club buy out his contract, in part or full. So if QPR are happy to pay him £20kpw, they could take up his contract in full - but that £2m cost to them would be part of the negotiations (understandably: it's coming off QPR's bottom line not ours). If they only want to pay him £15kpw, they could buy that part of his contract but we'd still owe him £500k – plus any of the myriad bonuses which get written into contracts these days.

It's really not as simple as paying a transfer fee plus a weekly wage, and then it all goes away when the player moves club. It's not as simple as when you or I move jobs, and the old boss stops paying us. Ream and BWFC entered into a binding fixed-term contract. Sometimes exit clauses are written in by one or both parties, sometimes they're not. This kind of stuff is often what holds up transfers.

Maybe, for instance, it's possible that Fulham offer £1.75m but won't pay as much of his contract off as QPR, so the deal overall is better for us. Or maybe Ream doesn't fancy Fulham as much as QPR, perhaps because they won't pay him as much.

And folk wonder why football is fcuked!

[bobo the clown]

I know you and Boris will be correct. But that's fckg madness.

Sign this document and you will be our player and we'll pay you £x. Leave, cease being our player and on leaving you will cease being paid £x. I can get that there will be specific clauses. I can also get that a player may say "then I'm going nowhere" but to be entitled to be paid wages by the club you've left is crazy.

No wonder the football World is in chaos.

[BWFC_Insane]

As is often the case, Boris is right

T-Ream is contracted to summer 2017. If we take £20kpw as accurate, that's £2m we owe him. £2m we have signed a legal contract to say we will provide.

What sometimes happens - but not always – is that as part of the fee, the buying club buy out his contract, in part or full. So if QPR are happy to pay him £20kpw, they could take up his contract in full - but that £2m cost to them would be part of the negotiations (understandably: it's coming off QPR's bottom line not ours). If they only want to pay him £15kpw, they could buy that part of his contract but we'd still owe him £500k – plus any of the myriad bonuses which get written into contracts these days.

It's really not as simple as paying a transfer fee plus a weekly wage, and then it all goes away when the player moves club. It's not as simple as when you or I move jobs, and the old boss stops paying us. Ream and BWFC entered into a binding fixed-term contract. Sometimes exit clauses are written in by one or both parties, sometimes they're not. This kind of stuff is often what holds up transfers.

Maybe, for instance, it's possible that Fulham offer £1.75m but won't pay as much of his contract off as QPR, so the deal overall is better for us. Or maybe Ream doesn't fancy Fulham as much as QPR, perhaps because they won't pay him as much.

Can't agree with this. I've worked fixed term contracts. If my employer wants me out and sacks me, or I decide to leave, my employer has no legal obligation to pay me. Whilst football is often considered special, basic employment laws aren't thrown out.

In football it may be players are paid off to get them to move or agree lower terms or there are special clauses. And yes sometimes there are clauses or bonuses or whatever. But say Ream pitches up and says, I'm retiring, I've had enough, he has broken his contract and isn't being paid.

But employment law is certainly not a requirement to pay someone for the length of a contract regardless of where they are employed.

[jaffka]

NL has said in his press conference that the money will be used to strengthen the squad.

This could be a good bit of business.

Thanks Tim.

[LeverEnd]

Interesting, but I imagine QPR would be able to comfortably afford what we were paying him, and them
taking it over being a lot more likely than us ending up losing him and still owing him.
Let's see what Lennon gets to use. The Sun reporting Hooper, but I can't see it.

[bobo the clown]

Anyway .... 100 pages of this thread and, in real terms Amos, Derik, Wilson, Madine and the Prince of Men.

Plus a raft of exits and a huge (^^ above discussions notwithstanding) amount taken off the wage bill.

Bravo Plymouth.

[Prufrock]

Once he moves, both our contractual obligations end. He can't force us to pay him the rest of his contact other than by refusing a move and continuing to hold up his end by playing for us. Whether we pay him anything to agree to end that contract is a matter of negotiation not law (other than any "loyalty bonuses"). What almost always happens (given the player holds most of the cards) is that the seeking club pays the loyalty bonus and then any short-fall in wages until what would have been the end of their contact. Ream doesn't get two lots of wages, one from QPR, one from us. But again, that's negotiated, not law.

In this case, it's QPR! I'll plat sawdust if they're not paying the useless bastard £20k+ so unless we've capitulated even by our own woeful negotiating standards, I'd be surprised if Ream is getting any more than his loyalty bonus from us.

[BWFC_Insane]

Once he moves, both our contractual obligations end. He can't force us to pay him the rest of his contact other than by refusing a move and continuing to hold up his end by playing for us. Whether we pay him anything to agree to end that contract is a matter of negotiation not law (other than any "loyalty bonuses"). What almost always happens (given the player holds most of the cards) is that the seeking club pays the loyalty bonus and then any short-fall in wages until what would have been the end of their contact. Ream doesn't get two lots of wages, one from QPR, one from us. But again, that's negotiated, not law.

In this case, it's QPR! I'll plat sawdust if they're not paying the useless bastard £20k+ so unless we've capitulated even by our own woeful negotiating standards, I'd be surprised if Ream is getting any more than his loyalty bonus from us.

This!

[CrazyHorse]

Ream's agent was savvy enough to bag him a 30x pay increase last time and QPR are one of richest clubs in England. And he's not going to upsticks down to London without some kind of personal incentive.

He's clearly received a substantial payrise.

[jaffka]

He also said its more than £1.4m but not yet finalised. Hoping to bring in 2 new players. Pisano and hooper?