I doubt he’d sign for them over us based on the past 3 months. Most players would at least wait until the season is over to see just how much of an improvement they have made considering they are all of 1 place above us at this point in time
Well if TAA/Henderson warmed up Bellingham for Liverpool as van Dijk did to Gakpo we might have a chance to sign him.
2 Likes
Gotta love someone starting the day saying United are as desirable as us and then before midnight the very same day we go and steal a Transfer from under their noses after they’ve done all the work.
10 Likes
Apparently The Times are going with this £60m release clause in the summer stuff.
I think it’s bullshit. If Dortmund face losing him for sixty in the summer, then they would take eighty now.
Although, it does make sense of them telling all and sundry ‘we want £100m…no, we want £120m…no, £150m to take him’ like they are desperate for someone to blink and lash in a mega bid.
1 Like
While we’ve got a dodgy record with trading on knowledge of secret releases clauses, you’d wonder whether knowledge of that might have influenced our decisions in the summer.
Jude’s at Burnley…is it still Turf Moor…anyway…he’s watching his brother…but Burnleys not far from Liverpool.
Can I get an oooooow-weeeeeeeeeeeee ma que baaaaa ma que baaaaaaaa
Make ma baadeeehhh daaaance for yaaaah
Not a clue…thought it was a strange answer to my post…not a clue
Rumours has it he’s staying overnight (accomodation and room service paid for by LFC) and then when Gakpo lands tomorrow morning, that same cabby that picked up Jude will be on it’s way to pick up Gakpo.
We live in hope…
Not far from blackpool either! 
2 Likes
If he doesn’t have a release clause, that would be very unusual for Dortmund.
Oh shit, well if Jamie O’Hara says it…That’s my NY ruined.
Who’s Jamie O’Hara again?
Joyce mentioned nothing so far when speaking about Bellingham, that would surely spread everywhere if it was the case. Highly doubt there’s a clause like Haaland had.
1 Like
Yes! I remember now, it’s all coming back to me…
1 Like
I dont think it would have changed anything this winter, but i could have seen it make a difference last summer.
Presumably the only immediate people that will know about a release clause is Bellingham, his agent and Dortmund. One of those parties under pretty much no circumstances would release that info, and it would depend on the character of the other two as to whether that info is shared with others. We’ve talked about the character of Bellingham and him keeping that info a secret sounds right up his alley, especially if he truly does have a desire to play for the Reds.
I’m certainly not discounting it just because release clauses often become public. It would help to explain how we still appear to be interested even when Dortmund themselves are talking figures that seem way beyond our reach.
Though as Dortmund is a publicly traded club, wouldn’t shareholders (ie some of their fans) have access to inspect contracts? Presumably his contract would have been inspected by fans by now wouldn’t it, unless the club have some policy that forbids shareholders from viewing the details of a contract?
I would love to read too much into the Klopp interview. He’s definitely more open about a transfer target than he normally is. But he’s also much more open in general in that interview than he normally is. Of course its better hearing those words than an alternative where he shuts the talk down straight away. But won’t count my chickens just yet.
If a player has a release clause I don’t really understand how a club can keep it quiet. I completely get that they will want to, especially if the release clause is lower than what the player would go for on the open market. So the wishes of the club are clear.
But what about the other parties?
For example, if I’m a player like Jude Bellingham, and the whole footballing world would like my services, then my agent would be duty bound to let interested parties know what’s what. He would be acting in my best interests, hearing proposals and so on and so forth.
The only way the information doesn’t come out is if the selling club, Dortmund in this instance, make the contract legally tight so no other parties, apart from player, agent and selling club, can be informed of the release clause.
But then even at that point, I don’t get it.
Because as soon as an offer is made that hits the release clause, isn’t the selling club then legally bound to say it has been activated?
And if not, I don’t really understand the function of the release clause.
The Heinze situation failed back in the day because of some supposed violation of the disclosure of the clauses existence, which Fergie successfully argued made it invalid to the party (us) to whom it was disclosed.
I don’t think that level of secrecy is normal though, but it is in the selling party’s interest to keep it under wraps. It was team Halaand who spread word about his release, and Dortmund just seemed to accept that was part of the deal of landing him in the first place, especially as the clause became a bargaining chip in the contract extension he got there.
With other situations you would just have all parties keeping their cards close to their chest and respectful negotiations between trusted parties may see the existence of the clause disclosed as a way of managing the player’s exit in a way that is most beneficial to them. Remember Dortmund didnt want to sell in the summer because of sporting reasons. They may have leaned on interested parties who enquired last spring to wait until the clause became active so they got another year of football out of him to help them pull a young team shorn of key players together enough to make a CL qualification run.
Releases clauses require the entire fee be paid up front. Some of them require it be the player himself who has to pay it, which then has a load of additional tax implications for the buying club who have to pay the player the lump sum plus additional tax. So in lots of ways they are more complex than the normal offer that structures the payment over installments with various add ons. So the chances of someone inadvertently activating it are essentially nil.
2 Likes
Thanks for the info.
So let’s imagine the release clause is €70M (I’m making up the number).
If we bid €70M isn’t the selling club then duty bound to say we have hit the release clause?
And then if there are particular terms in how the money is to be paid e.g. all up front in one lump sum, the selling club discloses that information so they get the money in the manner stipulated in the release clause?