do u still have to pay for a player over 24months if you already sold him?

example;

you but a player for 5mill + 3mill over 24months.

Now your playing £125'000 per month to his previous club, but what if after 1 season you then sell him for £10mill. would you still be paying his previous club the £125'00 per month for the remaining 12months?

example;

you but a player for 5mill + 3mill over 24months.

Now your playing £125'000 per month to his previous club, but what if after 1 season you then sell him for £10mill. would you still be paying his previous club the £125'00 per month for the remaining 12months?

You signed a contract with the club to pay that much over 24 months, you can't break a contract just becuase the player has gone elsewhere.

So, yes, you still pay all the money.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mattyspurs76:

example;

you but a player for 5mill + 3mill over 24months.

Now your playing £125'000 per month to his previous club, but what if after 1 season you then sell him for £10mill. would you still be paying his previous club the £125'00 per month for the remaining 12months? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You buy a car, and you have to pay 500€ each month, until 2011. But in the spring of 2009 you decide to sale it, do you think you will have to pay until 2011?

What they said.

But did you mean do the club pay off the outstanding dept to the straight away using the transfer money they have recieved for the player.

The answer is the same but personally i think it somthing that should be implemented into the game to make it more realistic as well as being to negotiate "buying out" sell on clauses for a instant sum of money.

In real life, I believe the system will work like this:

Buy Freddy from Plop Utd for 5mil + 3mil over 24 months.

12 months later, you sell Freddy for 10mil.

You have shelled out 5mil + 1.5mil so far, with 1.5m still owing to Plop Utd.

Your accountant will - I expect - give Plop Utd a call and say "Hey, we still owe you 1.5m over the next six months, but since we've sold Freddy and made a bit of a profit we'd like to give you all of the remaining money now." It would be up Plop Utd as to whether they say yes or no. This would write off the remaining balance, and enable the club to publish an immediate profit - especially important if it's a PLC.

This is, of course, only if the club's finances are in the black. If they were forced to sell Freddy due to financial problems (a la Leeds United) they would more than likely keep the original payment structure. Unless they go into administration, in which case Plop Utd get nowt.

I can't see this happening on the game, though. Not that big an issue, IMO.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Unless they go into administration, in which case Plop Utd get nowt. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, there's a point. If a club on the game goes into administration, but you sold them a player based on a 24-month structured payment, shouldn't your club's finances suffer?

Hmm.

If a signed a player on these terms, I would only sell him for a huge bid or I'd haggle to have the equal price over 24 months that I'm paying, so my monthly payments are cancelled out by the new ones.

Then any percentage or other money is straight profit. Plus, when you've finished paying off what you owe, the other club may still owe you, bit of profit there.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by backpackant:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Unless they go into administration, in which case Plop Utd get nowt. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, there's a point. If a club on the game goes into administration, but you sold them a player based on a 24-month structured payment, shouldn't your club's finances suffer?

Hmm. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that is an interesting point... in real life "footballing costs" would be paid off first and usually in full by an administrator, so I would say that it shouldn't.

Just for those mentioning about paying of the remaining monthly payments to the team you purchased the player from after selling on....

why would you? You gain nothing from it, and infact lose out because you would earn thousands from the interest.

And your profit would actually not change from the deal, just your available funds would be decreased thus you actually be in a worse position then if you just kept the monthly payments.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Hey, there's a point. If a club on the game goes into administration, but you sold them a player based on a 24-month structured payment, shouldn't your club's finances suffer?

Hmm. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I answered this on a different thread on a completely different topic.

The answer is that when a club goes into administration the Football League requires you to pay all "football creditors" in full. This is the reason why Boston United were relegated two divisions.

The problem is that HMRC (Government Tax People) think that this shouldn't be the case and that all creditors should be treated equally. This is half of the reason that Leeds United has issues too.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by backpackant:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Unless they go into administration, in which case Plop Utd get nowt. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, there's a point. If a club on the game goes into administration, but you sold them a player based on a 24-month structured payment, shouldn't your club's finances suffer?

Hmm. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

football debt always have to be paid in full.

or what MuppetMaestro had already said

I was still being paid for a player 12 months after he'd retired.

That was quite funny.

The AI does play one particular filthy dirty trick:

You buy a player with a 50% sell-on clause.

You sell him with a clause such as £1 million after scoring 10 goals. Half the transfer fee goes to the previous club, fine.

Then when he bags 10 goals for his new club, half that £1 million also goes to the old club - bummer!

That's exactly what you'd expect to happen!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by phnompenhandy:

The AI does play one particular filthy dirty trick:

You buy a player with a 50% sell-on clause.

You sell him with a clause such as £1 million after scoring 10 goals. Half the transfer fee goes to the previous club, fine.

Then when he bags 10 goals for his new club, half that £1 million also goes to the old club - bummer! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? Never noticed that. Thats something that should be fixed, there are numerous examples of players who have been sold before they've made a certain number of appearances/goals so that the club doesn't have to pay the money!

Hmm, yeah sorry, I completely misread that previous point...it isn't what I'd expect to happen at all

simple answer... as has been said... yes

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xx11:

Just for those mentioning about paying of the remaining monthly payments to the team you purchased the player from after selling on....

why would you? You gain nothing from it, and infact lose out because you would earn thousands from the interest.

And your profit would actually not change from the deal, just your available funds would be decreased thus you actually be in a worse position then if you just kept the monthly payments. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by phnompenhandy:

The AI does play one particular filthy dirty trick:

You buy a player with a 50% sell-on clause.

You sell him with a clause such as £1 million after scoring 10 goals. Half the transfer fee goes to the previous club, fine.

Then when he bags 10 goals for his new club, half that £1 million also goes to the old club - bummer! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course it does - you promised to give 50% to the club you bought him from, why do you think you can get out of it?

why would you pay the money now when any financial bod worth his/her salt will tell you to hang on for the cash as long as possible as you can invest it etc

its better to keep the money yourself rather than pay it back especially if its interest free

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by backpackant:

In real life, I believe the system will work like this:

Buy Freddy from Plop Utd for 5mil + 3mil over 24 months.

12 months later, you sell Freddy for 10mil.

You have shelled out 5mil + 1.5mil so far, with 1.5m still owing to Plop Utd.

Your accountant will - I expect - give Plop Utd a call and say "Hey, we still owe you 1.5m over the next six months, but since we've sold Freddy and made a bit of a profit we'd like to give you all of the remaining money now." It would be up Plop Utd as to whether they say yes or no. This would write off the remaining balance, and enable the club to publish an immediate profit - especially important if it's a PLC.

This is, of course, only if the club's finances are in the black. If they were forced to sell Freddy due to financial problems (a la Leeds United) they would more than likely keep the original payment structure. Unless they go into administration, in which case Plop Utd get nowt.

I can't see this happening on the game, though. Not that big an issue, IMO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

All wrong unfortunately. It would make no difference to profit. Of course, profit in the game is quite another thing to real life. Plus what other people have said about footballing debts for clubs in administration (which is frankly ridiculous).