minimum fee release clause

[donnie]

can someone explain to me the consequences of this irl..e.g cristiano ronaldo has a 1billion release clause.if real madrid release cristiano will rm pay ronaldo 1billion?
question 2. if chelsea will pay 1 billion.to whom the money will go? to cr9 or rm? thanks

[Hershie]

The clause is one in a contract saying 'if a club bid this amount for you, we will accept it'. If a club bid £1bil for C. Ronaldo then it will be accepted and the player should be aware of this.

The money goes to the club as with any usual transfer.

In other words, it's the minimum fee at which the club will be contractually obliged to 'release' or accept a bid for a player. Whether or not this also acts as a fee at which a player can buy out their contract, I don't know.

[Tomer]

Minimum release fee clause is the minimum bid the club must accept. If Chelsea was to bid 1B for Ronaldo, RM must accept and will get the money if Ronaldo decides to move.

[donnie]

ok..but i usually insert min.release clause to a contract of a player to add the interest of the player in joining my club.is there an effect on this? irl the player usually has a cut on the transfer price right?

[Kyno]

ok..but i usually insert min.release clause to a contract of a player to add the interest of the player in joining my club.is there an effect on this? irl the player usually has a cut on the transfer price right?

If any club offers the minimum release fee for your player, you will be forced to accept the offer. That's the major down side to putting a minimum release in a players contract. (In Spain, clubs are forced to do so, hence ridiculously large fees for star players).

The player does not get a cut of the transfer fee, however, the club they are joining in most cases will pay a large (relatively) signing on fee.

[El Zar]

ok..but i usually insert min.release clause to a contract of a player to add the interest of the player in joining my club.is there an effect on this? irl the player usually has a cut on the transfer price right?

No. It might actually put him off signing if the release clause is too high. The player doesn't receive a cut of the transfer fee - but you can can give him a sweeetener in the form of the signing-on fee.

[donnie]

No. It might actually put him off signing if the release clause is too high. The player doesn't receive a cut of the transfer fee - but you can can give him a sweeetener in the form of the signing-on fee.

ok..but i usually set the minimum release fee at $160million and the player always accept it.even though i can only give 35k per week and yet they are demanding 45-50k..and max signing fee to..i think irl robinho has actually demanded a cut on the transfer fee.im not sure about it though

[Giving Dick Dastardly]

ok..but i usually set the minimum release fee at $160million and the player always accept it.even though i can only give 35k per week and yet they are demanding 45-50k..and max signing fee to..i think irl robinho has actually demanded a cut on the transfer fee.im not sure about it though

When Robinho was at Santos in Brazil he had a minimum release clause of about £34m, (which is common in Brazil when big players registrations are owned by 3rd parties) but he was entitled to 40% of the transfer fee.

I remember this causing a stumbling block for R. Madrid when they were trying to sign him, as Santos were demanded the full release clause. Madrid wouldnt pay it so Robinho was trying to waive his cut of the transfer fee. I think Santos eventually accepted these terms and madrid signed him for around £20m IIRC.