Ryan Sessegnon

[Finney Is Back]

What is an unreasonable price, when it's completely a sellers' market?

It's why Hazard's £80m needs to be our benchmark for Eriksen.

I've said all along that we wouldn't get anything like that for Eriksen due to his contract situation. Hazard is a marquee type player that the Madrid president needed to sign to keep the fans off of his back. Unfortunately Eriksen doesn't have that same star quality. Eriksen's transfer is further complicated in the fact that it seems he only wants to move to very specific clubs and those very specific clubs would probably be more than happy to pick him up in 1 year's time for no transfer fee, with them having to use their funds on other (marquee type) players this year.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Who knows?

All I can say is that, IMO, the deals that have gone through tribunal have all ended up at a far lower cost than anticipated.

As Bedfordspurs says, its about potential, and who knows how a tribunal really judges that?

I think Danny Ings' move was the start of that changing somewhat. Of course there is still a risk for Fulham as the development fee they would receive from team overseas would be paltry in comparison (and I could see clubs like Dortmund or Leipzig making the player a big offer in a year's time)

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I think Danny Ings' move was the start of that changing somewhat. Of course there is still a risk for Fulham as the development fee they would receive from team overseas would be paltry in comparison (and I could see clubs like Dortmund or Leipzig making the player a big offer in a year's time)

Precedent disagrees so far.

Its logical to assume things will go up, but who knows when they will - and then by how much?

So far, the answer is slowly and not by a lot...

 

[r-u-s-x]

You think it would be that high? Ings went for about £8m didnt he? Why would Sessegnon be £20m?

Ings went for 12M in the end I think, the markets moved loads since then and Sessignon is a first team player which increases the value. All guesses of course but I was basing this on Ings.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I think the Solanke one is interesting, seems the clubs agreed a deal outside of tribunal. Perhaps both fearing its outcome lead them to just get something sensible done.

No that’s normal form what I’ve seen
Most clubs don’t want the agro of a tribunal and agree to “disagree” to get a deal done

 

[r-u-s-x]

Precedent disagrees so far.

Its logical to assume things will go up, but who knows when they will - and then by how much?

So far, the answer is slowly and not by a lot...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jul/10/transfer-tribunal-danny-ings-liverpool-burnley
http://fullcontactlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery/


PFCC hearings require each club to provide evidence to support their valuation of the player in question. In making its judgment the committee will take into account the costs of both clubs in operating a Football Academy or Centre of Excellence, as well as the age and playing record of the player, the length of time he was registered with his original club, the terms offered by both clubs, the status of the two clubs, the substantiated interest shown by other clubs in acquiring the registration of the player and any amounts paid by the original club to acquire the player in the first place.

In deciding on a compensation figure, it is not uncommon for the PFCC to set fees that build as the player becomes more established at first team level. It has now become quite usual for clubs to receive a basic compensation fee with further payments becoming due on the player’s debut, following a certain numbers of first-team appearances and after international appearances. It is also usual for there to be a sell-on fee should the player be sold at a profit at any point in the future.


DANNY INGS

• Danny Ings signed for Burnley as a 19 year old in the summer of 2011 after many years at Bournemouth. It was reported that Burnley had paid a transfer fee in the region of £1 million.
• Danny appeared 122 times for Burnley in the League, scoring 38 goals, with 11 of those goals coming in the 2014/15 season in the Premier League.
• Signing for Liverpool in the summer of 2015 as a free agent, the PFCC would ultimately order Liverpool to pay Burnley an initial compensation fee of £6.5 million.
• Additionally, Liverpool must pay up to £1.5 million based on further appearances and also 20% of any profit they make in the event that they sell the player to another club.

 

[metalgear]

So we pay the same price for two of them even though one is better?

Sent from my SM-G975F using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

No that’s normal form what I’ve seen
Most clubs don’t want the agro of a tribunal and agree to “disagree” to get a deal done

Most likely because, IMO, they dont fancy the tribunal will give them a favourable outcome...

 

[Gazza Dazzla]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jul/10/transfer-tribunal-danny-ings-liverpool-burnley
http://fullcontactlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery/


PFCC hearings require each club to provide evidence to support their valuation of the player in question. In making its judgment the committee will take into account the costs of both clubs in operating a Football Academy or Centre of Excellence, as well as the age and playing record of the player, the length of time he was registered with his original club, the terms offered by both clubs, the status of the two clubs, the substantiated interest shown by other clubs in acquiring the registration of the player and any amounts paid by the original club to acquire the player in the first place.

In deciding on a compensation figure, it is not uncommon for the PFCC to set fees that build as the player becomes more established at first team level. It has now become quite usual for clubs to receive a basic compensation fee with further payments becoming due on the player’s debut, following a certain numbers of first-team appearances and after international appearances. It is also usual for there to be a sell-on fee should the player be sold at a profit at any point in the future.


DANNY INGS

• Danny Ings signed for Burnley as a 19 year old in the summer of 2011 after many years at Bournemouth. It was reported that Burnley had paid a transfer fee in the region of £1 million.
• Danny appeared 122 times for Burnley in the League, scoring 38 goals, with 11 of those goals coming in the 2014/15 season in the Premier League.
• Signing for Liverpool in the summer of 2015 as a free agent, the PFCC would ultimately order Liverpool to pay Burnley an initial compensation fee of £6.5 million.
• Additionally, Liverpool must pay up to £1.5 million based on further appearances and also 20% of any profit they make in the event that they sell the player to another club.

So £8m + 20% sell on.

The sell on clause seems reasonable to me, if he’s the next Bale then the developing club will rightly get a good clip of the transfer, but if he’s a dud then the buying club only really has to pay the initial lump sum.

 

[r-u-s-x]

2015 he moved to Liverpool - hence I think the Tribunal will have a higher figure.

 

[JerusalemMan]

https://www.football365.com/news/ryan-sessegnon-the-perfectly-pliable-pochettino-player

I really like Seb Stafford-Bloor's writing.

 

[Modric THFC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1159023903362244610

 

[Rorschach]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1159023903362244610

This looks like a good deal for both teams if it happens

I hope we have a buy back clause on Onomah. There is a very talented player in there from what I have seen of him. He just needs to sort out the mental side of his game to I need TP for my bunghole a level.

 

[camspur]

This looks like a good deal for both teams if it happens

I hope we have a buy back clause on Onomah. There is a very talented player in there from what I have seen of him. He just needs to sort out the mental side of his game to I need TP for my bunghole a level.

.

That's what the loan deals to Villa and Wednesday were supposed to do, nothing there showed he could.

 

[Rorschach]

That's what the loan deals to Villa and Wednesday were supposed to do, nothing there showed he could.

That's fair but my point was more that the talent is in there. Whether he'll make the most of it is looking less likely but it is still not too late for him.

 

[Modric THFC]

More from Kilpatrick

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/tottenham/paulo-dybala-update-tottenham-still-pushing-for-65m-transfer-ahead-of-deadline-a4207636.html

Fulham’s Ryan Sessegnon is expected to seal a £25m deadline-day move to Spurs, who have agreed to include Joshua Onomah, the 22-year-old midfielder, in the package.

 

[metalgear]

I hope we don't and get max value for him

Onomah has potential however we've moved up to the next level

This looks like a good deal for both teams if it happens

I hope we have a buy back clause on Onomah. There is a very talented player in there from what I have seen of him. He just needs to sort out the mental side of his game to I need TP for my bunghole a level.

.

Sent from my SM-T835 using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[parklane1]

Sounds like a good deal, not seen anything in Onomah that would suggest he would have a future here.

 

[Modric THFC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1159208805609201665

 

[monkeybarry]

That's what the loan deals to Villa and Wednesday were supposed to do, nothing there showed he could.

He might just need a stable environment. Permanently at a club means if he works his way into the team, it's then his to lose.
A loan means working your way in twice and has lots of uncertainty.

Time will tell I guess.
Personally, I think he'll have a few good years at Fulham and the become a PL/Champ yo-yo player, taking in Palace, West Ham, Saudi Sportswashing Machine, a plucky promotion team and ending up at Middlesbrough in his late 20s.