Oliver McBurnie

So those on the board are wrong even though they were involved in the running of the club, whereas you aren’t just presuming there isn’t a sell on due to the large up front payment?

I’ll ask the question again. How have you seen the deal?

 

As I've posted before Xander, if nothing else you're consistent mate, it won't be long now before we find out Swansea need the brass .

 

Indeed there is that is constantly misquoted, all will be revealed going forward!

 

Well someones lying. It will be interesting to see who it is. Rhodes is pretty adamant there is a sell on fee, you seem pretty adamant there isn't. I have no evidence to prove either.

 

One of which is definitely privy to the contract and one isn’t connected to the contract at all.

I know who I would be backing

 

Even if it is his brother why would he have seen the contract?

 

I agree, the club can check and recheck the agreement - can anyone else?

Perhaps someone is relying on some ambiguous language?

 

I spoke to Ryan Sparks a few weeks ago, he has read over the contract which apparently is a fairly thick document and he says it clearly states that it has a 15% sell on clause and that Swansea have acknowledged the sell on.

 

I've been told there definitely is one, Rhodes did the deal.

 

McBurnie likes a tweet and wind up mate... ask the Celts

 

Of course most of the sell on will go to Rupp as he has invested heavily in this summers transfer dealings. Apparently he's almost paid twice what he originally invested to bail out Edins financial mess and in supporting the coming seasons transfer budget.

 

Yep. Everyone involved in the contract. So that would be the two clubs, FA and EFL. The player isn’t involved in the contract between the two clubs.

His involvement is with Swansea, his new club, and possibly any outstanding contractural matters with City. Not the sale of his registration

 

Is this extra investment? A loan? Or what? Nothing is showing yet at Companies House

 

With all respect Xander you're 21? Rhodes must have shown him the paperwork and he's been in this business a long long time and put plenty of these clauses in.

 

If we receive any payment it will be by instalments as we have been informed before it is how transfers are structured - when the Wells was sold. Mr Rupp or the club will not see all of any of the sell on clause payment straight away unfortunately.

 

I’d have no issue with Rupp taking the sell-on for himself, in principle. It’s fair game because he’s underwritten losses last season and this. However, those losses are largely down to his own lack of control and diligence and just a little extra financially to bring in 2-3 more of quality will make all the difference.

One area where it might help - in terms of outgoings against revenue and FFP restrictions we must be sailing pretty close to the limit. A hefty revenue boost now might help raise the limit we can commit to on wages.