https://x.com/ellismfc_/status/1907834637616910665?t=7o-xU7q1od7mq8VWTjCnVQ&s=19

Yeah.

 

See on BBC gossip that Citeh want Rogers back. Nice bit of sell on to us for the coffers if true

What sell on have we got ? 

1 hour ago, Boro 86 said:

See on BBC gossip that Citeh want Rogers back. Nice bit of sell on to us for the coffers if true

And some of that sell-on would go back in full circle to Man City wouldn't it?

5 minutes ago, Bosco's Tuft said:

And some of that sell-on would go back in full circle to Man City wouldn't it?

No they don’t get the sell on it’s ours that

2 hours ago, Donnyboro said:

No they don’t get the sell on it’s ours that

It depends on the specific contract I suppose, but I thought any sell-on agreements included a % of any future add-on payments or sell-on payments for that player, not just the actual fee.

Edited April 6, 2025Apr 6 by Bosco's Tuft

2 hours ago, Bosco's Tuft said:

It depends on the specific contract I suppose, but I thought any sell-on agreements included a % of any future add-on payments or sell-on payments for that player, not just the actual fee.

That's how it works on FM, so if we both had 10% for arguments sake, City pay 50m for Rogers, Villa get 45m and we get 5m but we owe City 10% of that so we end up with 4.5m and City would keep .5m

2 hours ago, OldManGravz said:

That's how it works on FM, so if we both had 10% for arguments sake, City pay 50m for Rogers, Villa get 45m and we get 5m but we owe City 10% of that so we end up with 4.5m and City would keep .5m

Not many include % of future sell ons. We’ve got 20 % sell on for Morgan so we’ll receive a fairly decent fee in the coming years 

The gazette article about our January targets was interesting, they mentioned 2 or 3 times that Carrick wanted to persue Iheanacho signing over Strelec. No idea how true that is but that’s how they make it sound, so that’s him blamed for Giles and Iheanacho signings now. 
 

They also mentioned we got offered Armstrong a 2nd time under more favourable terms but it was to late to do the deal. 

10 hours ago, LinoJo3 said:

The gazette article about our January targets was interesting, they mentioned 2 or 3 times that Carrick wanted to persue Iheanacho signing over Strelec. No idea how true that is but that’s how they make it sound, so that’s him blamed for Giles and Iheanacho signings now. 
 

They also mentioned we got offered Armstrong a 2nd time under more favourable terms but it was to late to do the deal. 

I think it’s the cheaper deal to do probably, with a player that has experience in the league. We couldn't afford to have a player take weeks to settle but on the flip side we’ve had a player that’s taken weeks to get up to fitness. 🤷‍♂️ 

Think he sees him as this season’s Chuba in terms of link up (not goal return unfortunately) Although to be fair he has a goal and 2 assists in last couple of games.

Do feel like I’ve seen an improvement with Ihenacho in the last game though. I noticed he was getting about the pitch much faster and seems to be getting there with his fitness.

listen if he scored the winner at Wembley he’s done his job 😂

12 hours ago, LinoJo3 said:

They also mentioned we got offered Armstrong a 2nd time under more favourable terms but it was to late to do the deal. 

Its not like he's done anything much either since going to west brom

16 hours ago, Donnyboro said:

Not many include % of future sell ons. We’ve got 20 % sell on for Morgan so we’ll receive a fairly decent fee in the coming years 

man citys add on applies to all money we receive, 

if clubs let you off their percentage of any add ons or sell on clauses we have then you would have clubs weight bids towards add ons to avoid paying the other club out,

if villa get a sell on when they let him go, we will get a piece of that too and city will get a piece of it as well.

Edited April 7, 2025Apr 7 by Rob

14 hours ago, LinoJo3 said:

The gazette article about our January targets was interesting, they mentioned 2 or 3 times that Carrick wanted to persue Iheanacho signing over Strelec. No idea how true that is but that’s how they make it sound, so that’s him blamed for Giles and Iheanacho signings now. 
 

They also mentioned we got offered Armstrong a 2nd time under more favourable terms but it was to late to do the deal. 

Tbf it’s turned out to be a blessing in disguise imo. He’s not exactly torn up any trees at West Brom and it’s given Conway the opportunity to step up and be the main man.

It's probably the reasoning why we took Iheanacho. The belief that he can play in the "10" role. Unfortunately he can't.