Tom Ince

[kev776]

Where did this buy-back clause come from anyway, I thought he left us on a free transfer?

It is a "sell on" clause so we get 35% of any fee if Blackpool sell him (doesn't matter who buys him)

[Daffy Duck]

You allttthhhough ttthhhhhought you ttthhhhaw a puttthhhytat

That's Tweety, man

[Assassin]

That's Tweety, man

So it is

[ric.williams]

or are they just adding on extra to what is a fair price, to account for the 35% they'd have to give us back ?

6mil is generous

[Leyton388]

Thomas Ince's return from Blackpool to Liverpool hits deadlock as clubs fail to agree over price

Liverpool are ready to walk away from a deal for Blackpool’s Thomas Ince as they have no intention of increasing their bid for the midfielder.

By Chris Bascombe

10:00PM GMT 08 Jan 2013

CommentsComment

Blackpool have told the Merseyside club they must increase their offer for the 20 year-old, but it is now more likely Brendan Rodgers will wait until the summer before renewing interest.

The offer, lodged several weeks ago, amounted to £6 million. However, Liverpool are entitled to 35 per cent of any sale under the terms under which Ince was sold to the Championship club. That means Liverpool would be prepared to pay £4 million.

The player himself would be entitled to 10 per cent of his valuation – equating to £600,000 – which means Blackpool would receive £3.4 million from the deal. They are determined to get the full £6 million and have stated publicly on several occasions Liverpool must increase their bid to reflect such a value.
Liverpool are refusing to do that, and both Rodgers and managing director Ian Ayre have made no effort to reignite negotiations since their approach was rebuffed.

Blackpool paid just £500,000 for the youngster when he left Anfield in 2011 and Rodgers believes the 18 months he has spent in the Championship have developed his game more than had he stayed at Liverpool as a reserve over the same period.

He remains keen to bring the player to Merseyside, and Ince wants to return, but not at the figures Blackpool are quoting.

Rodgers showed last summer when he determines a player’s value, he sticks to it. He walked away from a deal for Gylfi Sigurdsson, a player he had signed for Swansea and thought would agree to follow him to Liverpool, when the figures rose beyond what Rodgers felt was feasible.

He and Ayre will apply the same principles to Blackpool. With negotiations so fraught and the position of both clubs entrenched, it is increasingly unlikely the impasse will be resolved during the course of this month.



Cheeky ****ers. So not only do they want us to cover the £6m but we must increase our offer more to cover the players fee plus the 35% sell on clause. They can swing for it IMO. They really are taking the piss.

[Fivex]

I don't understand their logic.

They're asking for £6m from everyone, of which we'd get 35% back no matter where he ended up.

However they will only sell to us for £6m net?

Is that correct?

[danperkins]

Can we though, or are they just adding on extra to what is a fair price, to account for the 35% they'd have to give us back ?

Maybe it's why we seem to be the only club talking to them about Ince, because the price is way too high without taking off the 35%, which other clubs can't do, so if we do it, really we'll be handing the 35% back for nothing, because no other club was going to pay that asking price ?

[RedReet]

There was a tribunal to determine compensation. I guess it comes from that.

I thought if it was a tribunal then we would have just got a fee, probably more than what Blackpool paid so assumed we sold at a reduced rate so we could include the clause in the contract?

[Lecter]

I don't understand their logic.

They're asking for £6m from everyone, of which we'd get 35% back no matter where he ended up.

However they will only sell to us for £6m net?

Is that correct?

I think they are looking to net £6 million for themselves

So essentially the price they are looking for is £8.1 million (less 35% = £6 million)

[Fierce]

I don't understand their logic.

They're asking for £6m from everyone, of which we'd get 35% back no matter where he ended up.

However they will only sell to us for £6m net?

Is that correct?

Yes, but nobody has ever discussed what Blackpool would say to another team, so far its only been us that has been discussed

Seems they want £6m in their sky rocket regardless of who they're selling to

[Fredo]

I don't understand their logic.

They're asking for £6m from everyone, of which we'd get 35% back no matter where he ended up.

However they will only sell to us for £6m net?

Is that correct?

From that Bascombe's article it's £6m gross, with 35% repaid back to us.

[Fivex]

They should have just said the fee is £8m from the start then rather than confusing us all.

[Fivex]

From that Bascombe's article it's £6m gross, with 35% repaid back to us.

They are determined to get the full £6 million and have stated publicly on several occasions Liverpool must increase their bid to reflect such a value.

It's even in bold on that article.

[Fredo]

He's not worth £6m, so we should bide our time.

[Fivex]

The problem is, exactly how the clause for the 1 year extension is worded.

We might not want to wait until the summer only for them to extend it for another year. I'd guess it would need agreement from both sides though.