1 hour ago, evissy said:

Not to bring in the SD's here too much but maybe they knew Felix was a pretty safe bet in terms of his market value.

You think that us buying Felix as a makeweight to help us meet our PSR/FFP obligations by selling Gallagher, for us then not to play him, except for some minor Conference league games and then loan him out to Milan, for them not to play him either and then return him only for us to not play him at all in the CWC and then to somehow sell him for half of what we paid up front with the hope that the add ons will eventually make us a profit, was all part of the master plan by the SDs.

That's a plot line that wouldn't have bene out of place here.

I’ve read so many different stories some in € and some in £.I’ll wait till the deal is done and the numbers are in.

Sky saying a total £43.7m with add ons what ever they are.

Which would be a profit right? Do we ever get to find out if and when any of these add ons happen.

I’m sick or reading mudryk cost £80m, we paid £60m didn’t we, no way he ever achieved even the easy ones like appearances.

How and when are these add ons accounted?

4 hours ago, C3blue said:

I’ve read so many different stories some in € and some in £.I’ll wait till the deal is done and the numbers are in.

Sky saying a total £43.7m with add ons what ever they are.

Which would be a profit right? Do we ever get to find out if and when any of these add ons happen.

I’m sick or reading mudryk cost £80m, we paid £60m didn’t we, no way he ever achieved even the easy ones like appearances.

How and when are these add ons accounted?

Wouldn’t be too certain about getting these add ons. He is apparently signing a 2yr deal till 2027. He is an unserious footballer managed by Mendes who doesn’t care about his career, and will keep moving him around every few years to get his agent fees.

9 minutes ago, markpitts said:

Wouldn’t be too certain about getting these add ons. He is apparently signing a 2yr deal till 2027. He is an unserious footballer managed by Mendes who doesn’t care about his career, and will keep moving him around every few years to get his agent fees.

That works perfectly for us, because we have a massive sell-on fee on him.

This Felix stuff is just some kind financial game between Clearlake, mendes and the Saudi

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by Bob stark

11 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

They got lucky. This time last week, he was off to Benfica, and we were set to make a big loss on him.

I don't think it is luck. All of this Felix saga is not real.

3 hours ago, Clown Lake said:

That works perfectly for us, because we have a massive sell-on fee on him.

How much do you think we’ll make if he moves for free in 2027?

3 hours ago, markpitts said:

Wouldn’t be too certain about getting these add ons. He is apparently signing a 2yr deal till 2027. He is an unserious footballer managed by Mendes who doesn’t care about his career, and will keep moving him around every few years to get his agent fees.

This is what I mean, if the add ons are see out ur 2yr contract and we pay the balance that’s doable even for a nomad. At this point sell ons even at 50% ain’t going to be worth much. If anything.

Some add ons like mudryks supposed Ballon d’or or winning the CL are more like incentives that you’d happily pay £20m to see happen.

I always see especially it seems when it comes to us that they take the price WITH add ons when we buy a player, but dont seem to show the net price with add ons when we sell them. Or here to much about them after the deal is done.

You do hear about sell ons because they are in the negotiations when that player moves like say Liveramento, but nothing from say CFC get £5m from Lukaku deal cos Napoli won the league or scored x amount of goals. It just all seems very vague not from a contractual context that is written but from an accounting one.

Loan fees is another one.

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by C3blue

33 minutes ago, C3blue said:

This is what I mean, if the add ons are see out ur 2yr contract and we pay the balance that’s doable even for a nomad. At this point sell ons even at 50% ain’t going to be worth much. If anything.

Some add ons like mudryks supposed Ballon d’or or winning the CL are more like incentives that you’d happily pay £20m to see happen.

I always see especially it seems when it comes to us that they take the price WITH add ons when we buy a player, but dont seem to show the net price with add ons when we sell them. Or here to much about them after the deal is done.

You do hear about sell ons because they are in the negotiations when that player moves like say Liveramento, but nothing from say CFC get £5m from Lukaku deal cos Napoli won the league or scored x amount of goals. It just all seems very vague not from a contractual context that is written but from an accounting one.

Loan fees is another one.

We know that add ons do get paid indeed in the clubs latest accounts , just like most of our accounts the following statement appears

“ The club realised contingent fees in relation to a number of previous transfers”

Without access to the full accounting records it’s impossible to work out in respect of whom and how much is received.

This is just me guessing but contingent fees in respect of academy/ younger players would probably be heavily weighted toward sell on % . Players like Cassadei there would without doubt be a combination of transfer% and performance sums both club and players. For instance €x when he makes a full international performance.

Other than supposition , guesswork and leaks in the press, which I would caution relying on , there really isn’t any guru we can trust however sometimes there are claims on certain sites to suggest that they are ITK

For instance there clearly was a sizeable sum paid following Livermentos transfer from Southampton to Newcastle .

At the time of his transfer to Southampton it was said the fee was circa €7 million with add ons . Those add ons would clearly have been realised and whilst I don’t trust Transfermarket if you look today at the fee has been uplifted to €26 million. In effect €19 million additional income received.

We have a significant number of academy players who were sold for small fees , like CHO, like Guehi and he’s Hutchinson who if sold will bring additional income . It’s just incredibly difficult to get a handle on the numbers.

Turning to Felix there clearly will be some pretty easy add ons. I would guess, and that’s all it is, that the weight is put toward the clubs success in the next two years as opposed to his personal contribution but quite probably a sum would be payable if he sees out his two years which would almost certainly mean, unless there is a club option, that there wouldn’t be any sell on paid.

As I have said before all clubs make mistakes when it comes to transfers in. It’s far from easy predicting how a player will adjust to a new culture adapt, how he will be impacted by injuries, loss of form etc etc. The real skill is trying to mitigate any loss if the player bombs and whilst we almost certainly won’t get to know the numbers re Felix follow how his new club do over the next 2 years particularly in terms of winning anything in Saudi and just as important how they do in any continental tournaments and if he signs a contract extension that probably will tick the box re another add on.

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by terraloon

1 hour ago, C3blue said:

This is what I mean, if the add ons are see out ur 2yr contract and we pay the balance that’s doable even for a nomad. At this point sell ons even at 50% ain’t going to be worth much. If anything.

Some add ons like mudryks supposed Ballon d’or or winning the CL are more like incentives that you’d happily pay £20m to see happen.

I always see especially it seems when it comes to us that they take the price WITH add ons when we buy a player, but dont seem to show the net price with add ons when we sell them. Or here to much about them after the deal is done.

You do hear about sell ons because they are in the negotiations when that player moves like say Liveramento, but nothing from say CFC get £5m from Lukaku deal cos Napoli won the league or scored x amount of goals. It just all seems very vague not from a contractual context that is written but from an accounting one.

Loan fees is another one.

The most opaque of the lot is the murky pit of "agent fees", the paying of which we certainly seem to be at the top of the top table LOL ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c70575zx8l5o

1 hour ago, terraloon said:

As I have said before all clubs make mistakes when it comes to transfers in. It’s far from easy predicting how a player will adjust to a new culture adapt, how he will be impacted by injuries, loss of form etc etc. The real skill is trying to mitigate any loss if the player bombs and whilst we almost certainly won’t get to know the numbers re Felix follow how his new club do over the next 2 years particularly in terms of winning anything in Saudi and just as important how they do in any continental tournaments and if he signs a contract extension that probably will tick the box re another add on.

I think that the bolded is really important and where the board is massively failing with their policy. They've taken a direction that points to them thinking that they can make more money by buying and selling players like they were car-dealers, and they've set to buy young players they deem with potential non-stop with the intention of moving them on and making a profit in the process. Thus, we've seen a massive income flux of players and we see now them struggling to move some of them on. Felix being just one example, and only Mendes' shrewdness and the fact that Al-Nassr is coached by Jorge Jesus and that Ronaldo plays in it, has possibly saved their faces (and I say possibly because the given figures are a loss to begin with and we don't know any add-ons details). What they haven't understood is what you say above, that players are not always going to work out and moving on many of them is going to be difficult (and making profit out of it even more). And that football in Europe and the UK does not work like sports in the US, especially when there's only a handful of teams across the different leagues that have money for big transfer fees, but they'll only pay those for big, established players.

It's also not about making mistakes, of course not all transfers are going to work out. But that is OK when you are just adding a few players to the positions required to tweak the team. When you're buying shed loads of young players with no obvious plan to integrate them or that are not even required, while in the process you are selling your academy lads (some not worse than what you're buying) to balance the debt, then is when supporters start turning on you.

Thanks for trying to clear it up guys but a lot of if buts and maybes….. just how they want it I suppose.

How about undisclosed fee… what? How? Why?

Wish I could tell that to the taxman.

4 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

How much do you think we’ll make if he moves for free in 2027?

I doubt Mendes allows that. He will be off again in a year. Possibly to another Saudi club or most likely Benfica.

1 hour ago, Clown Lake said:

I doubt Mendes allows that. He will be off again in a year. Possibly to another Saudi club or most likely Benfica.

Massive sign on bonus by the club as there’s no transfer fee to pay, Mendes will be licking his lips at the thought of it.

4 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

The most opaque of the lot is the murky pit of "agent fees", the paying of which we certainly seem to be at the top of the top table LOL ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c70575zx8l5o

We do so much player trading it's no wonder agent fees are so high. What I find sad is that so many of us are being seduced into looking at fees, profits etc and are forgetting about the actual football side of the football club. We were duped into buying a player we didn't want .

3 hours ago, RMH said:

I think that the bolded is really important and where the board is massively failing with their policy. They've taken a direction that points to them thinking that they can make more money by buying and selling players like they were car-dealers, and they've set to buy young players they deem with potential non-stop with the intention of moving them on and making a profit in the process. Thus, we've seen a massive income flux of players and we see now them struggling to move some of them on. Felix being just one example, and only Mendes' shrewdness and the fact that Al-Nassr is coached by Jorge Jesus and that Ronaldo plays in it, has possibly saved their faces (and I say possibly because the given figures are a loss to begin with and we don't know any add-ons details). What they haven't understood is what you say above, that players are not always going to work out and moving on many of them is going to be difficult (and making profit out of it even more). And that football in Europe and the UK does not work like sports in the US, especially when there's only a handful of teams across the different leagues that have money for big transfer fees, but they'll only pay those for big, established players.

It's also not about making mistakes, of course not all transfers are going to work out. But that is OK when you are just adding a few players to the positions required to tweak the team. When you're buying shed loads of young players with no obvious plan to integrate them or that are not even required, while in the process you are selling your academy lads (some not worse than what you're buying) to balance the debt, then is when supporters start turning on you.

Excellent summary mate 👍

2027 - he comes back to Chelsea - third time lucky?

41 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

We do so much player trading it's no wonder agent fees are so high. What I find sad is that so many of us are being seduced into looking at fees, profits etc and are forgetting about the actual football side of the football club. We were duped into buying a player we didn't want .

I hate keep talking about money, mind u if Enzo doesn’t get them playing a bit faster( which to be fair I feel we did at CWC) then it’s more interesting than the game.

50 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Massive sign on bonus by the club as there’s no transfer fee to pay, Mendes will be licking his lips at the thought of it.

It is a possibility you are correct, however Mendes is practically acting as our 3rd SD at this point and I am sure he is paid handsomely in fees for working with us. Every move he makes with/for us he takes a fee. His players contracted to the agency are our second pool after Strasbourg. It would not make financial sense to scr*w us from his perspective.

2 hours ago, Clown Lake said:

It is a possibility you are correct, however Mendes is practically acting as our 3rd SD at this point and I am sure he is paid handsomely in fees for working with us. Every move he makes with/for us he takes a fee. His players contracted to the agency are our second pool after Strasbourg. It would not make financial sense to scr*w us from his perspective.

It's in his interest financially to urge us to make transfers, a fee for every one,the more the better for him, but not necessarily for us. Stability and a settled squad ( which is what we need ) isn't going to fill his pockets.

17 minutes ago, Clown Lake said:

you are correct

Just leave it there in future and we'll get on swimmingly.

Jorge Mendes has no loyalty to Chelsea, he's a super agent. What players does he (or Gestifute) represent other than Pedro Neto and Joao Felix?

17 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Just leave it there in future and we'll get on swimmingly.

Jorge Mendes has no loyalty to Chelsea, he's a super agent. What players does he (or Gestifute) represent other than Pedro Neto and Joao Felix?

Mendes got a fee for getting his client Felix the move to Chelsea, now he'll get another fee for moving him on again !

Work is going on to make Joao Felix to Chelsea happen

We spoke to transfer expert Graeme Bailey on Wednesday regarding the situation of Atletico Madrid’s Joao Felix and his transfer links with Chelsea.

He’s explained that there’s some belief the 24-year-old Atletico attacker will end up returning to Stamford Bridge, especially because football agent Jorge Mendes is working extremely hard on a deal

1 hour ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Just leave it there in future and we'll get on swimmingly.

Jorge Mendes has no loyalty to Chelsea, he's a super agent. What players does he (or Gestifute) represent other than Pedro Neto and Joao Felix?

Geovany Quenda also is. That was a deal we achieved with Mendes at the helm of the move. Diego Moreira another one. I’m sure there are other players that I am forgetting, who are either with us or have moved on.

You know me and my opinions… they’ll be there. Just be accepting of it and agree to disagree with me at times. 🙃

Edited July 28, 2025Jul 28 by Clown Lake

1 hour ago, The Rising Sun said:

Mendes got a fee for getting his client Felix the move to Chelsea, now he'll get another fee for moving him on again !

Work is going on to make Joao Felix to Chelsea happen

We spoke to transfer expert Graeme Bailey on Wednesday regarding the situation of Atletico Madrid’s Joao Felix and his transfer links with Chelsea.

He’s explained that there’s some belief the 24-year-old Atletico attacker will end up returning to Stamford Bridge, especially because football agent Jorge Mendes is working extremely hard on a deal

These are just things we have to do to get first pick on any of his players. It is what it is.

I read that including bonuses, the Félix deal has us earn a profit. The bonuses must be achievable throughout his 2 years. I’d imagine the sell on clause is there only if he leaves before achieving those bonuses.