Diego Costa

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

Do you have any source for that? I'm not doubting you, I've just never heard of this before and am geniunly curious. Is also seems a little dubious, wouldn't it be illegal for us to just "give him" 32M? I would think we would need to talk to Atletico first. I realise this isn't the case when clubs meet the buyout clause, but if it's indeed the player who has to buy himself out, wouldn't it be illegal for us to talk to him directly?

http://espnfc.com/blog/_/name/laliga/id/1346?cc=5901

If a player in La Liga wants to leave without his employers being able to stop him and his "cláusula de rescisión" is within the realms of acceptability, the only barrier is that it should be him, and not the club he wants to join, who pays it.

Not a day goes by without my being asked about the accessibility of Diego Costa or Koke's respective buyout clauses.

But here's the rub. Given that it must be the player who pays the (let's say) 50 million euros to the Liga offices, who then devolve it to the club he's leaving, and that most players don't have seven figures in cash just lying around, it's usually the "buying" club that stumps up the money.

If they transfer that to the player so he can pay for his freedom, the Spanish authorities will deem that tax should be generated on the movement of that money. Which type of tax, and how much (potentially anywhere from 21 to 45 percent), will be dictated by a number of factors that I, decidedly not an accounting or legal specialist, decline to try to explain.

However, let's say that the buyout clause of Herrera is 35 million euros and there's 25 percent tax on it; the real fee will be 43.75 million euros. When a Spanish club deal is taking place and a player determinedly wants to go but the outfit he belongs to doesn't want to sell, then what often happens is a wee "scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" arrangement.

[Melanicus 5,208]

It is either £50m straight cash or £60m plus Torres. Either way, Diego is gonna Costalot.

[petre.ispirescu 4,928]

Release clauses in Spain work differently than the rest of the world. The buyout clause is accurate but it's actually not Chelsea who do the buyout, it's actually the player. So in Costa's case he has to pay Athletico 32M to terminate his contract. This means Chelsea has to pay Costa the amount and then he pays Athletico.

When we give Costa the money, he has to recognize this as income and pay tax on it. We have to give him the 32M + reimburse him for the income tax he'd owe. We'd have to transfer like 60M to him.

Instead it actually makes sense to not bother with the buyout clause at all and just pay Athletico a higher transfer fee, which would be beneficial to all parties. The only reason to activate the buyout is if Athletico don't want to sell, if they are willing to talk I don't expect the buyout clause to be activated at all.

THIS!

60m euros?! That's about £50m - way too much in terms of financial cost and everyone's expectations of the player. I thought his release clause was £32m!

There are few people that know about details of this business, but Bir CFC explained the situation well. And I would like to add that it's not that easy to deal will a club when a release clause is involved. I mean, it's not like faxing the offer that matches the release clause and the player is yours. The club has to accept that offer too, even if a release clause is involved. The best example I can give you is Dnipro's Konoplyanka - Liverpool triggered his release clause, but Dnepr's owner refused to let him go. Why? I can't tell. Fucked up situations with these release clauses, I know

As for the source, I can tell you El Confidencial is a respected newspaper in Spain. Not at the same level as El Pais and El Mundo, but a decent one, with trustable journalists. To be more clear, is the opposite of Daily Mail. They have an approach for the economical and financial area and they work with numbers. A lot of numbers. It's not a newspaper for everyone, the suits are their main target. You won't see guys reading it in the bus or at the Mc'Donalds.

They do not come with football stories very often, but when they do, they are right most of the times.

For 60mio, we could throw Cavani in the race too...

if it was 60m might as well bid for Cavani instead

As I said, real life football is different from Football Manager, the game.

When you decide to buy a player, you go and do your homework first. You try to find out what the club is up to, do they want to sell that player, or do they want him to stay? You talk to agents, see if the player wants to leave and so on, it's not that simple.

I bet Jose would go for Cavani if he'd be available, but my guess is he has clear signals Paris won't let him go in the summer.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

Release clauses in Spain work differently than the rest of the world. The buyout clause is accurate but it's actually not Chelsea who do the buyout, it's actually the player. So in Costa's case he has to pay Athletico 32M to terminate his contract. This means Chelsea has to pay Costa the amount and then he pays Athletico.

When we give Costa the money, he has to recognize this as income and pay tax on it. We have to give him the 32M + reimburse him for the income tax he'd owe. We'd have to transfer like 60M to him.

Instead it actually makes sense to not bother with the buyout clause at all and just pay Athletico a higher transfer fee, which would be beneficial to all parties. The only reason to activate the buyout is if Athletico don't want to sell, if they are willing to talk I don't expect the buyout clause to be activated at all.

In theory, Roman could just give Costa personal money (not the club one), meaning it wouldnt be counted in ffp?

[BloodIsBlue 291]

In theory, Roman could just give Costa personal money (not the club one), meaning it wouldnt be counted in ffp?

The backlash from that would be much worse than overspending.

[MGuerreiro 252]

http://espnfc.com/blog/_/name/laliga/id/1346?cc=5901

If a player in La Liga wants to leave without his employers being able to stop him and his "cláusula de rescisión" is within the realms of acceptability, the only barrier is that it should be him, and not the club he wants to join, who pays it.

Not a day goes by without my being asked about the accessibility of Diego Costa or Koke's respective buyout clauses.

But here's the rub. Given that it must be the player who pays the (let's say) 50 million euros to the Liga offices, who then devolve it to the club he's leaving, and that most players don't have seven figures in cash just lying around, it's usually the "buying" club that stumps up the money.

If they transfer that to the player so he can pay for his freedom, the Spanish authorities will deem that tax should be generated on the movement of that money. Which type of tax, and how much (potentially anywhere from 21 to 45 percent), will be dictated by a number of factors that I, decidedly not an accounting or legal specialist, decline to try to explain.

However, let's say that the buyout clause of Herrera is 35 million euros and there's 25 percent tax on it; the real fee will be 43.75 million euros. When a Spanish club deal is taking place and a player determinedly wants to go but the outfit he belongs to doesn't want to sell, then what often happens is a wee "scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" arrangement.

Thanks man, had no idea about this.

[Toli 977]

In most cases though, the clubs find an agreement. Instead of 32 mio pounds, lets say they make it 31.999999 or they are paying just more like Bayern did with Thagio. so the release clause isnt really activated. I think we will be able to find an agreement with Atletico, unless any club offers more. especially as we have a good relationship with them.

[duo11bluecl 207]

The backlash from that would be much worse than overspending.

Essentially that would in a sense be illegal as well, if it was allowed we could spend like 100m every year on players as Roman would just give players money and effectively players start to buy themselves out of their club. We would effectively be spending 0 every year.

Never gonna happen

[didierforever 7,349]

probably broke his foot hitting the post but ended up scoring the goal. if only we had someone like this.

[Stats 6,980]

Just suffered a horrible injury. Hope it is not a break but did look bad. But with the gash I reckon he is a certainty or possibility to miss the first leg if not both games. Hope it is not as bad as feared.

[We Hate Scouse 10,260]

Not sure what to make of it if it is a bad injury, yeah great he misses the CL games, but if we're after him it's very bad.

[petre.ispirescu 4,928]

Haven't seen the replay. Is it bad?

[We Hate Scouse 10,260]

[We Hate Scouse 10,260]

Looks broken and bad....

[We Hate Scouse 10,260]

Hairline fracture apparently, although it seems too soon for anything definite.

[Jype 6,398]

Feel bad for the guy, if it's broken he will miss not only the deciding match in the La Liga and the Champions League but also his first ever World Cup, not to mention also probably being denied the chance to get a big transfer this summer.

[MrExcalibur100 7,124]

Let's hope there's nothing broken there.The part above the gash looks like cut skin as opposed to bones sticking out.

[We Hate Scouse 10,260]

https://vine.co/v/MJ5FA1vLFFm