| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 09:53 - Mar 31 with 1471 views | bsw72 |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 09:40 - Mar 31 by PhilTWTD |
While I'm sure that's true, if we're relegated and big clubs come knocking, I don't think there's much doubt Delap would move on and for less than would be the case if he were sold when a Premier League player. |
Completely agree, and I would be disappointed if we stood in the way of players who can move on to bigger and better things (such as Delap) - but historically when we have been relegated, our best players have left for less than fair value, to average PL clubs.
Am not convinced many of our squad would be nailed on starters at other PL clubs, and am hoping with the backing of the owners, and KM in charge we continue to build on our squad of our younger talented players.
Delap will probably move on, but as MA says, hopefully more on our terms. |  | |  |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 10:06 - Mar 31 with 1397 views | tractorboy1978 |
The bigger story from that for me is that we had interest/offers for a few other players in January. It might be a harder summer window than I was hoping in terms of keeping players. |  | | |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 10:08 - Mar 31 with 1382 views | Trequartista |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 08:59 - Mar 31 by hoppy |
Grrr…
There are two ways in which you can help support our dedicated team of journalists to achieve this Grrrrr. Can’t read it…
1 - Read for free with personalised ads. You give consent to the use of cookies to store and access personal data on your device. This can include the use of unique identifiers and information about your browsing patterns to determine the advertising you see, and create the best possible user experience on this website. You will have access to our content for free and enable this website to be funded by advertising revenue.
2 - Pay to remove personalised ads. You can access the same content but with reduced tracking and without sharing your personal data for advertising purposes. You will continue to see advertising but it will no longer be personalised in nature. |
firefox, f9, f5 |  |
| |
| Yep…. on 10:11 - Mar 31 with 1374 views | NeedhamChris |
| Yep…. on 09:28 - Mar 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
No, he quite clearly states he won't comment on individual contracts on any players, so he wouldn't have "just denied it". And saying “we didn’t sell in January” doesn't remotely confirm we will in the summer either. It just confirms the board will back him if he doesn't want to sell (any player).
The only thing confirmed in this 'story' is Ashton won't confirm anything. |
From a purely legal perspective - confirming the non-existence of a non-existent clause wouldn't be a breach of contract. So I think the existence of a buyback clause is fairly nailed on now (especially with Phil believing it too). | |
| |
| There’s a fine line…. on 10:17 - Mar 31 with 1349 views | Bloots |
| Yep…. on 09:41 - Mar 31 by Churchman |
That’s how I read it too. No more than that. I am a bit confused as to why people don’t take what is said at face value and choose to read more negatively into it. If they have sources that contradict what MA has said, let’s hear it and who those sources are.
If Delap is bought back compulsorily for the fee we paid by Man City or the sell on fee is all the profit or the club announces a Sheepshanks fire sale, that’ll be the time to challenge the owners and the decision makers in my view. |
….between taking things negatively and looking at everything through blue tinted specs.
The reality is obviously going to be somewhere in between.
You yourself are exaggerating by saying that we can only challenge the owners if we make no profit on Delap. That plainly won’t happen. Equally we won’t be selling him for £100m+ like some have claimed.
It wasn’t long ago that many in here were claiming that there was no clause in the purchase at all, the fact that there is is now widely accepted.
We need to be realistic and accept that Ashton isn’t the master of deals that some people claim he is and that our relegation puts us in a weaker negotiating position than if we’d stayed up.
Personally I expect we’ll sell him in the summer and probably clear about £15m to £20m profit.
That’s fine, nothing more nothing less. |  |
| "He's been a really positive influence on my life, I think he's a great man" - TWTD User (May 2025) |
| |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 10:20 - Mar 31 with 1312 views | SaffronWaldenBlues |
A political response, essentially just telling us "don't believe what the papers say". Even if it were true, much like the Brandon Williams stuff, he's not going to admit it to the EADT is he? Were people expecting him to say:
"Oh yeah, City can have him back for £30million, so they can sell him on for even more. We were just desperate to get any kind of deal done this summer, and we didn't worry about protecting the club's interests at all. Oh, renew your Season Tickets btw for another journey against adversity folks!"
No, he's going to keep it quiet, there's nothing to suggest City are really that keen on him anyway and given they are probably going to want to trim the fat post getting their hands slapped over the charges next season they are hardly going to be spending big on players that won't get anywhere near their first team. [Post edited 31 Mar 10:21]
|  |
| An East Anglian Town overtaken by Londoners |
| |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 10:24 - Mar 31 with 1285 views | SaffronWaldenBlues |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 10:06 - Mar 31 by tractorboy1978 |
The bigger story from that for me is that we had interest/offers for a few other players in January. It might be a harder summer window than I was hoping in terms of keeping players. |
There will be sales (and loans out) to cover the relegation in the summer, we can expect anyone from Delap, Davis, Hutchinson, Philogene, and co to leave. Nature of being relegated, all sides that drop have to make sales.
We will just have to recruit a lot smarter in the summer to supplement what we still have. | |
| An East Anglian Town overtaken by Londoners |
| |
| Yep…. on 10:25 - Mar 31 with 1287 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Yep…. on 10:11 - Mar 31 by NeedhamChris |
From a purely legal perspective - confirming the non-existence of a non-existent clause wouldn't be a breach of contract. So I think the existence of a buyback clause is fairly nailed on now (especially with Phil believing it too). |
A confidentiality clause covering the terms of the contract generally would clearly cover this.... | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Yep…. on 10:28 - Mar 31 with 1277 views | blueasfook |
| Yep…. on 09:28 - Mar 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
No, he quite clearly states he won't comment on individual contracts on any players, so he wouldn't have "just denied it". And saying “we didn’t sell in January” doesn't remotely confirm we will in the summer either. It just confirms the board will back him if he doesn't want to sell (any player).
The only thing confirmed in this 'story' is Ashton won't confirm anything. |
I read it as we didnt need to sell in January. Whether we need to sell in summer is a different story...
When we are relegated from the premier league, there is no way I can see we will retain Delap. |  |
| |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 10:47 - Mar 31 with 1192 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
He really didn't add anything. Also, would it be breach of contract to confirm whether there is a buy back clause?
Only if there was also a confidentiality clause? |  |
| |
| There’s a fine line…. on 11:44 - Mar 31 with 1109 views | Churchman |
| There’s a fine line…. on 10:17 - Mar 31 by Bloots |
….between taking things negatively and looking at everything through blue tinted specs.
The reality is obviously going to be somewhere in between.
You yourself are exaggerating by saying that we can only challenge the owners if we make no profit on Delap. That plainly won’t happen. Equally we won’t be selling him for £100m+ like some have claimed.
It wasn’t long ago that many in here were claiming that there was no clause in the purchase at all, the fact that there is is now widely accepted.
We need to be realistic and accept that Ashton isn’t the master of deals that some people claim he is and that our relegation puts us in a weaker negotiating position than if we’d stayed up.
Personally I expect we’ll sell him in the summer and probably clear about £15m to £20m profit.
That’s fine, nothing more nothing less. |
I don’t agree. There is a time to wade in and a time to take at face value and not to read to much into something. That’s not blue tinted spectacles, that’s being objective. I’ll bust into anyone if I think there’s just cause whether it’s Trump, Sheepshanks, Starmer, Boris or Evans as my posts on this board demonstrate..
What I won’t to is wheedle negativity into a statement that basically says the club has protected itself when it comes to the inevitable moving on of a player. I believe one should take his word for it until proven otherwise, i.e. challenge on the basis of some sort of substance rather than reading into something that isn’t necessarily there.
Nobody has claimed he is master of deals or anything else, though he managed to sew up Evans like a kippers wotsit over Webster. Neither is he Satan as Bristol fans claim. He is a CEO who from what we know has done a good job, by and large. Has he made mistakes? Hope so because if he hasn’t that means he’s done f all.
Nor has anyone on here claimed there’s no sell on clause. What some have said is that it was unlikely to be on the same basis as Villa/Philogene and I personally doubt that it is. 10%? 20% sell on? That’s the way a lot of big money deals are done.
As for his value, what makes you say he will go for £15m - £20m profit? I take it you work that on the basis of a £30m - £40m odd fee. So Southampton want £100m plus for their young lad, Chelsea paid over £50m for Nkunku and Spurs paid £40m for Archie Gray, ripped a new one by Delap.
Why, unless Ashton has lied, would we let Delap go for anything but a premium price? Young English centre forward, destined to play for England who has troubled a lot of PL teams virtually on his own. It’s not as if forwards are thick on the ground. What that price is? No idea but looking at transfer inflation, there’s a lot of money sloshing about in the PL, especially given it’s fast becoming a closed shop.
At the moment plenty of people are looking at everything negatively, including one or two that will post nothing but misery. That’s ok, it’s a forum and people can say what they like within reason. But if it’s just going to be a perspective free mechanism for piling in on players, managers, CEOs and others including turning anything said into something it isn’t, then there’s little point to it. |  | | |
| Yep…. on 12:04 - Mar 31 with 1042 views | hoppy |
| Yep…. on 09:52 - Mar 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
They're just trying to be clever and condescending. |
For anyone not understanding this comment, it means talking down to, or looking down on.
Hope that helps. |  |
| |
| Yep…. on 12:35 - Mar 31 with 985 views | blueasfook |
| Yep…. on 12:04 - Mar 31 by hoppy |
For anyone not understanding this comment, it means talking down to, or looking down on.
Hope that helps. |
I knew that already, but thanks and well done. | |
| |
| There’s a fine line…. on 13:48 - Mar 31 with 906 views | Smoresy |
| There’s a fine line…. on 11:44 - Mar 31 by Churchman |
I don’t agree. There is a time to wade in and a time to take at face value and not to read to much into something. That’s not blue tinted spectacles, that’s being objective. I’ll bust into anyone if I think there’s just cause whether it’s Trump, Sheepshanks, Starmer, Boris or Evans as my posts on this board demonstrate..
What I won’t to is wheedle negativity into a statement that basically says the club has protected itself when it comes to the inevitable moving on of a player. I believe one should take his word for it until proven otherwise, i.e. challenge on the basis of some sort of substance rather than reading into something that isn’t necessarily there.
Nobody has claimed he is master of deals or anything else, though he managed to sew up Evans like a kippers wotsit over Webster. Neither is he Satan as Bristol fans claim. He is a CEO who from what we know has done a good job, by and large. Has he made mistakes? Hope so because if he hasn’t that means he’s done f all.
Nor has anyone on here claimed there’s no sell on clause. What some have said is that it was unlikely to be on the same basis as Villa/Philogene and I personally doubt that it is. 10%? 20% sell on? That’s the way a lot of big money deals are done.
As for his value, what makes you say he will go for £15m - £20m profit? I take it you work that on the basis of a £30m - £40m odd fee. So Southampton want £100m plus for their young lad, Chelsea paid over £50m for Nkunku and Spurs paid £40m for Archie Gray, ripped a new one by Delap.
Why, unless Ashton has lied, would we let Delap go for anything but a premium price? Young English centre forward, destined to play for England who has troubled a lot of PL teams virtually on his own. It’s not as if forwards are thick on the ground. What that price is? No idea but looking at transfer inflation, there’s a lot of money sloshing about in the PL, especially given it’s fast becoming a closed shop.
At the moment plenty of people are looking at everything negatively, including one or two that will post nothing but misery. That’s ok, it’s a forum and people can say what they like within reason. But if it’s just going to be a perspective free mechanism for piling in on players, managers, CEOs and others including turning anything said into something it isn’t, then there’s little point to it. |
I'm sticking all my chips in the Phil camp that these clauses exist. They were reported at the time of the transfer by reliable sources. Town fans understandably hoped initial stories contained imprecise language, that "buy-back' really meant "matching", but a respected sports journalism site has since corroborated those reports and fleshed out details further.
Our man Mark has said we're "very, very, very well protected", "hell yes" to departures only on Ipswich's terms, and "never quite fact" to what's been reported. Emphatic, enthusiastic responses that we've come to know well, none of which is really incongruous with the outside reports on Delap's situation. | | | |
| There’s a fine line…. on 14:54 - Mar 31 with 810 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| There’s a fine line…. on 10:17 - Mar 31 by Bloots |
….between taking things negatively and looking at everything through blue tinted specs.
The reality is obviously going to be somewhere in between.
You yourself are exaggerating by saying that we can only challenge the owners if we make no profit on Delap. That plainly won’t happen. Equally we won’t be selling him for £100m+ like some have claimed.
It wasn’t long ago that many in here were claiming that there was no clause in the purchase at all, the fact that there is is now widely accepted.
We need to be realistic and accept that Ashton isn’t the master of deals that some people claim he is and that our relegation puts us in a weaker negotiating position than if we’d stayed up.
Personally I expect we’ll sell him in the summer and probably clear about £15m to £20m profit.
That’s fine, nothing more nothing less. |
"It wasn’t long ago that many in here were claiming that there was no clause in the purchase at all, the fact that there is is now widely accepted."
I'd say you're cherry-picking with a claim like that. Some might have said that, but the majority were saying that a buy-back most likely exists (it was reported by credible sources when Delap was signed), but only questioned the credibility of the figures being bandied around. Many were claiming that no one knew the value of the buy-back, not that it didn't exist. [Post edited 31 Mar 14:55]
| | | |
| Yep…. on 14:58 - Mar 31 with 781 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| Yep…. on 12:04 - Mar 31 by hoppy |
For anyone not understanding this comment, it means talking down to, or looking down on.
Hope that helps. |
That's an excellent example of being condescending. The irony of it. | | | |
| Nope, MANY were claiming…. on 15:01 - Mar 31 with 768 views | Bloots |
| There’s a fine line…. on 14:54 - Mar 31 by SuffolkPunchFC |
"It wasn’t long ago that many in here were claiming that there was no clause in the purchase at all, the fact that there is is now widely accepted."
I'd say you're cherry-picking with a claim like that. Some might have said that, but the majority were saying that a buy-back most likely exists (it was reported by credible sources when Delap was signed), but only questioned the credibility of the figures being bandied around. Many were claiming that no one knew the value of the buy-back, not that it didn't exist. [Post edited 31 Mar 14:55]
|
….that there wasn’t a “buy back” and that it was a “matching” clause, which is an entirely different thing.
I stand by my wording entirely.
It probably won’t matter anyway, unless City buy him early in the window at the agreed fee and move him on straight away for a profit. | |
| "He's been a really positive influence on my life, I think he's a great man" - TWTD User (May 2025) |
| |
| Yep…. on 15:12 - Mar 31 with 724 views | Dubtractor |
| Yep…. on 14:58 - Mar 31 by SuffolkPunchFC |
That's an excellent example of being condescending. The irony of it. |
Hoppy, do you mind if I administer a whoosh on your behalf? [Post edited 31 Mar 15:12]
|  |
| |
| Nope, MANY were claiming…. on 15:12 - Mar 31 with 724 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| Nope, MANY were claiming…. on 15:01 - Mar 31 by Bloots |
….that there wasn’t a “buy back” and that it was a “matching” clause, which is an entirely different thing.
I stand by my wording entirely.
It probably won’t matter anyway, unless City buy him early in the window at the agreed fee and move him on straight away for a profit. |
Yes, there absolutely were a few that said that (and were corrected at the time), but I stand by my challenge that it was many
A balanced view would look at the yay and nay sayers, and my recollection is that those claiming no buy-back clause were a minority. [Post edited 31 Mar 15:26]
| | | |
| Fair enough…. on 15:25 - Mar 31 with 667 views | Bloots |
| Nope, MANY were claiming…. on 15:12 - Mar 31 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Yes, there absolutely were a few that said that (and were corrected at the time), but I stand by my challenge that it was many
A balanced view would look at the yay and nay sayers, and my recollection is that those claiming no buy-back clause were a minority. [Post edited 31 Mar 15:26]
|
….if that’s your recollection.
I’m not one to argue the toss over things like that. | |
| "He's been a really positive influence on my life, I think he's a great man" - TWTD User (May 2025) |
| |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 16:00 - Mar 31 with 595 views | olimar |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 10:47 - Mar 31 by Marshalls_Mullet |
He really didn't add anything. Also, would it be breach of contract to confirm whether there is a buy back clause?
Only if there was also a confidentiality clause? |
Thought that was a bit of a weird position to take too. It may technically be true, but doubt anyone who might claim a breach of contract (i.e. the player, presumably) would be in any way bothered.
Id imagine if you asked someone involved in Chelseas recruitment, for example, they will know all the details, probably because the players agent has told them or maybe even Ashton has. Suspect within the game its common knowledge, just doesnt want to get into discussing it publicly about a player who we dont want to admit we are looking at selling. | | | |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 19:49 - Mar 31 with 487 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| Mark Ashton on Delap ‘buyback’ clause… on 16:00 - Mar 31 by olimar |
Thought that was a bit of a weird position to take too. It may technically be true, but doubt anyone who might claim a breach of contract (i.e. the player, presumably) would be in any way bothered.
Id imagine if you asked someone involved in Chelseas recruitment, for example, they will know all the details, probably because the players agent has told them or maybe even Ashton has. Suspect within the game its common knowledge, just doesnt want to get into discussing it publicly about a player who we dont want to admit we are looking at selling. |
This misses the point of a confidentiality agreement. The agreement will bind all parties, including agents.
If the information needs to be shared with a third party, then everyone covered by the confidentiality agreement will have to agree with the detail being shared, and the third party receiving the information will need to sign an NDA before receiving the information.
This will prevent the detail being common knowledge, keeping it on a ‘need to know basis’. Of course this doesn’t make it impossible that someone may be indiscreet, but that could seriously damage their reputation, not to mention possible material damages. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
