The Mail claims Sean Dyche profit shares in the sale of Academy graduates

[Chester Perry]

I see Pep has signed a new 2 year deal at City

I bet what's in his contract is eye watering

he was on about £19 million a year - when he first joined he insisted on having a house in the centre of the city - that is what he was used too - the club even bought land to build one for him (because there are no decent houses in the centre of Manchester) - he soon decided that he liked his apartment well enough though

[Grumps]

Dyche says story is factually incorrect.... There's a surprise

[warksclaret]

Is Sean responsible for our rise and extended stay at the top table - Yes, in good part, definitely not him alone though - but I am not sure you actually mean that if you consider the wider implications. He is paid what appears to be a Premier League standard of circa 1.2 - 1.5 times that of his highest paid player - his contributions have led to a higher level of revenue, but have also contributed to that revenue hitting a ceiling - salaries structures and the ongoing cost of the infrastructure he has seemed to want in place (remember a significant part of development in recent years has been for the benefit of the players at both Gawthorpe and Turf Moor) leave very little room for manoeuvre when it comes to transfer fees - which is something he has consistently refused to accept.

Yes and to put it in to context Guardiola earns 6-7 times more pa than SD, yet if Pep was to manage BFC with the current squad and lack of spending I doubt very much he could guarrantee us 5 years in the PL, maybe not even one without relegation

[arise_sir_charge]

Quite a bit, but the fact you are asking this question means it is too hard to explain

Go on, humour me, but if it's the same as the response above about those people not wearing tracksuits then don't bother.

As for tax efficiency, SD having such a clause in his contract suggests any payment would be PAYE. Now that is arguably the least tax efficient way for both employee and employer.

[arise_sir_charge]

The way I look at it, is he only makes money IF he is successful. It also gives him a good reason to push the kids, as he hasn't you have to presume they aren't ready yet.

No problem with this.

Yet you are massively against the muted Egyptian takeover which is surely in the same boat.......they will only make money if successful.

[Paul Waine]

The only bit I find concerning about this is who has leaked this information to the press? I imagine very few people had knowledge of such a clause in the manager's contract; the manager himself, his agent and maybe a few senior people at the club.

Now, I can't see what benefit Dyche or his agent gain by this information being made public, so who at the club has told the press about it, and why?

Yet more proof, as though it was needed, that our football club is currently in a right state.

Hi John, I've not read the posts after your's, so maybe someone else has already made this comment. There are two other groups of people who, if the reports of takeover discussions are accurate, will have access to this information, i.e. the people doing the due diligence for the potential buyers of the club. Any new buyer will need to know all the details of every contract that the club has in place including contracts with players, coaching staff and all admin staff - and, extending to all the other contracts, such as Barnfield for the recent construction etc etc etc.

As we've already seen some evidence of press leaks re one or both potential bidders, it's very likely that it's a member of one of their teams that has spoken with a journo (or two) about SD's contract.

UTC

[Grumps]

Hi John, I've not read the posts after your's, so maybe someone else has already made this comment. There are two other groups of people who, if the reports of takeover discussions are accurate, will have access to this information, i.e. the people doing the due diligence for the potential buyers of the club. Any new buyer will need to know all the details of every contract that the club has in place including contracts with players, coaching staff and all admin staff - and, extending to all the other contracts, such as Barnfield for the recent construction etc etc etc.

As we've already seen some evidence of press leaks re one or both potential bidders, it's very likely that it's a member of one of their teams that has spoken with a journo (or two) about SD's contract.

UTC

To what benefit?

[Paul Waine]

To what benefit?

Hi Grumps, are you asking what benefit a potential buyer might get from providing details of SD's contract to a journo? Let's try "more benefit" than either SD or any of the senior people at BFC would get from doing it. If there was benefit in the club/SD "leaking" these details, don't you think it would have already been done? Now, according to media reports, there are two outside groups vying to buy BFC. I'd put the benefits in one or other of their camps. Maybe it's been leaked by one group that feel they are at risk of coming second? Maybe it's been leaked by a group that have decided they don't want to retain SD? or they do want to retain SD, and will offer him an improved contract? Maybe... lot's of things.

Just saying....

UTC

[Jakubclaret]

Well, if true, there are two unsurprising but welcome conclusions.

1. He could have sold McNeil and earned himself some money; he didn't.
2. He could pick players that he thinks aren't really ready to earn himself some money; he doesn't.

If it proves one thing, even if it's something that we didn't doubt anyway, it's that while he's under contract he will do what's best for the club rather than screwing the last penny for himself.

I don't think you've presented the best examples to be fair, McNeil's value is likely to rise he's pre peak so why would you cash out now or before in them circumstances & picking players not ready probably represents a greater risk to losing your job thus increasing the likelihood of damaging your own reputation in the event of form detoriating which it would, the best 11 are struggling already bar cork for obvious reasons so they'd be no logic doing that to earn a few quid the downsides are more financially damaging on a reward to risk basis. Them reason's apart I think he's on the level & not the kind of the gentleman who'd try to do us over he'd be doing himself over more in any case.

[Lowbankclaret]

Didn't Cotterill have a percentage profit clause from transfers?

I suspect these sorts of arrangements are fairly common. I would hope the coaching staff themselves get some sort of reward too.

Yes Steve had a clause in his contract too.

[Grumps]

Hi Grumps, are you asking what benefit a potential buyer might get from providing details of SD's contract to a journo? Let's try "more benefit" than either SD or any of the senior people at BFC would get from doing it. If there was benefit in the club/SD "leaking" these details, don't you think it would have already been done? Now, according to media reports, there are two outside groups vying to buy BFC. I'd put the benefits in one or other of their camps. Maybe it's been leaked by one group that feel they are at risk of coming second? Maybe it's been leaked by a group that have decided they don't want to retain SD? or they do want to retain SD, and will offer him an improved contract? Maybe... lot's of things.

Just saying....

UTC

Yes, sorry I was asking what benefit either side would get by leaking that info. I don't see any, but it's a weird world.

[LAM]

Much coveted? Is he really?

Huge Dyche fan by the way, but thought if he was much coveted in the summer he’d have gone.

[Colburn_Claret]

Yet you are massively against the muted Egyptian takeover which is surely in the same boat.......they will only make money if successful.

Thats like comparing gloss paint to fish and chips

[Colburn_Claret]

Didn't Harry Redknapp profit from player sales too?

Harry never made a penny.



However his dog did very nicely

[TheFamilyCat]

Hi Grumps, are you asking what benefit a potential buyer might get from providing details of SD's contract to a journo? Let's try "more benefit" than either SD or any of the senior people at BFC would get from doing it. If there was benefit in the club/SD "leaking" these details, don't you think it would have already been done? Now, according to media reports, there are two outside groups vying to buy BFC. I'd put the benefits in one or other of their camps. Maybe it's been leaked by one group that feel they are at risk of coming second? Maybe it's been leaked by a group that have decided they don't want to retain SD? or they do want to retain SD, and will offer him an improved contract? Maybe... lot's of things.

Just saying....

UTC

That would be a breach of the NDA. Surely the club would be able to find out which of the two parties was responsible and pull the plug on their bid.