3rd party owners or part co-owners

[Wonderwall]

It must be a contractual nightmare with all the different parties involved and everyone pulling in different directions when a player becomes involved in a bid from a team from England. I see the rags have tabled a bid for Marcos Rojo, who would be a good buy IMO, better than shaw at this moment in time especially in that formation with 3 at the back.

A row has broken out between the representatives and part-owners of Manchester United target Marcos Rojo and his club Sporting Lisbon.

Argentina defender Rojo is the subject of disciplinary action by the Portuguese club after he handed in a transfer request and refused to train amid reports of a bid from United.

Sky sources in Lisbon reported that United bid around £16million but it is believed Sporting are holding out for more as they only own 25 per cent of the player.

Management company Doyen Sports, which owns 75 per cent of the player, has hit back at Sporting's stance and threatened legal action if fees due from any rejected bid are not paid.

It is reported that Doyen is entitled to a payment from Sporting worth 75 per cent of any declined offer for Rojo. In this instance that would equate to £12million.

In a statement, Doyen Sports has stressed it cannot interfere in transfer business and that Sporting have a right to retain the player who has a £24million release clause.

But it has pointed out that in such a scenario the club still have obligations to the company.

The statement read: "Sporting is entirely within its rights not to transfer the player Marcos Rojo, knowing that it only has to make up for the fund under the terms and deadlines as contractually established since the beginning."

It added the company "will not hesitate to use all legal resources at our disposal to defend fully all our interests and rights".

Doyen holds strong rights over the player after paying 75 per cent of his transfer fee from Spartak Moscow in 2012.

The statement added: "Without the intervention of Doyen, through financing, Marcos Rojo would not be a Sporting player."

Sporting have responded with their own detailed statement which alleges interference from Doyen.

They insist they have had "just cause" to terminate their agreement with the company, therefore suggesting they do not intend to pay any fees.

Sporting have also confirmed that Spartak would be owed 20 per cent of any fee received for Rojo above £4million.

WOW! That's a money spinner, if the club decline an offer, then they must pay 75% of that offer to the co-owners? You could milk the hell out of that by touting him around a lot of clubs.

[Dameerto]

I wouldnt mind seeing some co-ownership here if it was between clubs and completely transparent - but this just demonstrates why the FA didn't want speculators getting involved in player ownership, it gives them scope for way too much influence over clubs.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

Third party ownership needs banning outright by FIFA.

The English and French FAs have it right not allowing these leeches suck money out of the game.

It's ridiculous that FIFA let this trend develop in the first place but no doubt they're getting their palms greased to keep shtum.

[DoomMerchant]

It must be a contractual nightmare with all the different parties involved and everyone pulling in different directions when a player becomes involved in a bid from a team from England. I see the rags have tabled a bid for Marcos Rojo, who would be a good buy IMO, better than shaw at this moment in time especially in that formation with 3 at the back.

A row has broken out between the representatives and part-owners of Manchester United target Marcos Rojo and his club Sporting Lisbon.

Argentina defender Rojo is the subject of disciplinary action by the Portuguese club after he handed in a transfer request and refused to train amid reports of a bid from United.

Sky sources in Lisbon reported that United bid around £16million but it is believed Sporting are holding out for more as they only own 25 per cent of the player.

Management company Doyen Sports, which owns 75 per cent of the player, has hit back at Sporting's stance and threatened legal action if fees due from any rejected bid are not paid.

It is reported that Doyen is entitled to a payment from Sporting worth 75 per cent of any declined offer for Rojo. In this instance that would equate to £12million.

In a statement, Doyen Sports has stressed it cannot interfere in transfer business and that Sporting have a right to retain the player who has a £24million release clause.

But it has pointed out that in such a scenario the club still have obligations to the company.

The statement read: "Sporting is entirely within its rights not to transfer the player Marcos Rojo, knowing that it only has to make up for the fund under the terms and deadlines as contractually established since the beginning."

It added the company "will not hesitate to use all legal resources at our disposal to defend fully all our interests and rights".

Doyen holds strong rights over the player after paying 75 per cent of his transfer fee from Spartak Moscow in 2012.

The statement added: "Without the intervention of Doyen, through financing, Marcos Rojo would not be a Sporting player."

Sporting have responded with their own detailed statement which alleges interference from Doyen.

They insist they have had "just cause" to terminate their agreement with the company, therefore suggesting they do not intend to pay any fees.

Sporting have also confirmed that Spartak would be owed 20 per cent of any fee received for Rojo above £4million.

WOW! That's a money spinner, if the club decline an offer, then they must pay 75% of that offer to the co-owners? You could milk the hell out of that by touting him around a lot of clubs.

but....i'm going to assume that Sporting then own 100% of the player rights if they make that payment which could mean they are just driving up the value to collect more at the end of the day, right? Reject 16M, pay them 12M and accept 20M in 2 weeks, and yr 4M ahead just for saying no, and making the payout.

Surely it can't be that simple can it?

cheers

[freshie]

If a 3rd party owns 75% of the player then shouldn't they have to pay 75% of his wages?

[ant london]

Third party ownership needs banning outright by FIFA.

The English and French FAs have it right not allowing these leeches suck money out of the game.

It's ridiculous that FIFA let this trend develop in the first place but no doubt they're getting their palms greased to keep shtum.

That's my only real issue with it (aside from the fact that it makes transfer negotiations like Manglers a total clusterfuck) as the gains made by the 3P owners do not flow (to any degree) back into the game.

I understand the clubs' rationale in using 3P owners to help them but players as it enables them to purchase and use assets they otherwise can't afford. BUT it's massively short-termist in terms of how to fun your business. Sporting have been enjoying the benefits from a 16m asset but will only get 4m when he is sold so unless another 3P funded deal is done to replace him you have an automatic downgrade in quality for what you can buy.

[Slim]

This is a ridiculous rule, any bid they knock back they have to pay 75% to the 3rd party?

So I could offer them £10 for him 10,000,000 times and they'd have to pay £75M to not sell him?

Sporting should do a straight swap deal and give the 3rd party 3/4 of fuck all.

[michaelcityfan]

Does our purchase of manguala. (Hope that's right) include third party shares in other words is he all ours? With tevez I thought there was still another "owner.

I think it's worthbanning by fifa or at least eufa. Those organisations only appear to act for the benefit of influential bodies and clubs though.

[Slim]

Does our purchase of manguala. (Hope that's right) include third party shares in other words is he all ours? With tevez I thought there was still another "owner.

I think it's worthbanning by fifa or at least eufa. Those organisations only appear to act for the benefit of influential bodies and clubs though.

With Tevez, the problem was the 3rd party ownership and signing by West Ham, when he was loaned to the rags, he was entirely owned by MSI(Kia Joorabchian) and therefore no problem. When we bought him, we bought out Kia 'Cuntlips' Joorabchian entirely and again no drama.

3rd party ownership has been banned in England and Mangala was bought for £24M from Porto and £8M from Jorge Mendes.

I do like the way they've added the amount paid to Standard Liege onto the fee we've paid, when it would come from the £32M those parties received.