Wonder if we put a sell on clause in. Some Peterborough fans seems to think they've turned 2.2m down for him in the past
http://www.theposhforum.co.uk/viewtopic ... 8&start=75

If we didn't then we must have/have had idiots running the club.

ken probably didnt, just wanted to rush the deal through as quick as poss on deadline day.

The Peterborough chairman has just said on Talksport that anyone who sells any player without a sell on clause should be sacked.

The person who did the Baldwin deal is still at our club with his family and friends so it will be interesting if one is in place.

Peterborough insist on a starting point of 20% for any player they sell so if that offer has been rejected you are potentially looking at more than the laughable £500,000 we sold him for.

Just before he got his year long injury I remember reading they'd turned down a bid of not far under 3 million for him

I'm sure I'd read somewhere that Liverpool were interested at that point. In fact I'm sure it came from the walking ego of a chairmans mouth.

The chairman definitely said they'd turned down one or two £1mill+ bids but I don't remember him naming a specific club.

West Ham n Liverpool were rumoured.

He's certainly comfortable enough on the ball to catch the eye of big clubs.

Had it not been for his injury I think he would have been moved on by now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Currently being scouted by Everton.

For all his negatives, the Peterborough chairman doesn't sell his players cheaply. Brit Assombalonga went to Forest for a deal that could reach £8mil. I know he's a striker with a 1 in 2 record but they were still league one at the time I think and it was a record for both clubs. If they sold a defender to Prem club they'd be wanting big bucks, I'd be guessing over £5mil. If there's any sell on clause at all it's a sizeable windfall.
It's all speculation however, he might not move on, we might not even have a sell on clause(who'd be surprised if we didn't?) and the fee could be a lot less.

And IF we had a sell on clause does it belong to Pools or any former owners of the club?

Peterbrough have made a staggering 21 million pounds in players in the last three years. For a club with maybe 2000 more fans than us is remarkable. Just shows what you can do with decent managers a good scouting network and owners who are willing to spend percentages of the money they make on a transfer and reinvesting in more good talent.

Wish he was here.Think I could put up with his ego.

The chairman has just telt me on that twitter that we do have a sell on clause

Good work... and now onto to Mr Rippers question!!

I seriously doubt Hodcroft would have done that though, I'm not even sure you can legally when you sell a club.

Twitter must be the truth then.

Can u ask the question did the final 300k instalment from the Luke James transfer instalment come into the clubs coffers during the 2015/16 season which was reported in the MAILS Question n Answer survey 14 months ago.


DoTheres only one person who can give an honest answer to the Mails qoute but that will never come out!

It's not 'Twitter' saying it is the Peterborough chairman who is responsible for that account, so yes it is clearly true. It is a person directly answering a question via social media.

He's very open about business matters, refreshing but might not endear him to other owners who wish such matters to remain private. Say if they wanted to pocket the cash themselves for example!

The FA should make it mandatory for all transfer matters to be made public except wages. It will help discourage the dishonest owners a tad.

We may have a sell on clause but will the money be the clubs or pocketed elsewhere?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Didn't pools try and claim we sold him for less than the peterbrough chairman said we did? At the time. He might be big mouthed but the guy isn't all talk like a certain chairman of ours. This guy actually goes out and does it.