The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - 8th July 2017

[TheChosenOne]

"There are no facts, just interpretations" - Friedrich Nietzsche

You could add,

"Nothing is the truth nor a lie, everything depends on the colour of the crystal through which one sees it” ― Pedro Calderón de la Barca

I just think Levy is one of those Marmite characters - (Yankspur you won't get that so Google it)

Veggie might ?

 

[thebenjamin]

Sue for breach of contract, damages, the works.

A contract exists as soon as the parties agree it does. The written contract is simply post-fact evidence.

If one party then refuses to honour that agreement without legally solid reason before the document is signed, they are in breach and can be sued.

Imagine if that was actually enforced in football! It's an industry of lies and back stabbing. Written contracts are barely binding, let alone verbal ones.

In any case, there's very easy ways to say there was a misunderstanding in the negotiations. One party thought X when the other party was actually saying Y

 

[kremlyn]

As far as I know, first thing you do is agree a sale, then you negotiate. Standard practice. Only an amateur thinks otherwise.

Then, to conclude the best deal, you negotiate thoroughly ; payment terms including currency, installments, rights, timing etc etc.

Then during the process you renegotiate where necessary depending on what you discover through due diligence.

This is much like house buying where you renegotiate depending upon the results of the survey etc.

When the contract is signed, then, unless you are a monkey and haven't included penalties for withdrawal, you are secure in the sale.

Levy is probably just professional and good. The chairmen who complain are probably not and haven't worked the process properly.

If you're whinging about how levy does his business, I'd suggest the problem is with you.

 

[stevenurse]

Sue for breach of contract, damages, the works.

A contract exists as soon as the parties agree it does. The written contract is simply post-fact evidence.

If one party then refuses to honour that agreement without legally solid reason before the document is signed, they are in breach and can be sued.

At what point is a deal "agreed"?

In a lot of industries the rule of "if it isn't written down, it never happened" is king.

That said, it may just be me being naive.

 

[Lilbaz]

At what point is a deal "agreed"?

In a lot of industries the rule of "if it isn't written down, it never happened" is king.

That said, it may just be me being naive.

http://www.contractsandagreements.co.uk/law-and-verbal-agreements.html

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

At what point is a deal "agreed"?

In a lot of industries the rule of "if it isn't written down, it never happened" is king.

That said, it may just be me being naive.

It depends.

There's a very strong convention that says if you shake hands on a deal, it is a binding contract from that moment. This can be a physical hand-shake, but can simply be an exchange of words like "agreed?" , "Agreed!" For example contracts can be made by phone on that basis, whether recorded or not.

Some deals are too complicated for this kind of treatment, like buying a house, which is why they usually specify "subject to contract".

Transfers are like that nowadays. Which means that no one is entitled to believe the deal is done until it's signed. Which in turn means that no one is entitled to believe they've been "re-traded" or cheated in some other way until the deal is signed. Which furthermore means that a lot of the complaints about Levy are simply people moaning because he played the game to the end.

Yes, I agree that it may hurt us if the deal doesn't get done. Sometimes it infuriates me. But any suggestion that he's doing anything legally or morally wrong is wide of the mark.

In any event, how do we know that he is at fault in and has stopped the deal from happening? Isn't it just as possible that he, unlike many other directors/negotiators, has particularly high standards when it comes to protecting the club (I've said before he is a stickler for the rules and for thoroughness) and he's determined to avoid bad deals where we get stitched up due the the absence of legal protection in the document? I find this explanation far more logical and consistent with the facts as I know them than the hugely simplistic "Levy's trying to save ten quid at the last minute" type of thing that gets trotted out every time we don't sign someone.

 

[absolute bobbins]

The interpretation given of re trading is "when you agree a deal and then try to change the terms after agreeing, re-doing the trade."

Call me old fashioned, but if you've agreed a deal and shaken hands, then that's it.

Both parties in any contractual arrangement need to know that ultimately the other party is acting in good faith, and will not say "Yes" and then go back on their word and attempt to change the terms.

The fact that footbal is full of scumbag parasites like Raiola is obscene but a separate issue.

http://www.spurscommunity.co.uk/ind...-spurs-transfers.113824/page-112#post-5511316

Even if you are old fashioned, they are agreements in principle. When I do a deal, I will always crunch the numbers again and if it no longer suits my business objectives I always go back to the client.

Put the shoe on the other foot, if City offer £45m for Walker and we agree, then offer £60 million for Bertrand, you wouldn't be pissed off if Levy pulled the plug until City offered us the same if not more for Walker.

 

[yanno]

Even if you are old fashioned, they are agreements in principle. When I do a deal, I will always crunch the crunch the numbers again and it no longer suits my business objectives I always go back to the client.

Put the shoe on the other foot, if City offer £45 for Walker and we agree, then offer #60 million for Bertrand, you wouldn't be pissed off if Levy pulled the plug until City offered us the same if not more for Walker.

But you're making an interprettion of dragon 1's ITK according to your own experience.

Once again, here's what the ITK states about Levy's way of doing business and the consequences in other chairmen and parties interested in buying the club refusing to deal with him. The ITK even explicitly states that Sugar refused to deal with Levy for a year because of his "re trading" behaviour;

Only element of truth is that levy is beyond a nightmare to deal with on transfers with other clubs certain chairman will not deal with him and certain interested parties in club will not deal with him either they go over him

Levy is not shy to do a re trade ,he did it in fact a year before buying the club to sugar who told him to go f**k himself and it took him a year before sugar would deal with him again ,

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

Even if you are old fashioned, they are agreements in principle. When I do a deal, I will always crunch the crunch the numbers again and it no longer suits my business objectives I always go back to the client.

Put the shoe on the other foot, if City offer £45 for Walker and we agree, then offer #60 million for Bertrand, you wouldn't be pissed off if Levy pulled the plug until City offered us the same if not more for Walker.

Quite.

I think part of the problem is people interpreting "deals in principle" as being contracts. It's the age-old combination of naivety and only seeing one side of the bargain.

And one thing I think you can be certain of: Levy never forgets to say "subject to contract" before agreeing to a multi-million pound deal.

 

[robertgoulet]

Right, I'd imagine most times "deals in principal" mean "we'll give you 20M for him" "OK" and then when the contracts come the payment structure is stretched or there are a lot of milestones added that the player needs to hit, etc.

 

[Spurger King]

He said 'out of order' and it was. Hardly slagging. Just goes to show how massively differently people can see things I suppose.

How is it out of order for someone who is clearly well connected to make comments about publicly available information, on a completely different forum?

 

[Tucker]

But if you assert that any ITK criticising Levy can be dismissed as simply someone with an axe to grind, isn't it just as conceivable that any pro-Levy information is spun by someone employed by his PR team? Or is that too much of a leap of faith for you? And now we're playing a dangerous game: we're actively looking to discredit an ITK if he/she doesn't provide the information we want to hear. Question the validity of the information by all means. Take it all with a pinch of salt! But questioning the credibility of the person who provides that information - in good faith - just isn't cool. When I first read Grey Fox's ITK about Bale, I must admit that info didn't add up to me; I questioned the validity of the Nike deal, because as many posters have pointed out, Bale is contracted to Adidas. But that doesn't suddenly mean that Grey Fox can't be trusted; that he's somekind of pro-Levy plant! That's just ridiculous! He's clearly past on his information in good faith, and if he had been attacked in the way the Goat had been, would it be any surprise if he said, "fuck it, I won't bother in future". And then we all miss out.

No ones trying to discredit anyone, where have I said that the information is flawed or invalid, or indeed untrue? I haven't. All I offered was my interpretation of the language of the post. Nothing more nothing less. This wasn't some massive criticism of anyone sharing any information, any more than you calling out Grey Fox on the Nike thing was a criticism of them.

Any information shared is always going to come through the prism of someone's interpretation of what they've been told.

You're placing an assumption onto my words, just as everybody places their own assumption and bias on the information shared by the itks. That's the nature of communication.

Anyway, I suggest we leave it at that.

 

[McArchibald]

... He then went on to tell me a story about Doug Ellis telling a player he had gotten a bid from United and it had been accepted, and did he want to go. Of course was the answer so he was told to get his stuff and he would be flying out to Spain where United were having a pre season training camp. For the next hour he has been giving it large in the dressing room, " see ya later lads I'm off to conquer the world" etc. Gone home told all the family they were moving up north, packed his stuff and jumped on the plane to Spain. Where he was met at the airport by representatives of Oxford United.
Any way he has got straight on the phone to Deadly, and Doug has told him quite clearly his future was not at Villa and Oxford were offering the most money, so that's where he was going.

Lucky escape!
Could have been Newcastle United...

 

[Hoopspur]

Mr Byrite by name.....

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

How is it out of order for someone who is clearly well connected to make comments about publicly available information, on a completely different forum?

I only took issue with the 'bollocks' part and I've explained why in a response to your earlier post. Did you not see it?

 

[John48]

Have to say that whatever the truth in the ITK we're currently getting, the fact is we're spending way too much time on how Levy does deals & not enough on deals themselves.

Does it matter in the long run maybe not, but the sooner the deals are done, especially when it comes to the 1st team squad, the better chance we have of getting off to a good start, because it's so much easier to integrate a new player in preseason than it's is once the season has started.

 

[robertgoulet]

A&C - I didn't see a response to a question from yesterday. You'd mentioned on Thursday that you had bad news and good news. Did we ever get the good news?

 

[Spurger King]

I only took issue with the 'bollocks' part and I've explained why in a response to your earlier post. Did you not see it?

Fair enough. I guess there are different sides to every story.

 

[Led's Zeppelin]

Have to say that whatever the truth in the ITK we're currently getting, the fact is we're spending way too much time on how Levy does deals & not enough on deals themselves.

Does it matter in the long run maybe not, but the sooner the deals are done, especially when it comes to the 1st team squad, the better chance we have of getting off to a good start, because it's so much easier to integrate a new player in preseason than it's is once the season has started.

I promise that when we've got some deals to talk about I'll start talking about them instead.

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

A&C - I didn't see a response to a question from yesterday. You'd mentioned on Thursday that you had bad news and good news. Did we ever get the good news?

Sorry, sometimes I intend to answer and something crops up and I forget

Yeah, you had the good news. Breezer with his Bale stuff.