Marius Niculae Update

[Yngwie]

We've known for almost a year that Marius was pursuing ICT for transfer related fees, but I'm not sure if we've ever seen details of what exactly is being claimed.

Sunday Times reports first of all that Inverness Sheriff Court will rule "imminently" regarding ?85,000, which is the part of his signing on fee that he claims ICT never paid him.

Secondly, an action is with FIFA regarding ?148,800 he claims is his share of the transfer fee to Dinamo Bucaresti.

The same article reports that he is up for sale, after his club finished 3rd and missed out on a Champions League place. As Stevico mentioned recently, Celtic are supposedly interested, but Liege and 3 Russian teams are perhaps more likely buyers. I seem to recall that we agreed a straight transfer fee rather than one with a sell-on clause, which is a shame when a 7 figure transfer is being talked about.

[stevico1]

We've known for almost a year that Marius was pursuing ICT for transfer related fees, but I'm not sure if we've ever seen details of what exactly is being claimed.

Sunday Times reports first of all that Inverness Sheriff Court will rule "imminently" regarding ?85,000, which is the part of his signing on fee that he claims ICT never paid him.

Secondly, an action is with FIFA regarding ?148,800 he claims is his share of the transfer fee to Dinamo Bucaresti.

The same article reports that he is up for sale, after his club finished 3rd and missed out on a Champions League place. As Stevico mentioned recently, Celtic are supposedly interested, but Liege and 3 Russian teams are perhaps more likely buyers. I seem to recall that we agreed a straight transfer fee rather than one with a sell-on clause, which is a shame when a 7 figure transfer is being talked about.

He is most likely to go to Liege, as their new manager was the manager at Sporting Lisbon when Marius was there.

Edited June 14, 2009 by stevico1

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

He is claiming close to ?250,000 from ICT and will probably get most of it - what our muppets will do is to let it go on and on so they dont have to show it in last years finances.

I would suggest that he goes to County where he will be understood in the same manner as I have previously described him :018:

[WYNESS101]

Was he know over here in court already? I think it was for speeding

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Well at least it wasnt on the feckin pitch

[kiltarlity]

Was he know over here in court already? I think it was for speeding

Traffic offence of using Mobile Phone whilst driving after he refused to accept the normal ?60/3point on the spot fixed penalty.

[Kirishima]

That would be a particularly nasty sting in the tail if ICT had to shell out 200k plus legal fees. I would be expecting a few searching questions if it does go against us.

[Georgeios]

That would be a particularly nasty sting in the tail if ICT had to shell out 200k plus legal fees. I would be expecting a few searching questions if it does go against us.

By all accounts (pardon the pun) that moneys been put to one side, it wipes out the drop payment though..

[Kirishima]

Let me get this straight, ICT allegedly offered Niculae 80k as a signing on fee, and then allegedly 148k of the tranfer fee as claimed by the Sunday Times newspaper. Should the allegations prove to be true, 228k goes out the door, excluding legal fees.

And no sell-on clause in the contract. Wow, no wonder they were so keen to try and keep this schtum.

.

[caley100]

Would the cut from the transfer fee not come out of the ?400k that we recieved? this will surely have put aside as the club knew he was due this fee, therefore only the ?80k will have to be found.

Anyway Marius should waive the fee as we really did put him back on the map... he might have ended up in a dead end job in Dingwall otherwise!

Oh aye... who the feck arranged a transfer cut of ?185k from a total of ?400k ?????? were we that desperate to get rid of him, i would'nt mind finding out who sorted that deal on behalf of the club.

Edited June 17, 2009 by caley100

[SMEE]

Aye......wonder how much our highly experinced DoF played in the whole Marius debacle :huh:

Edited June 17, 2009 by SMEE

[kencar]

Was it not 400,000 Euros we got rather than ?'s?

[Yngwie]

When it comes to budgeting, I'd be pretty sure that the club have been working on the basis that they will have to shell out the money, which is the most likely outcome.

But if they feel they have been the victims of a Romanian stitch up, then you can't blame them for holding firm, holding onto the money and letting a court decide.

[latviaman]

Would the cut from the transfer fee not come out of the ?400k that we recieved? this will surely have put aside as the club knew he was due this fee, therefore only the ?80k will have to be found.

Anyway Marius should waive the fee as we really did put him back on the map... he might have ended up in a dead end job in Dingwall otherwise!

Oh aye... who the feck arranged a transfer cut of ?185k from a total of ?400k ?????? were we that desperate to get rid of him, i would'nt mind finding out who sorted that deal on behalf of the club.

Leave the D of F alone, see my previous posts, the man is ruining the club

[caley100]

Was it not 400,000 Euros we got rather than ?'s?

Thought it was e500k which at the time equated to ?411k ? might be wrong and canna be assed looking back.

[Alex MacLeod]

My understanding is that Niculae came to us in the first place for a particular salary + a signing on fee of euro 250k for a two year deal. I also understand he requested a release clause to any team outside SPL. Furthermore I understand the negotiator of all this to be Alan Savage.

My understanding of the present situation is that the club believe the signing on fee should be reduced by half because the contract was terminated at the request of Niculae and that the club do not believe they should be paying Niculaes cut of any transfer deal.

Sell on clauses, generally, only ever happen when the concerned player is deemed to be an upcoming star....never, normally, when the player concerned is reaching the end of his stardom.

Edited June 19, 2009 by Alex MacLeod
clarify

[Johnboy]

Sell on clauses only ever happen when the concerned player is deemed to be an upcoming star....never when the player concerned is reaching the end of his stardom.

A sell on clause can be part of ANY player's contract with a club.

[stevico1]

My understanding is that Niculae came to us in the first place for a particular salary + a signing on fee of euro 250k for a two year deal. I also understand he requested a release clause to any team outside SPL. Furthermore I understand the negotiator of all this to be Alan Savage.

My understanding of the present situation is that the club believe the signing on fee should be reduced by half because the contract was terminated at the request of Niculae and that the club do not believe they should be paying Niculaes cut of any transfer deal.

Sell on clauses only ever happen when the concerned player is deemed to be an upcoming star....never when the player concerned is reaching the end of his stardom.

Alex I dont know where you get your information from but it is not accurate.

Niculae never requested or never had a release clause in his contract to any team, he had a standard 2 year contract.

There was a sell on clause in the contract that was negotiated between the player and the DOF, Alan Savage was not present, I know this as fact as I was present.

As for the sell on clause only ever happening when the player concerned is an upcoming star, no idea where you pulled this from but I can assure you this is not true

[Johnboy]

Alex I dont know where you get your information from but it is not accurate.

A lot of people out there would like to know where he gets his information from.

Underneath the giant toad stool at the bottom of Dingly Dell would be my guess....

[Alex MacLeod]

Alex I dont know where you get your information from but it is not accurate.

A lot of people out there would like to know where he gets his information from.

Underneath the giant toad stool at the bottom of Dingly Dell would be my guess....

I dont profess to get information from anyone. As I said, 'it is my understanding'. An understanding based on comments made in conversation with a person or persons with some close ties to the club. If my understanding of things is wrong then so be it. If I interprerate something to be different to how it was intended then I apologise. Like anyone else I am entitled to make my comments and views without being subjected to childish spat from the Johnboys of the land.

As for the part about sell on clauses, on re-reading what I wrote I realise I should have inserted 'generally' between clauses and only and 'normally' between never and when. I will edit and correct to avoid further confusion.

[stevico1]

Alex I dont know where you get your information from but it is not accurate.

A lot of people out there would like to know where he gets his information from.

Underneath the giant toad stool at the bottom of Dingly Dell would be my guess....

I dont profess to get information from anyone. As I said, 'it is my understanding'. An understanding based on comments made in conversation with a person or persons with some close ties to the club. If my understanding of things is wrong then so be it. If I interprerate something to be different to how it was intended then I apologise. Like anyone else I am entitled to make my comments and views without being subjected to childish spat from the Johnboys of the land.

As for the part about sell on clauses, on re-reading what I wrote I realise I should have inserted 'generally' between clauses and only and 'normally' between never and when. I will edit and correct to avoid further confusion.

Alex I wasnt having a go just clearing up things from what I know

[caleyboy]

I doubt if anyone on this board knows ANYTHING about players contracts - so please lets not try to sound as if you are some expert!

[stevico1]

I doubt if anyone on this board knows ANYTHING about players contracts - so please lets not try to sound as if you are some expert!

Was that aimed at me

[Johnboy]

I doubt if anyone on this board knows ANYTHING about players contracts - so please lets not try to sound as if you are some expert!

I think Stevico1 might dispute that statement!

[Sorted]

My understanding is that Niculae came to us in the first place for a particular salary + a signing on fee of euro 250k for a two year deal. I also understand he requested a release clause to any team outside SPL. Furthermore I understand the negotiator of all this to be Alan Savage.

My understanding of the present situation is that the club believe the signing on fee should be reduced by half because the contract was terminated at the request of Niculae and that the club do not believe they should be paying Niculaes cut of any transfer deal.

Sell on clauses only ever happen when the concerned player is deemed to be an upcoming star....never when the player concerned is reaching the end of his stardom.

Alex I dont know where you get your information from but it is not accurate.

Niculae never requested or never had a release clause in his contract to any team, he had a standard 2 year contract.

There was a sell on clause in the contract that was negotiated between the player and the DOF, Alan Savage was not present, I know this as fact as I was present.

As for the sell on clause only ever happening when the player concerned is an upcoming star, no idea where you pulled this from but I can assure you this is not true

You are obviously in a position of considerable benefit having been there Stevico. Not been fully aware of who does what, were you there on the club's behalf or on Marius's?

It has been suggested to me that the sell on clause had a trigger in it wherby the party that initiated the transfer suffered penalty i.e. if Marius requested the move he waived his right to his money, as others, often slated on CTO did before him. Is this true? I only ask as you appeared comfortable releasing the detail of the conversation in response to Alex.

I like many others would be keen to know the detail of a "standard two year contract" if possible as it may clear up many of the debates on site?