An Insight Into the World of Football Transfers - Part II

This is the second part of an analysis into the world of football transfers. The first part was published a few weeks ago http://lawtop20.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/an-insight-into-world-of-football.html?view=classic  and it informed readers of some controversial and unique situations that occur in football transfers. It was suggested, in the first part of this analysis, that patience is the key component in every successful football transfer. There are many parameters that come into play on a constant basis and plans also change without warning and/or schedule. Hence, those in charge of securing, successfully, a football transfer, always apply a cautious approach in their dealings with all parties involved. 

In the premises, the analysis also suggests that there are two models in a negotiation for the acquisition of a football player. There are those who have a competitive and aggressive approach in terms of offers, where they apply the 'money is not an issue' approach and they are determined to acquire the player whatever the cost. On the other hand, you have the other model of the cautious and careful negotiator, where the second phase of the effective negotiation process comes into play: namely, the phase of discussion. 

The first model is to be discouraged for obvious reasons. It creates a competitive approach, which does not lead to optimum results. In every negotiation, the win-win outcome is the one that leaves both parties happy and suggests that they are likely to do business again. With a competitive model of negotiation, you do not achieve optimum results and it is highly likely you could lead the discussion into a deadlock. This model also creates an environment of capitulation, which, in the long run, may create further complications in future negotiations. As suggested previously, a sharp approach is to be avoided.

On the other hand, a cautious and careful approach, particularly during the discussion phase of the negotiation, may build the required trust between the parties and it would allow them to discover whether there are any difficult issues to be resolved. Knowing where your opponent stands, allows you to use your plan (and your BATNA) more effectively. 

Some people appear to be favouring the first model. They have suggested that without a competitive approach, you could be deemed weak and you could never be successful. I cannot agree with such premise and I favour the second model. A cautious and careful CEO not only has to think about a particular deal, but he also has to think about the football club as a whole. This means that accepting an inflated price may make fans happy and create marketing success, but it could also create divisions amongst the squad and make other players unhappy. When, for example, the market value of a player is £35m (subjectively) and the selling club requests £50m (among other unreasonable things), you would have to think whether, in the long run, this is a valid and viable business decision making. A CEO also has to consider specific parameters designed by the manager. A CEO cannot accept an inflated amount for a player who is not going to feature on a regular basis and he is highly likely to have competition from other players on the same position. An inflated price on a player also creates market instability and causes friction, as one has to accept the argument that the same seller one day, may become the buyer the next and vice versa. 

In the premises, a careful and cautious CEO also needs to consider intelligence gathered from different reliable sources. A selling club may have a 'hidden' agenda, which has been created for internal purposes. One of the main principles of effective negotiation, suggests that you always make an offer that is capable of being accepted. The same goes for the counter offer too. If the counter offer is deemed unreasonable, the buyer may think that you never had an intention to sell (or simply your replacement deals elsewhere failed) and weeks of preparation and the inevitable use of valuable resources, have been wasted without a compelling justification. 

Those in charge of negotiation and those assisting in the negotiation are well positioned to understand that it is never too 'close' and the 'shaking hands' situation never gives rise to a valid and binding agreement. It was not a long time ago when a well known CEO shook hands with me and arranged for their assistant to send me the contract, only to tell me fifteen minutes later (in a text message) that the deal was off. Experience suggests that one deal depends on a number of other deals taking place elsewhere and until the contract is signed, there is no such thing as 'nearing an agreement'. 

In addition, reports in the press have a purpose to serve and undeniably they serve such purpose. But what happens behind closed doors is a matter 'for your eyes only', it stays like that and any other information floating about is simply not reliable enough to justify knowledge built on facts and evidence.

The business of football transfers is a unique area of the commercial world and one that requires, knowledge, experience, prudence, discretion and patience. These are all elements that could be acquired with constant practice and effective people management. Above all, it requires integrity and true intentions. As Aristotle Onassis used to say: 'You always need to keep notes, especially about people. So the next time you meet with them, you know what you owe them and they know what they owe you.'

Dr Gregory Ioannidis*

19 July 2017

* Dr Gregory Ioannidis is a sports lawyer and an anti-doping litigation expert. He is a former The FA registered lawyer and has acted for and represented many players and clubs around Europe, Africa and Asia. He is currently the Course Leader of the Master's programme LLM International Sports Law in Practice at Sheffield Hallam University and an academic associate at Kings Chambers in Manchester.