I haven’t seen Eze’s contract and doubt that anybody on this site has either.

However, if it is true that it includes a release clause which clubs are currently seeking to exercise, it puts further emphasis on the point which I raised earlier in this discussion.
I have been surprised by the relaxed attitude of many to Olise’s potential departure via a release clause.
Will they be as relaxed if we lose Eze in the same way in this window?

I disagree that our only option is to include the clauses if we want to sign these players.

There’s another option which is to sign players who want to play for the club and are not looking for an exit before the ink is barely dry on the contract.

There’s an argument that it gives the club certainty if a sale is made.
However, does anybody seriously think £50-60 million is a fair market value for Olise?
If there was a bidding war in the absence of such clause it would likely to be closer to £100 million.

I know if we sell Eze and Olise with release clauses we will make far more money than we paid for them.
Great, but at what cost to the team and preparations for next season.

Furthermore, let’s hire Brighton’s negotiator to prepare the release clauses.
£115m for Caceido
£60m for Cucerella.

My take is that both Olise and Eze would only sign new contracts provided a release clause was included. If the club had not done so then it's possible that both players ( Olise certainly ) would have already left the club.

Agree that the amount of the release clause seems heavily weighted in favour of the players in these cases. Olise is certainly worth far more than Palace are receiving for him.

In terms of Caceido and Cucerella, my understanding was that Caceido didn't have a fee attached to his release clause and Cucurella didn't have one at all. But it seems ridiculous that Brighton were able to extract those sums for those players.

Old, Ungifted and White

In the case of Olise , maybe built in the clause was the demand only a major club outside of the Premier league could deal. Failing that maybe no premier side could meet a financial demand, in fact that’s what some have claimed . Either way it seems any effort by a home club to trigger a release clause was only possible at great expense.
Whatever the truth, I can,t see why Eze,s contract would be any the easier to open so if no one in the premier could afford Olise, it wouldn’t seem likely Spurs have any chance.

-.-' -.-'

When your children are teenagers, it’s important to have a dog so that someone in the house is happy to see you

Part of the problem with release clauses (at least for the selling club) is that a players market value can change fast, what seems like a reasonable release clause one day can seem ridiculously undervalued just a few weeks later.

If Eze has a gentlemen's agreement with SP-something along the
lines of: "if we receive an acceptable offer for your services of course we wouldn't stand in your way"- Seems clear enough,
doesn't it ?

Who is to say what an acceptable offer looks like ?
Presumably SP / the club-

Some clubs on the continent are putting release clauses of £150 million on talented youngsters to keep predators out of the way.
It is probably less easy to do when the youngsters have already made a name for themselves, but you could see the attraction for clubs like Palace to stop this incessant speculation every few months.
For example, Wharton only signed a few months ago and looks to gave a great future.
If release clauses are now so much part of the game let's put prohibitive release provision clauses in contracts like they do on the continent so we don't sell players like Olise so far below market value if a situation arises where a sale is to be made.

Needless to say that it requires the player to agree to that condition.

Suspect we wouldn't have been able to sign Olise without agreeing to put in a modest clause

Unfortunately we missed out last year on the absolute stupidity of the new Chelsea management who had a billion to waste in an attempt to buy success.

It was Brighton’s good fortune that there was a mug around the corner at just the right time to be fleeced!

It would depend upon the wording of the clause, but I think this is broadly correct.
It reinforces that these provisions are more likely to be in the player's interest.
It would be preferable to have a minimum value e.g offers over £60 million so that in your example Bayern have to match Man Utd's offer to take Olise.