The sell on clause is part of the fee that villa are paying for Rogers. Just like the sell on clause was part of the fee Middlesbrough paid City for Rogers. It is not a separate agreement, it is part of the same deal. Middlesbrough didn't pay City £1.5m for Rogers. They paid £1.5m plus 20% of future profits. An upfront fee, a performance related add-on, an international appearance add-on, a trophy winning add-on or an additional sell-on clause would all count towards that total fee we would receive from Villa.Anyone suggesting man city get additional sell on clauses beyond our agreement with villa is probably wrong according to efl regulations. Man city can take a% of the fee agreed with villa but not any fees after that.
So if we have a sell on clause with villa that is solely between villa and Boro and nothing to do with city.
City don't retain any rights to the player, his contract could run out at villa and Boro (and city) get no cut of any transfer fee. There is no regulations being breached by having sell on clauses on top of sell on clauses. There's no multiple ownership or anything like that. It's a fairly basic clause.