gccrowdpleaser

Still the best out and out defender at the club, even after not playing for months and at the end of his career!
Just don’t understand the pelters he gets. Vastly underestimated!

No. This is the standardised compensation value set out in the EPPP compensation guidelines. 
There is figure per year from the 9-11 fixed at 3k per year. There is then a fee per year based on academy status from 12 to 16 which varies from 12.5k to 40 depending academy status.
A worked example would be that Player x joins Derby at age 8 and is now being picked up by any other academy at 15.
3 k for years 9-11 = 9k
3 years for 12 to 15 @ 40k as Derby is the elite academy. 
That's your fee and I presume your 129k but that assumes these players have been with us since early. If it's someone we picked up at 14...we are entitled to 40k.
The per games compensation is fixed thereafter UNLESS another agreement is made between the two clubs which guarantees an income now.
So risk vs reward if those 3 15 year old go on to make 100 appearances for United it costs them 7.75m each player spread over the years the appearances take.
Or they could give Derby 2m now ans Derby forego any entitlement to future earnings from the players. 
 

He's played the last few games for their U23's including a couple of games up top. I think this one is happening. 

No. This is the standardised compensation value set out in the EPPP compensation guidelines. 
There is figure per year from the 9-11 fixed at 3k per year. There is then a fee per year based on academy status from 12 to 16 which varies from 12.5k to 40 depending academy status.
A worked example would be that Player x joins Derby at age 8 and is now being picked up by any other academy at 15.
3 k for years 9-11 = 9k
3 years for 12 to 15 @ 40k as Derby is the elite academy. 
That's your fee and I presume your 129k but that assumes these players have been with us since early. If it's someone we picked up at 14...we are entitled to 40k.
The per games compensation is fixed thereafter UNLESS another agreement is made between the two clubs which guarantees an income now.
So risk vs reward if those 3 15 year old go on to make 100 appearances for United it costs them 7.75m each player spread over the years the appearances take.
Or they could give Derby 2m now ans Derby forego any entitlement to future earnings from the players. 
 

Aside from the fee you get per year they are in the academy you also get the below based on appearances.  What I'm not sure about is how it is applied. I presume it only applies to the club that signs and not all future transfers but really not sure. 
Effectively if one of the U15s goes on to make 100 appearances for United we would get a further £7.5m in increments.
 

No. This is the standardised compensation value set out in the EPPP compensation guidelines. 
There is figure per year from the 9-11 fixed at 3k per year. There is then a fee per year based on academy status from 12 to 16 which varies from 12.5k to 40 depending academy status.
A worked example would be that Player x joins Derby at age 8 and is now being picked up by any other academy at 15.
3 k for years 9-11 = 9k
3 years for 12 to 15 @ 40k as Derby is the elite academy. 
That's your fee and I presume your 129k but that assumes these players have been with us since early. If it's someone we picked up at 14...we are entitled to 40k.
The per games compensation is fixed thereafter UNLESS another agreement is made between the two clubs which guarantees an income now.
So risk vs reward if those 3 15 year old go on to make 100 appearances for United it costs them 7.75m each player spread over the years the appearances take.
Or they could give Derby 2m now ans Derby forego any entitlement to future earnings from the players. 
 

Says it on Strettynews.com - also states they can't name juniors because they are juniors.

Well that was the case. He didn't play for over a year.  
Any player on that salary will be insured against injury that ends there career or limits earnings.  Any club will insure the player due to injury re transfer cost at market value for replacement.
No insurer is going to pay out in this instance where there's been a clear dereliction of terms.  Why would the club lose out on a players. value, pay him a full wage and pay out for a replacement.   The fact they offered him any wage plus full use of state of the art medical facilities was an amazing offer.
The bloke caused his own downfall.  The only reason Lawrence and Bennett were retained by the club was they didn't get a custodial sentence.  Sure if someone had offered a few million for Lawrence he'd have been moved on at the earliest opportunity like Bennett.

What inconsistency?
They could fulfil their contracted duties as professional footballers, Richard couldn't.