2022/23 Anthony Gordon

Status
Not open for further replies.
arbok said:
This has been a very weird transfer saga. Id say the majority of Everton fans would have sold at 40m/45m and almost everyone here would have taken 60m. The people on talkback shows like Simon Jordan felt like 60m was too much. It's almost like Chelsea started listening to the feedback and never made that 60m bid but just put the rumors out there to see how people react. Frank was almost laughing at the 60m bid question, because he knows what's going on.

I honestly believe recruiters use fan forums for player valuations, and we wanted him to go at 40m, which is probably a red flag for them. Obviously this can't be helped, but in an ideal situation, we should have all have been singing Gordon's praises and asking for twice the price (at least ever since the transfer rumors started). I'm not saying
Click to expand...
Simon Jordan is a complete buffon who thinks that people will take what he says seriously because he sounds posh and looks like Angelos Epithemiou
 

arbok said:
This has been a very weird transfer saga. Id say the majority of Everton fans would have sold at 40m/45m and almost everyone here would have taken 60m. The people on talkback shows like Simon Jordan felt like 60m was too much. It's almost like Chelsea started listening to the feedback and never made that 60m bid but just put the rumors out there to see how people react. Frank was almost laughing at the 60m bid question, because he knows what's going on.

I honestly believe recruiters use fan forums for player valuations, and we wanted him to go at 40m, which is probably a red flag for them. Obviously this can't be helped, but in an ideal situation, we should have all have been singing Gordon's praises and asking for twice the price (at least ever since the transfer rumors started). I'm not saying Everton themselves should only accept 2x bids, but maybe we have to put out the perception that he is *wink wink* worth that.
Click to expand...

Let's all go into the Rondon and Gomes threads and make them seem like world beaters.
 
arbok said:
This has been a very weird transfer saga. Id say the majority of Everton fans would have sold at 40m/45m and almost everyone here would have taken 60m. The people on talkback shows like Simon Jordan felt like 60m was too much. It's almost like Chelsea started listening to the feedback and never made that 60m bid but just put the rumors out there to see how people react. Frank was almost laughing at the 60m bid question, because he knows what's going on.

I honestly believe recruiters use fan forums for player valuations, and we wanted him to go at 40m, which is probably a red flag for them. Obviously this can't be helped, but in an ideal situation, we should have all have been singing Gordon's praises and asking for twice the price (at least ever since the transfer rumors started). I'm not saying Everton themselves should only accept 2x bids, but maybe we have to put out the perception that he is *wink wink* worth that.
Click to expand...

Hmm. The buying team don’t set the price.
 

Martin Alvito said:
This is not 'Nam. This is the Premier League. There are rules.

Chelsea took a pretty hefty loss last year. They can expect to get about half of it back from adding gate receipts back in. Since they were making money pre-COVID, I would imagine that they're fine under the Prem's sustainability rules right now. If they're amortizing the present purchases over longer (5-6 year) contracts, they can probably stay fine as long as the owner makes up the resulting losses out of his own pocket up to the cap. They're going to be sell-to-buy for a few years, but otherwise this works.

Double that outlay, and the math quits working unless they start selling players. They would be committing to selling a major player every year to stay compliant, and more to make any signings. We all know how well that need worked out for us this summer.

The wild card is exactly how UEFA's replacement system for FFP, with the even less attractive acronym of FSCLR, will work. If Chelsea doesn't have to amortize transfer fees under those rules, and can effectively write them off now, spending half a billion is a way to end-run the transition period from FFP to FSCLR. If they do have to amortize, which they probably do, there is just no way that they can get down to wages plus the amortization on a half billion in transfers being under 70% of revenue three years from now without a fire sale every year. Their pre-COVID wage bill was already 75%, and they have to pay these new signings, who will largely be crowding out players on lower wages.

Spending that much right now, if they have to amortize, would be tantamount to Todd Boehly having to be Wayne Huizenga conducting the infamous Florida Marlins fire sale every year for several years, most likely starting two years from now. The best part is that they couldn't even do what Barcelona did and sell assets other than players to comply, because proceeds from such sales go on a P&L but are not considered revenue.
Click to expand...
Be honest with you mate a lot of that went over my head and I've never even heard of Todd Boehly. As I understand it, the commitment to provide guaranteed funds for player acquisition was a requirement of the bid process. My question is why would this be the case if they weren't in a position to spend it

I also thought that Chelsea have always run on a profit and once you've stripped out the effects if covid I'd gave thought their P&L could sustain a foray into the transfer market. I don't have figures to back that up so could be way off. But I wouldn't have thought they would be throwing money at players that they don't have.
 
Axlswhk said:
I think we will sign Gana, the squad will be well balance with Dominic Calvert-Lewin back. Pace on the flanks with Gordon and gray(as long as McNeil is not playing) tenacity in midfield with gana and onana. Stability at the back. Lampard should be please with the window under difficult conditions.

Keep the rest of the funds for emergency signing in jan.
Click to expand...
That'll be needed on another forward, because I have no faith in DCL ever getting back full fitness.
 
Barnfred 55 said:
Be honest with you mate a lot of that went over my head and I've never even heard of Todd Boehly. As I understand it, the commitment to provide guaranteed funds for player acquisition was a requirement of the bid process. My question is why would this be the case if they weren't in a position to spend it

I also thought that Chelsea have always run on a profit and once you've stripped out the effects if covid I'd gave thought their P&L could sustain a foray into the transfer market. I don't have figures to back that up so could be way off. But I wouldn't have thought they would be throwing money at players that they don't have.
Click to expand...
We Yanks are a lot more used to dealing with this numbers stuff, since we've had 'interesting' spending rules in professional sports for a generation now.

The long and the short of it is that while Chelsea may have that much in liquid funds available, under the Prem's current rules and UEFA's new ones spending it creates big problems very soon. They could do it, but it's a really bad idea because they would end up in the situation we were in this summer when we had to sell Richarlison to stay compliant. The difference is that they would end up in that situation every summer for years, unless they sell players now or sell a bunch one summer.

This is a problem, because they're us a couple of years ago on a larger scale. Much of their squad's value is tied up in the starting XI. Of the rest with value, shifting players like Pulisic for a significant fee is difficult because they're on high wages, which limits the number of clubs they can market him to. He would not be an upgrade for most of those clubs.

Can they buy Gordon? Yes. Will they buy Gordon after buying Fofana? Probably not, unless there are some significant outgoings, because they don't want to be us right now in the future.
 

Paul Rideout said:
We need to email Frank and Kevin and let you know about your vote of no confidence so they can do something to allay your fears.
Click to expand...
If they'd listened to me they wouldn;t have lumbered us with that big gob Kopite and McNeil. Two of the poniest signings of the summer so far.
 
Martin Alvito said:
We Yanks are a lot more used to dealing with this numbers stuff, since we've had 'interesting' spending rules in professional sports for a generation now.

The long and the short of it is that while Chelsea may have that much in liquid funds available, under the Prem's current rules and UEFA's new ones spending it creates big problems very soon. They could do it, but it's a really bad idea because they would end up in the situation we were in this summer when we had to sell Richarlison to stay compliant. The difference is that they would end up in that situation every summer for years, unless they sell players now or sell a bunch one summer.

This is a problem, because they're us a couple of years ago on a larger scale. Much of their squad's value is tied up in the starting XI. Of the rest with value, shifting players like Pulisic for a significant fee is difficult because they're on high wages, which limits the number of clubs they can market him to. He would not be an upgrade for most of those clubs.

Can they buy Gordon? Yes. Will they buy Gordon after buying Fofana? Probably not, unless there are some significant outgoings, because they don't want to be us right now in the future.
Click to expand...
Yeah I do understand the principles if FFP if not the minute detail.

My point was that I don't think they would be breaking those rules and wouldn't risk doing so, but that is not based on anything concrete. Are you that familiar with Chelsea's finances that you know they will break the rules if they splash an extra 50m on Gordon? If so, fair do's.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top