January Transfer Thread 2020

[Gardocki]

But in terms of FFP selling Kenny for £15 million makes us +£15 million profit in the accounts as he's home grown and cost us nought.

Signing Sidibe for say £13 million on a 5 year deal means £2.6 million per year on the accounts.

Therefore for the RB position we'll have only made a £2 million profit in terms of ins and outs but in terms of the FFP accounts for next year it would be a profit of £12.4 million.

Very basic as more included than that but player trading wise it makes sense selling home grown talent that cost us nothing for as much as we can get for them.

Why would we get to pay the transfer fee over a number of years, but Shalje have to pay us all upfront? Surely that logic works both ways?

 

[TheSecondComing]

We’ve all had to watch what will be two years of Theo Walcott, we all deserve medals

 

[Goat]

Why would we get to pay the transfer fee over a number of years, but Shalje have to pay us all upfront? Surely that logic works both ways?

I wouldnt worry, hes talking about player amortisation which isnt a factor for FFP.

 

[Dymak]

imagine if you work in tesco and you earn 22k a year and your manager comes in and says aldi wants you but you will only get 18k per year

You are right, he won’t take a pay cut. The best we can hope for right now is a loan in which a club pays all or a large percentage of his wages, where he demonstrates his ability. Ideally, we’d then be able to fetch about 10 million for him, but most of that will go to paying his remaining wages, with a small amount coming to us.

Or, we will be looking at a loan or a sale (same thing come the summer) which covers his wage, or as much as his wage as possible. His days at Everton are numbered.

 

[OneTrueLegend]

Considering we have Calvert-Lewin and Richarlison scoring and working 100% every game for the team, and now Kean’s off the mark too, I’d argue we have far more pressing concerns than up top.

I think now we are playing 2 up top, we have the same problem upfront, as we have at the back; 3 players for 2 positions. which means we are a couple of injuries and suspensions away from seeing Delph play CB and Niasse starting upfront. Even in the Newcastle game we took of Kean and brought on Niasse becuse there are no other options and it ended badly

 

[ForeverBlue92]

I wouldnt worry, hes talking about player amortisation which isnt a factor for FFP.

I assume amortisation surely must be included in FFP - otherwise we are about £9 million from the threshold which doesnt include a net spend of £35 million from this year which will be posted next.

Basically we'll have breached FFP come next year if you're basing things solely of money in and out as I doubt our revenue has changed much in this season to last.

Add in Ancelotti being promised funds it wouldnt make any sense.

 

[Brisan123]

The argument for it is actually pretty simple - take whatever the cost estimate is and double it, because that's what you're going to spend. See: Spurs, Dallas Cowboys, Los Angeles Rams. Then compare this to the cost of major redevelopment projects like the ones I mentioned (Fenway, Wrigley, Anfield).

Now, ask yourself how long it's going to take for the new stadium to improve the club's finances given the difference in price. These projects do not pay off in a timely fashion. They're vanity projects. They're more common here in the US because we permit teams to threaten to move in order to extort public financing.

Put another way - Levy may be tightfisted, but do you really think he isn't spending to improve a club that was a match away from lifting the European Cup last season because of his nature, or because he can't afford to?

Redevelopment is almost invariably the sane choice, and the venues I listed are as good as anybody's. There's no question that we need to do something, but one option will delay a proper squad rebuild a lot longer than the other.

Dave's just holding up a mirror to what's out there. I actually think he's right about Ferguson; the politics of the situation made it impossible not to keep him on, but forcing the manager to keep an assistant not of his choice rarely works out well.

There is one very small hole in your argument
You haven’t got a clue how the stadium will be financed and how if at all it will affect our future spending
Here say and ill informed conjecture forms the basis of your entire post

 

[ForeverBlue92]

All the talk of Everton Soares when Allan isnt in Napoli's squad to play Juve tonight.

Any reason why? Wasnt listed as injured yesterday.

 

[Tipp blue]

I wouldnt worry, hes talking about player amortisation which isnt a factor for FFP.

I think it does pal.

 

[ValBlue]

Have we had any actual confirmed interest in any of these players, I haven’t seen a quote or any reliable sources link us with one player yet.

Vecino and Everton Soares have been linked by a supposedly very reputable Italian journo

 

[ToothPlucker]

I assume amortisation surely must be included in FFP - otherwise we are about £9 million from the threshold which doesnt include a net spend of £35 million from this year which will be posted next.

Basically we'll have breached FFP come next year if you're basing things solely of money in and out as I doubt our revenue has changed much in this season to last.

Add in Ancelotti being promised funds it wouldnt make any sense.

I think you were 100% right the first time. This is from an article about UEFA FFP.

Purchasing
Currently good players cost a huge amount of money and in order to balance the books of the clubs when a player is bought, his transfer fee is capitalized on the balance sheet and is amortized over the length of his contract. So the whole transfer fee is spread over the length of the contract and amortization is made yearly. To give an example a player is bought for 50 million euros over a five year contract, the transfer value is amortized for 10 million euros every year. In the balance sheet there is a 50 million investment but in the income statement there is only 10 million amortization for the next five years. This will make net profit look more stable yearly.

Selling
Sometimes players don’t stay at their clubs to the end of their contracts and they will be sold to a different club. The player’s transfer fee is in the books as mentioned above. If we use the same example as above and let’s say that the player worth EUR 50 million with his five year contract has now played two years of his contract. The annual amortization of 10 million has been made so the cumulative amortization is 20 million in two years, leaving a value of 30 million in the books. After two years the player is sold for 35 million so the selling club can report a profit on sale of 5 million euros in the accounts (sold for 35 million minus remaining 30 million). Therefore the club will show an annual profit improvement of over 15 million after the deal (5 million profit on sale plus 10 million lover amortization plus lower wages). As a result, the player who was bought two years ago for 50 million and now sold for 35 million can be made an accounting profit of 5 million on his transfer fee. However, if you only look at the transfer fees it looks like the club made a 15 million euros loss. The club can put over 15 million profit improvement in their accounts after that.

 

[TheFinnFan]

Allan not in Napoli XI

 

[Brisan123]

Bloody hell Eggs, you're committed, up at 5.27 am on a Sunday morning to post the transfer round - up!

I’d say he got up to let the Guinness out and stayed up. Lol

 

[Goat]

I think it does pal.

The transfer fee yes, but not wages, which is what we do in our accounts.

Anyway, its very complex and I dont understand 90% of it, but then nobody on here does.

 

[Glasshalffull]

I think you were 100% right the first time. This is from an article about UEFA FFP.

Purchasing
Currently good players cost a huge amount of money and in order to balance the books of the clubs when a player is bought, his transfer fee is capitalized on the balance sheet and is amortized over the length of his contract. So the whole transfer fee is spread over the length of the contract and amortization is made yearly. To give an example a player is bought for 50 million euros over a five year contract, the transfer value is amortized for 10 million euros every year. In the balance sheet there is a 50 million investment but in the income statement there is only 10 million amortization for the next five years. This will make net profit look more stable yearly.

Selling
Sometimes players don’t stay at their clubs to the end of their contracts and they will be sold to a different club. The player’s transfer fee is in the books as mentioned above. If we use the same example as above and let’s say that the player worth EUR 50 million with his five year contract has now played two years of his contract. The annual amortization of 10 million has been made so the cumulative amortization is 20 million in two years, leaving a value of 30 million in the books. After two years the player is sold for 35 million so the selling club can report a profit on sale of 5 million euros in the accounts (sold for 35 million minus remaining 30 million). Therefore the club will show an annual profit improvement of over 15 million after the deal (5 million profit on sale plus 10 million lover amortization plus lower wages). As a result, the player who was bought two years ago for 50 million and now sold for 35 million can be made an accounting profit of 5 million on his transfer fee. However, if you only look at the transfer fees it looks like the club made a 15 million euros loss. The club can put over 15 million profit improvement in their accounts after that.

Respect from me to everyone who writes and reads this stuff. I am qualified as an accountant and love the club, and yet would rather put my wotsits in a mincer than even think about, much less write or read it. Again, respect!