Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Players costs are recorded on the books are spread out over the length of the contract and include wages.

It's a lot more complicated than we spend £50mill this year and recoup £50 mill so have £50mil to spend. Also agent fees and crap come out of each sale.

A £100mill transfer that results in a 5 year contract would be recorded as £20mill +wages for each of the next 5 years on the books.

A cheap player on high wages gets counts for more than an expensive player on low wages. Who knows what our books like and how much we have to spend? It's probably a lot more complicated than Henry telling Klopp he has £200mil to spend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby and Zanjinho
Milk Omertà said:
Then I completely disagree with you. Can looked better in CB than Klavan, and when Lucas used to be with us, he was better in that spot too. I'd imagine Milner or Henderson could cover the position better in an emergency too.

I'm not familiar with our U21 but I can't imagine them being much worse and the experience would be important.
Click to expand...
Harsh on Raggy, methinks.
 
Money is irrelevant. None of our recent transfers have gone ahead just because the price was cheap or failed because the price was too high. If it's the right player and he's available to buy and wants to come then FSG will pay.
 
Well Man City have spent ridiculous money in last 2 years.. heck even clubs like Burnley stoke out spent us on net over last few years so I think we’re pretty good for s while yet.

Especially if we get get rid of Markovic, Sturridge, Mig who are high earners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy Squarefoot
You must log in or register to see images


It's a rolling period of 3 years this cycle started in season 2016/17 to 2018/19

So.... whatever that's worth....
 
Milk Omertà said:
Players costs are recorded on the books are spread out over the length of the contract and include wages.

It's a lot more complicated than we spend £50mill this year and recoup £50 mill so have £50mil to spend. Also agent fees and crap come out of each sale.

A £100mill transfer that results in a 5 year contract would be recorded as £20mill +wages for each of the next 5 years on the books.

A cheap player on high wages gets counts for more than an expensive player on low wages. Who knows what our books like and how much we have to spend? It's probably a lot more complicated than Henry telling Klopp he has £200mil to spend.
Click to expand...

it is complicated but for FFP its over a rolls 3 year period.

so if you've 2 good years like we have say.... you can go mad in year 3.... this is in terms of "losses" made in the year. hence the odd city sponsorships we all wonder about.

If LFC say spend 300mil this year... well it might be ok. I don't know. this is based on not spending 2 last yeas but then we might find that in 12 months time we cannot spend as we have only one good year and one whopper of a year so need to be frugal.
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
it is complicated but for FFP its over a rolls 3 year period.

so if you've 2 good years like we have say.... you can go mad in year 3.... this is in terms of "losses" made in the year. hence the odd city sponsorships we all wonder about.

If LFC say spend 300mil this year... well it might be ok. I don't know. this is based on not spending 2 last yeas but then we might find that in 12 months time we cannot spend as we have only one good year and one whopper of a year so need to be frugal.
Click to expand...


I think, if we bought a player for £60mil. And he had £10mil per year wages on a 4 year contract he would count as a £25mil expenditure EACH year (£60 / 4 + £10) not £50m in the year he was purchased.

So, after his third year looking back in FFP he would count as £75mil in expenditure.
 
Milk Omertà said:
Then I completely disagree with you. Can looked better in CB than Klavan, and when Lucas used to be with us, he was better in that spot too. I'd imagine Milner or Henderson could cover the position better in an emergency too.

I'm not familiar with our U21 but I can't imagine them being much worse and the experience would be important.
Click to expand...

Now i know you're wrong milky.

Lucas used to get slaughtered at CB (by then he'd lost his legs)
 
Jimmy Squarefoot said:
Lol ok mate.
Click to expand...

lol well maybe not your description of Hendo but:

tidy on the ball = hendo king of side to side passing
can play a through ball = he doensn't do it often but hendo has put in some neat throughballs
winning the ball back = okay hendo doesn't do this very effectively
covering large space = one of hendos strengths is that he can run all day long like milner.
 
BobbyD said:
lol well maybe not your description of Hendo but:

tidy on the ball = hendo king of side to side passing
can play a through ball = he doensn't do it often but hendo has put in some neat throughballs
winning the ball back = okay hendo doesn't do this very effectively
covering large space = one of hendos strengths is that he can run all day long like milner.
Click to expand...

Tidy on the ball doesn’t mean just passing sideways. It’s about being confident in possession, not ****ting yourself when pressed and playing quickly and passing through lines. Whilst Fabinho isn’t Alonso, he can hold his own.

Hendo can occasionally play a through ball - granted.

Fabinho is a really good ball winner, excellent tackling and tracking. Hendo isn’t great in that respect.

Covering large spaces isn’t about being able to run around. It’s about being positionally aware and blocking passing channels to prevent a pass even coming near you in the first place. This is arguably his best attribute - great intelligence and awareness.

Not to mention the fact that he’s stronger and better in the air.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tiresias and BobbyD
Milk Omertà said:
I think, if we bought a player for £60mil. And he had £10mil per year wages on a 4 year contract he would count as a £25mil expenditure EACH year (£60 / 4 + £10) not £50m in the year he was purchased.

So, after his third year looking back in FFP he would count as £75mil in expenditure.
Click to expand...

no thats not how it works. It is how you might amortise yes but its not how FFP looks at the finances.

If you managed to get a club to take their transfer fee that way then sure great but if you pay 70mil upfront to southampton then that 70mil off the books right then. Same for if coutinho got with two installments to get to 120mil or whatever. it could be 100mil in now.

writing down the players value over the lifetime of a contract is not the same as the profit and loss which FFP is all about. This is why PSG "loaned" mbappe this season and didn't buy. They will buy this summer but in effect they kicked the FFP issue down the road.

The only losses The rules allow are those related to capital investments and such like our stadium.

IF you double your wages in a year it hits FFP. If you build a 90k stadium it doesn't. Buy a 50mil player it does, buy a 50mil training gorund no.
 
LIVERPOOL TARGET €60m CILLESSEN

Liverpool are interested in Barca 'keeper Jasper Cillessen, reports Mundo Deportivo.

The Reds are keen to bring in a top shot stopper this summer after Lorus Karius’ calamitous display in the Champions League final and Roma’s Alisson Becker and Atletico’s Jan Oblak have both been linked with a move to Anfield.

Now Mundo Deportivo reports that they are also keen on Cillessen, who has been the second-choice 'keeper at Barca since making the move from Ajax in 2016.

Barca have been made aware, via a British agent, that Liverpool are keen on the Netherlands international, but they La Liga champions insist that he is not for sale.

Cillessen, who is under contract until 2021, has a €60m buyout clause.
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
no thats not how it works. It is how you might amortise yes but its not how FFP looks at the finances.

If you managed to get a club to take their transfer fee that way then sure great but if you pay 70mil upfront to southampton then that 70mil off the books right then. Same for if coutinho got with two installments to get to 120mil or whatever. it could be 100mil in now.

writing down the players value over the lifetime of a contract is not the same as the profit and loss which FFP is all about. This is why PSG "loaned" mbappe this season and didn't buy. They will buy this summer but in effect they kicked the FFP issue down the road.

The only losses The rules allow are those related to capital investments and such like our stadium.

IF you double your wages in a year it hits FFP. If you build a 90k stadium it doesn't. Buy a 50mil player it does, buy a 50mil training gorund no.
Click to expand...

Isn't there a provision in ffp for one-off investments? I seem to recall that while limited, it was possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back