Not long ago Wigan RLFC had a lot of high profile overseas players but stayed within wage restraints.They also had a lot of highly paid cleaners and cooks with the same surnames. Allegedly.
How, exactly? The fees for Tufan, Sinik and Allahyar can’t have been more than the £16 million we got for KLP, and I can’t imagine new player wages accounts for the rest of our FFP headroom.
The average wage has gone up considerably according to Acun. From around £6k a week last year to around £20k a week now
There is an FFP thread so don't want to expand on it too much here, but it's not even as simple as that (in the sense, we have a lot more headroom than that), so there must be some other limit we're close to which is why I was hoping he may have expanded on it.
That still wouldn't put us close to the limit in terms of 39m losses over 3 years. There must be something else we're close to. Also begs the question of how we've been pursuing multiple other signings and comes back to my prediction some time ago now that after Tetteh and (I presumed) one more, we wouldn't be doing much.
Doesn't matter when or how you pay the fee, you can amortise over the length of the contract. If we've chosen to take the hit all at once up front it would be a strange decision, but one we're entitled to. Sort of a rod made for our own back so to speak. Leaves us much freer in following years though.
Potentially including the new targets we have been looking at? Only way i can think we are close to FFP...
Could the way the club was purchased potentially have something to do with FFP.... The purchase fee lumped onto the club ( like man utd was I think ) absolutely no idea if that's even possible or would count towards ffp but could explain it
He might be, but considering one of those three is a loan I can't imagine we'll be doing much beyond them in terms of permanent signings.
It wouldn't count towards FFP. FFP is the losses incurred by the club. You can't incur a loss purchasing yourself. And a loan from the club to Acun (essentially putting the purchase fee as debt on the club) wouldn't be a loss, it'd be a balance sheet item.
The no.10 won't be cheap, and the wingback is meant to have PL experience so he won't be cheap either. I can't imagine Halil would be particularly cheap either regardless of whether it's a loan or a perm
Unless we're signing Kevin de Bruyne I don't think we're going to be breaching 40m of losses signing a no. 10. That's also on the assumption we're dumping the entire transfer fees in the single financial period, which as I said earlier, would be shooting ourselves in the foot for essentially no reason.
There's either something in the FFP that isn't readily available or Acun is using it as a tactic to not spend as much cash.
