Summer Transfer Window
- Thread starter GodAlmighty
- Start date
-
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
-
Forest's spend isn't as mad as it seems - Gibbs-White is the only player over £20m, only 4 players between £10-20m and 7 others below £10m that they've paid a fee for. Past that there's loans and free transfers but your not paying £10+m for those in fees and probably more like £3-6m for agent and player. They've lost 9 over the summer for little or no fee plus whoever they had on loan and lost at the end of last season.
16 players in - roughly £150M spent (inc free transfers/exc add ons) - average £9.3m per player to rebuild there squad.
Only players over 30 are Lingard, Kouyate, Hennesey (all free) and Frueler (£8.1m) past that everyone is 26 or under so just hitting their prime or room to develop.
TBH its very very good business and if they stay up they'll be quids in. I said the other day - their in danger if they go down and stay down but actually they've made £100m+ this year just through being in the league and they probably weren't expecting in January this year so net loss for the year of £50m on transfers + their wages outlay but they could recoup that by selling a few of them if they go down, if they stay up they can add one or two and push on from there.
Really impressive when you look at it, ballsy move from the club, a lot of promoted teams just come take the money and go down again but they are clearly aiming high.
16 players in - roughly £150M spent (inc free transfers/exc add ons) - average £9.3m per player to rebuild there squad.
Only players over 30 are Lingard, Kouyate, Hennesey (all free) and Frueler (£8.1m) past that everyone is 26 or under so just hitting their prime or room to develop.
TBH its very very good business and if they stay up they'll be quids in. I said the other day - their in danger if they go down and stay down but actually they've made £100m+ this year just through being in the league and they probably weren't expecting in January this year so net loss for the year of £50m on transfers + their wages outlay but they could recoup that by selling a few of them if they go down, if they stay up they can add one or two and push on from there.
Really impressive when you look at it, ballsy move from the club, a lot of promoted teams just come take the money and go down again but they are clearly aiming high.
It’s worth that to them even if they get relegated first year.
Their wages would have been really low and thus they can spend this way and be within FFP.
My question would be where is the actual cash coming from.
And what if this all goes wrong. Playing with fire.
I wouldn't call it impressive, as it could blow up in their faces. Definitely risk taking, but their highest earner only has a one year contract. If they go down, his wages are off the books.
Good luck to them.
Pulisic is now our number one target from the Chelsea bunch apparently.
Well, they're allowed to lose £105 million over a 3 year accounting period (35 x 3). They had loads of players leave, which were on loan... Dunno about the rest of their finances, but they'll have got a good chunk for getting promoted. They'll be touch and go I should think at this point.
Remember though, everything they spend on fees/transfers is amortised over the length of the player's contracts, so it's not like they'll be paying it all day 1, but over 3-5 years most likely.
Remember though, everything they spend on fees/transfers is amortised over the length of the player's contracts, so it's not like they'll be paying it all day 1, but over 3-5 years most likely.
Last edited:
So assuming all contracts are 5 years then only 1/5 of costs are counted this season?
Golly-gosh indeed - I agree. Of the lot, he'd be the one I'd prefer to end up with us.
Correct, and when you only have to account for 3 years FFP at a time...
Have you been reading Charles Dickens books again?
But the same applies to all teams. So we could be spending a lot more than we have, without impacting FFP.
I have faith in the club making more signings, but by golly gosh, if we still register Murphy in our 25 man squad on 1st September then one will be incredibly miffed.
Specifically for this year, yes, but as you have a 3 year accounting period to work for FFP with, that means they're taking 30m of their 35m allowable loss for the next 5 years... Looking simplistically at it, assuming they're starting at net 0.
This is where revenue growth comes in to allow you to support / not reach that ceiling of losses. This is where we need to become (and will become ) much stronger in the coming years.
However much they got for promotion would be in this years accounts, so they might be positive for this year, then the next years, closer to the 35m loss... There are a lot of variables.