The problem is going to be finding willing and able buyers who interest the players they want to sell. Chelsea thought they could sell Broja for something in the £50m range. There were no takers. There probably won't be any, at anything like that level, this summer, as an awful lot of clubs are fighting to get their FFP houses in order. Chelsea may get within the threshold but it certainly won't be easy or painless.
I foresee some sort of collusion where other clubs in the FFP **** agree to swap academy players for inflated fees. If Chelsea bought one of Everton’s HG players for 100m and sold them Gallagher the next day for a similar amount, both clubs would be better off by 80m assuming 5 year contracts.
In the short-term this would be unsatisying, but in the long-term they'd just be pyramid-scheming themselves even more into the dirt in the coming years. Loading up on expensively-bought players that nuke their amortised figures for years to come while depleting themselves of more and more of their valuable HG players. Both teams would be delaying the inevitable if they did this... Chelsea and the like are now completely reliant on buying 16yos for peanuts, loaning them out for a few years and hoping they do well enough that they can sell them on for bigger money by the time they reach low to mid 20's. If we all stop buying their loanees they crash and burn.
Well, that's what the guy on the radio was saying who was apparently some P&L specialist. I don't know. Sounded appealing because Chelsea are scum. Would be disappointing not to be true. Where's the source for actual info?
The idiots who bought Kai Havertz and Mason Mount have a lot to answer for. With £100m less in the bank Chelsea would already by ****ed
If Ange really wants the player, then if I was Levy I would : 1. Calculate the minimum transfer fee that will enable them to comply with FFP by a mere 1m pa over 4 years, and offer that. 2. If they refuse to sell to Spurs, put the numbers for #1 in the public domain.
How on earth did they manage to sell this pair for fortunes? Blackmail, demands with menaces, fraud. I thought the Russians had left.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe wants to take a leaf out of Spurs’ book and build a new stadium. Utd own a lot of land around the ground and can therefore not only expand the ground but build leisure and entertainment facilities on site. The revenues from this could be substantial - as they have been for Spurs. The Glazers should have done this a decade or more ago.
Isn’t this also very similar to what Juve got pinged for? Don’t get me wrong I think it’s a murky business to be enforcing on because who is to determine the value of a player? There are so many variables. But the bodies who enforce this kind of thing might view that as a precedent. I know you’re not proposing a swap here but that makes it even more egregious.
All you know is that some serious "creative accounting" schemes will be concocted to try and escape this. So all the PL big fish need to do is to "hold the line" on transfer fees so that when a player is on offer from a : 1. Sugga Daddy FC, drive the price down as badly as possible 2. a smaller club, whose finances have got in trouble due to the financial arms race fueled primarily by the Sugga Daddy FCs, do not seek to punish them.
And you can play at the Etihad in the meantime. I hear it's even got a functional roof and everything. Alternatively, Toughsheet. That's what The Reebok is called nowadays, apparently.
If he owned the club.... ...but he doesn't. I wouldn't loan the Glazer family the steam off my piss without substantial collateral. They've always used their club shares and charged the club with the interest. I see a fall out between the owners coming about funding....
