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!
Zanjinho said:
If true, why turn down Man City for Liverpool?

Crooks is a cockend
Click to expand...

He's a spurs plant desperately trying to sew a bit of confusion. he should be ignored for the twat he is. less clicks = he loses his job.

I'd say he's got enough abuse (deliberate bait) to keep his job for another year form that one bit of gobshittery.
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
yes, and if he extends contract we gain even more write down. it is an asset and written off against tax in this manner.

however thats for TAX, not for FFP. FFP demand you spend what you earn
Click to expand...

No, that’s wrong. The post you replied to was correct. A player is an intangible asset and his transfer value is written down over the period of his initial contract, extending it makes no odds. The annual write down or amortisation is the cost that’s taken in the tax year e.g. you buy a £50m player on a 5 year contract, the cost in the current financial year is £10m not 50. FFP is based on annual losses and is so measured on the accounts, not spend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SIR_KENNY_KLOPP_KING and moreinjuredthanowen
You must log in or register to see media

You must log in or register to see images

WARNOCK STAYING AT CARDIFF

Neil Warnock looks set to stay with Cardiff City for one more season after constructive talks with the club, Sky Sports News has been told.

The 70-year old met with Cardiff board members Mehmet Dalman and Ken Choo in London’s Mayfair last night to discuss staying at the Cardiff City stadium for the final year of his contract – and a shot at returning the Bluebirds to the Premier League at the first attempt.

Speaking after their 2-0 win against Man United on Sunday, Warnock said he would welcome a chance to achieve a ninth promotion of his career.

"I'm going to have one more year in the Championship," he said.

"It'd be nice to get a ninth promotion. I never thought I'd be going for it but the wife's keen!"
 
Tobes said:
No, that’s wrong. The post you replied to was correct. A player is an intangible asset and his transfer value is written down over the period of his initial contract, extending it makes no odds. The annual write down or amortisation is the cost that’s taken in the tax year e.g. you buy a £50m player on a 5 year contract, the cost in the current financial year is £10m not 50. FFP is based on annual losses and is so measured on the accounts, not spend.
Click to expand...

ta mate <ok>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tobes
Celtic job is just a pay cheque. You can't prove anything there or increase your reputation... Sure, I'm sure it's great just to get paid whilst kicking your feet up.
 
Tobes said:
No, that’s wrong. The post you replied to was correct. A player is an intangible asset and his transfer value is written down over the period of his initial contract, extending it makes no odds. The annual write down or amortisation is the cost that’s taken in the tax year e.g. you buy a £50m player on a 5 year contract, the cost in the current financial year is £10m not 50. FFP is based on annual losses and is so measured on the accounts, not spend.
Click to expand...

Yup - and as all of our incomes have increased dramatically this last couple of years, our spending ability has too. That’s not just us mind, every team in the PL has much bigger spending power now.
 
Tobes said:
No, that’s wrong. The post you replied to was correct. A player is an intangible asset and his transfer value is written down over the period of his initial contract, extending it makes no odds. The annual write down or amortisation is the cost that’s taken in the tax year e.g. you buy a £50m player on a 5 year contract, the cost in the current financial year is £10m not 50. FFP is based on annual losses and is so measured on the accounts, not spend.
Click to expand...

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

"Where a club extends a players' contract, the book value at the time the contract was re-negotiated would need to be amortised over the duration of the new contract."

[HASHTAG]#readtherules[/HASHTAG]
 
Tobes said:
No, that’s wrong. The post you replied to was correct. A player is an intangible asset and his transfer value is written down over the period of his initial contract, extending it makes no odds. The annual write down or amortisation is the cost that’s taken in the tax year e.g. you buy a £50m player on a 5 year contract, the cost in the current financial year is £10m not 50. FFP is based on annual losses and is so measured on the accounts, not spend.
Click to expand...
If a players contract is extended it brings a new amortisation cost. The book value at the time of the extension is amortised in the same way as you describe here.

Using your e.g. a £50m player who renews after two years has £30m spread over the new contract length. If that's a five year contract then the new amortisation is £6m per season. If the player renews again, the amortisation is similarly revised and so on.
 
astro said:
http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php

"Where a club extends a players' contract, the book value at the time the contract was re-negotiated would need to be amortised over the duration of the new contract."

[HASHTAG]#readtherules[/HASHTAG]
Click to expand...

That does line up with that tobes said.

100mil signing over 5 year.

20 mil year 1
20mil year 2
New contract signed year 3 giving 5 more years so 12mil year 3 etc.

Same value written down for tax purposes over all.

Makes sense to me anyway.
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
That does line up with that tobes said.

100mil signing over 5 year.

20 mil year 1
20mil year 2
New contract signed year 3 giving 5 more years so 12mil year 3 etc.

Same value written down for tax purposes over all.

Makes sense to me anyway.
Click to expand...
How is £12m the same as £20m?

Tobes said amortisation costs are set in the year you buy a player and extensions make no difference. They do make a difference.

I've no idea about tax implications but in terms of FFP it means that decreasing amortisations make it look like you spent less in that year's accounts than you would have done if there had been no contract extension. Your e.g. proves it. £12m as opposed to £20m.
 
Last edited:
johnsonsbaby said:
How is £12m the same as £20m?

Tobes said amortisation costs are set in the year you buy a player and extensions make no difference. They do make a difference.

I've no idea about tax implications but in terms of FFP it means that decreasing amortisations make it look like you spent less in that year's accounts than you would have done if there had been no contract extension. Your e.g. proves it. £12m as opposed to £20m.
Click to expand...

£100m spread over five years = £20m per season...

Season one = £20m
Season two = £20m

Sign new five year contract, £60m remaining...

£60m spread over five years = £12m per season...

Season three = £12m
Season four = £12m

Sign new five year contract, £36m remaining...

£36m spread over five years = £7.2m per season...

Year five = £7.2m


And so on...
 
johnsonsbaby said:
How is £12m the same as £20m?

Tobes said amortisation costs are set in the year you buy a player and extensions make no difference. They do make a difference.

I've no idea about tax implications but in terms of FFP it means that decreasing amortisations make it look like you spent less in that year's accounts than you would have done if there had been no contract extension. Your e.g. proves it. £12m as opposed to £20m.
Click to expand...

Just reading what astro posted.

Normally speciation is over a set period 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, 20 years depending on what the asset is. A building or a car or a machine are all different.

I interpreted astro quote as saying the useful life of the asset changes from in my case 5 to 7 years so I depreciate the 100mil over 7 years with 20milmover each of first 2 years allowed as best known info but then I'm not allowed complete 20 mil take

Say I sell player having written him off over 5 years but his new deal has 2 to run. I make back huge amount.

It's be to my thinking like writing off a car over 5 years and then selling it for same as i bought it, thus government is in effect paying me to have it.
 
Zanjinho said:
£100m spread over five years = £20m per season...

Season one = £20m
Season two = £20m

Sign new five year contract, £60m remaining...

£60m spread over five years = £12m per season...

Season three = £12m
Season four = £12m

Sign new five year contract, £36m remaining...

£36m spread over five years = £7.2m per season...

Year five = £7.2m


And so on...
Click to expand...
Yes, that's exactly what I said in my first post <ok>

If there were no contract extensions the amortisation stays at £20m per year. The contract renewals make a difference in the annual accounts which in turn make a difference to FFP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zanjinho
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
johnsonsbaby said:
Yes, that's exactly what I said in my first post <ok>

If there were no contract extensions the amortisation stays at £20m per year. The contract renewals make a difference in the annual accounts which in turn make a difference to FFP.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you know already but... I didn't read back :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
moreinjuredthanowen said:
Just reading what astro posted.

Normally speciation is over a set period 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, 20 years depending on what the asset is. A building or a car or a machine are all different.

I interpreted astro quote as saying the useful life of the asset changes from in my case 5 to 7 years so I depreciate the 100mil over 7 years with 20milmover each of first 2 years allowed as best known info but then I'm not allowed complete 20 mil take

Say I sell player having written him off over 5 years but his new deal has 2 to run. I make back huge amount.

It's be to my thinking like writing off a car over 5 years and then selling it for same as i bought it, thus government is in effect paying me to have it.
Click to expand...
Our initial discussion was about FFP. You raised the point about contract extensions but in terms of tax implications which I know nothing about. Tobes said extensions made no difference and pointed out amortisation saying it's all based on the year you buy a player which isn't true.

The annual lowering of amortisation with contract extensions means accounts show you spent less which is more favourable in FFP terms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back