Unbelievable

A 16.5m profit for FFP then, more or less.

Don’t want to piss on your parade, but that makes no sense considering the people who bought him are basically the same as the people who own us.

It points to out owners wanting to play by the rules imposed by the league on behalf of the traditional “big six” a bit too much imo. Similarly I expected a few more commercial deals, even below the 1m threshold, to come through this summer, and perhaps a legal challenge or two to crack the “fairness” of the FFP rules. If we succeed it would ultimately feel a much bigger accomplishment and we are well on course to do so, but boy are we making things a bit complicated for ourselves by not leaning on the financial might of our owners the way the likes of PSG and Man City have done to get to where they are now.

The fee is a head scratcher. I can’t believe we couldn’t have got away with a higher fee considering what other players have gone for recently.

It’s profit*5, so assuming Maxi was still on the books for approx 6.5m at a fee of 30m it would be approx 117.5m, HOWEVER if we were to spend this all at once and assuming we are at the limit of FFP we would then need to make the same profit every year for the next five years (seling other players for considerable profit or through commercial revenue increases) before we could even think about further incomings. So really a better way to think about it is it allows to bring spending forward.

Our boy played the second half of a friendly vs Villarreal and won Feyenoord a penalty, which was converted to make the final score 1-1 edit: based on a quick scan on Twitter/X he played as a striker second half, was tireless and really impressed some Feyenoord fans.

Not sure how they could when we’re arguably selling at below market value.

Based on what rule could the FA possibly block an outgoing transfer?

So what’s happening with this deal then..?

Shola was a God awful football player mind. I also still loath him for his pro-Ashley comments. No idea if he’s any good at his role, but if he’s good enough for Dan Ashworth I suppose he must be doing something well.

Schiedam, outskirts of Rotterdam

There are coffeeshops aplenty, but I’d certainly call that neck of the woods rural, even if it is not far from Amsterdam.

FC Volendam is more NL oriented than most though. Just had a look at their squad: they only have 7 non-NL players on their books, 3 of whom are English. In terms of language he should have no problem.

First priority was probably to ensure he actually gets on the football pitch, which he should at that club.

FC Volendam is a typical yo-yo club over here, but very well known for its youth development. It’s a VERY traditional club and city (Christianity). The level is not great, and I’m not sure the environment is right. At least I will be able to monitor his development a bit.

Mental. Still can’t get over the apparent ASM fee in light of these ridiculous fees for mediocre English players who just happen to be on the books of the so-called big clubs. We got Milan’s talismanic, yet to hit his prime midfielder for just a bit more.

You make it sound so easy to buy one of Chelsea’s most promising youngsters just like that

The time to loan him out was last season. He looks ready for a breakout season now.

That concerns commercial deals afaik

No such transfer fee rule exists..?

Good post. This is why my Feyenoord supporting friends are less than enthousiastic. They’d rather the club promote one of their youth players.

You’re not

Regarding FFP impact, ASM was signed in august 2019 on a six year deal worth approx. £20m (if reports at the time are to be believed). For the next two years we’d still amortise £3.3m per season (plus wages obviously). Any fee we’d get on top of £6.6m would count as profit towards FFP and we’d be allowed to spend that amount times five this season, amortising those contracts over the next five years. All good so far. What people seem to forget is that spending that profit *5 now means we are restricting future spend. Let’s say we sell Maxi for £30m. That gives us £23.4m * 5 = £117m wiggle room in terms of FFP. However, if we were to spend this on Barnes and say one or two more, rather than amortising £3.3m for the next two years (and nothing more if we extend his contract afterwards), we’re now amortising roughly £25m (plus more wages) every year for the next five years. That’s money which we will need to earn commercially or by trading other good players before we can spend any further. I understand this is the way we need to grow and develop, but I’m not sure if many people realise that creating room in our FFP budget in this way comes at a cost in terms of what we then can and can’t do in the future. Personally I believe this effect of FFP to be a bit ridiculous. Normally you’d applaud clubs for using their assets beyond their amortised value, i.e. using players from their own academy. Under the current rules it’s exactly those players that would be sold off in order to fund further investment, or worse mortgaging of the club’s future.

The lad has been nothing but exemplary in his time at this club, donating to fans and charity and speaking highly of the club, the city and its inhabitants. More like you are revealing your true colours by making this unsubstantiated prediction.

They can’t retrospectively apply rules that weren’t even inexistence at the time though, especially given other PL clubs have gladly shifted their deadwood to SA.