Unbelievable

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.

He’s worth more to us than 25m, so if that’s what we would get I simply wouldn’t sell. We have SA clubs bidding though, owned by the same owners as ours, so the fee could be anything that works out best for PIF. If that is below what I consider ASM’s value to NUFC it would raise a massive red flag about our project and its role in the greater scheme of things for PIF/SA.

Why should we sell ourselves short to prevent scrutiny?

Why would that make it difficult to sell to another club for a higher fee? Is there any precedent for a league not allowing an outgoing transfer because the fee was higher than someone else’s lowball offer? I think people are confusing the fair market value rules for commercial deals with transfer revenue where there are no such rules. We’d better get >50m

I agree. AFAIK there are no fair market value rules for transfer income. PIF could quite easily spend as much as they wanted to on acquiring ASM for one of their Saudi teams and effectively render FFP a non issue for NUFC. In fact, if Maxi is willing to go to SA it seems a bit of no-brainer to put a very high price tag on him. So it’s going to give us and them some flack for a while? It’s not like there isn’t undue criticism already whatever they do and the league/other clubs have gone out of their way to handcuff our potential by means of introducing ridiculous rules restricting our potential to trade and grow the club as out owners see fit. We need to use any loophole we can.