Jump to content

Allan Saint-Maximin (now playing for Al-Ahli)


Disco

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Wolfcastle said:

If that's close to the case there can be no arguement about selling.

 

Mind if that had been on The Manager/Champ Manager/SWOS back in the day I don't think I could have been arsed.

FM

 

’You have sold a player for £100m, the board have added £1m of this to the transfer budget’.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Equally, if the players you go on to buy don't work out, there's a drag on what you can do later. Amortisation works both ways - you still have to recover their costs at some point. 


E.g. if you buy someone for £100m on a 5 year contract, you're down £20m a year for each of those years in the future. Plus their wages. Unless you're confident your income will go up by more than that each year to cover it all, it's not some magic bullet.

 

So, it's only good if you're in expansion mode. We must be pretty confident we are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if there’ has been some confluence with ASM not finalising his move and Fabinho’s deal slowing down too.

 

If Liverpool are very vocal in their protest against any fee we might receive, perhaps PIF have decided to put the brakes on an extremely good deal for an over the hill Fabinho. Share the pain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Far too complicated all this accounting stuff. Should be simply no staggered payments allowed. If the club has the cold hard cash available they can spend it however they like. If the pots empty the pots empty.

 

Would instantly stop teams bending the rules to get players they shouldn't realistically be able to get.

 

Kind of agree with fair market value on sponsorships, but it could be based on last year's results rather than 'historic value'

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, gjohnson said:

Far too complicated all this accounting stuff. Should be simply no staggered payments allowed. If the club has the cold hard cash available they can spend it however they like. If the pots empty the pots empty.

 

This would likely make things even more difficult than they currently are for us in terms of FFP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Unbelievable said:

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.

 

 

 

The bolded part of this gets ignored by an alarming number of people. Including those paid to write about football.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lotus said:

Wonder if there’ has been some confluence with ASM not finalising his move and Fabinho’s deal slowing down too.

 

If Liverpool are very vocal in their protest against any fee we might receive, perhaps PIF have decided to put the brakes on an extremely good deal for an over the hill Fabinho. Share the pain.

 

It would serve the stupid bastards right, they've benefited more than anybody so far getting shot of their older players for stupid money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...