PIF and RB Sports & Media

[gjohnson]

6 hours ago, r0cafella said:

In an open market transaction the fair market value is decided by the selling price. This is how markets work. 

Not where the PL is involved....fair market value is  Sky 6 = x, anyone below =x/2 or less

[macphisto]

For anyone having a go at Staveley, we don't know what was promised in terms of incoming commercial deals. 

 

The other thing is no one says which transfer we shouldn't have done or who we should have sold that would have covered the shortfall? 

[gjohnson]

5 minutes ago, macphisto said:

For anyone having a go at Staveley, we don't know what was promised in terms of incoming commercial deals. 

 

The other thing is no one says which transfer we shouldn't have done or who we should have sold that would have covered the shortfall? 

No ones having a go at Stavely....she saved us from Ashley, and communicated with us in a way we hadn't seen before or since.

 

She isn't above criticism though as some of her conduct in business deals outside of us has been shown to be suspect at best bordering on fraudulent at worst. Barclays don't try to sue you for billions for genuine mistakes...

[Kanj]

2 hours ago, gjohnson said:

Staveley did a lot of good things for us. That can't be argued. However her record in other areas is not exactly whiter than white with some debatable shady deals for her own benefit

 

That has nothing to do with us and her work with NUFC

[Wolfcastle]

5 hours ago, enthusiast said:

 

i would bet an entire month's wage that the tone of the conversation would be completely different had she been a fat, bald bloke in a gilet.

I defend John Hall when people say he took money out the club. There was no money to take out the club when he bought it and completely transformed it.

Probably just fancied him. Got jel whenever he mentioned Lady Mae, thinking 'it should be Me not Mae"

[Groundhog63]

3 minutes ago, Wolfcastle said:

I defend John Hall when people say he took money out the club. There was no money to take out the club when he bought it and completely transformed it.

Probably just fancied him. Got jel whenever he mentioned Lady Mae, thinking 'it should be Me not Mae"

I despise the Tory cunt. Granted, best years supporting NUFC, until now, but he's still a wrongun. 

[Bishops Finger]

13 minutes ago, gjohnson said:

No ones having a go at Stavely....she saved us from Ashley, and communicated with us in a way we hadn't seen before or since.

 

She isn't above criticism though as some of her conduct in business deals outside of us has been shown to be suspect at best bordering on fraudulent at worst. Barclays don't try to sue you for billions for genuine mistakes...

Thought it was Staveley sueing barclays not the other way around 

[gjohnson]

41 minutes ago, Kanj said:

 

That has nothing to do with us and her work with NUFC

I do believe that's exactly what I said

[gjohnson]

32 minutes ago, Bishops Finger said:

Thought it was Staveley sueing barclays not the other way around 

Counter-claim

[huss9]

4 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Because that's not how it works. The costs carry. It's not a 1 season issue. We've not spent much this season and if we don't sell well or suddenly get massive revenue, we'll not buy much next season either.

yeah but barely spending this season, together with the first season spend falling off will ease things next season. just not before june.

[Ben]

11 hours ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

 

I think it's fair to say that Darwin Nunez has a lot more to his game than Chris Wood.

 

Aye aye

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, huss9 said:

yeah but barely spending this season, together with the first season spend falling off will ease things next season. just not before june.

That’s not how it works 

[Dr.Spaceman]

47 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

Aye aye

 

I never knocked Chris Wood's ability to score goals, I just think Nunez is the better all round footballer which is something the stats back up and partly why he's worth considerably more than 10 million.

[huss9]

25 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

That’s not how it works 

how does it work?

[The College Dropout]

9 minutes ago, huss9 said:

how does it work?

Costs are spread over contract lengths and wages are annual. So Tonali and Barnes cost us the same this season as they did last season. 

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by The College Dropout

[huss9]

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

Costs are spread over contract lengths and wages are annual. So Tonali and Barnes cost us the same this season as they did last season. 

 

 

 

no. i'm stumped.

but we've spent little on transfer fees in the third year buy loads in the first - spread out or not.

i give up.

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by huss9

[80]

1 hour ago, huss9 said:

no. i'm stumped.

but we've spent little on transfer fees in the third year buy loads in the first - spread out or not.

i give up.

 

 

 

Basically, you're right about the three year period. Year 1 drops off when Year 4 comes along, and then Year 2 drops off when Year 5 comes along. 

 

But if you buy someone in Year 1 on a 5 year contract, in PSR you're still paying exactly the same amount for him in Year 5 as you were back at the start.

 

E.g. a £50m transfer fee plus £5m wages per year equals a cost of £15m in Year 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 (that's the £5m wages plus a portion of the transfer fee).

 

So even though we bought Bruno, Burn and Trippier four PSR seasons ago, in PSR we're still paying the same for them now as we were originally, and will be next season too. So the amount we're spending each season in PSR-world has gone up every season, pretty much like a snowball rolling down a hill.

 

For nitpickers, I'm just trying to keep the explanation simple and without more complications than necessary.

[TheBrownBottle]

7 hours ago, huss9 said:

no. i'm stumped.

but we've spent little on transfer fees in the third year buy loads in the first - spread out or not.

i give up.

 

 

 

Just to add to 80’s excellent summation and to point out how crackers it gets, if you’ve bought a player for a fee they will always have an amortised book value.  So if you take Lascelles who was signed 11 years ago for about £3.5m (from memory we paid £7m for him and Darlow), his fee will have been further divided or amortised with each new contract.  So Lascelles’ transfer from more than a decade ago will still have a PSR burden (though at this point it will be negligible - and amortisation across a new contract is still capped at five years, minus the ‘book value’ already deducted in the previous contract period).  This is why academy products are so valuable from a selling perspective, and why buying at high fees is so risky - the player will always have a book value as long as they’re at the club.