Kieran Trippier: has a chance to play against Everton (Howe)

[80]

44 minutes ago, Beth said:

Would you pay more than that for a player you're going to get only one and half sesons out of, maybe two and a half at a push?

At their level of success and income, hoping to win a Champions' League in the next couple of seasons, then sure.

[Unlucky Luque]

1 hour ago, Alberto2005 said:

How much does it actually help with FFP?

 

Let's assume we paid £12m and we get £12m back.

 

Is it just as simple as we have £12m to play around with?

Add another 0 to that because amortization over five years or some shit I don't know

[mondonewc]

Crazy to think that we could sell Trippier, Wilson and Almiron, and I have that much confidence in those who are running the club along with the management team that whilst I'd be a little disappointed to see them go, I'd have no worries that it was for the right reasons to hopefully benefit the club and our future plans moving forward.

 

 

Edited January 23, 2024 by mondonewc

[TRon]

3 minutes ago, TRC said:

Replacing Trippier with Livramento isn't that straight forward, trippier makes 90 passes a game, is one of the most creative players in terms of key passes and crosses per game in the league, its tough to replace that I'm now thinking its not really worth taking the cash. 

 

Trippier will be 34 this year. If we can afford to write off the fee we can get now then great, otherwise it is going to be detrimental to our future if the FFP stuff is right and we have to sell before we buy.

[cubaricho]

3 minutes ago, TRC said:

Replacing Trippier with Livramento isn't that straight forward, trippier makes 90 passes a game, is one of the most creative players in terms of key passes and crosses per game in the league, its tough to replace that I'm now thinking its not really worth taking the cash. 

We’ll have to adapt and maybe it unlocks another player or two that will each make 20-30 more passes a match now.
 

I for one will look forward to us playing a modified style and hope we become less predictable in the process. 

[oldtype]

1 minute ago, cubaricho said:

We’ll have to adapt and maybe it unlocks another player or two that will each make 20-30 more passes a match now.
 

I for one will look forward to us playing a modified style and hope we become less predictable in the process. 

 

The "all of our creativity comes from our 33-year-old right back" model was never going to be sustainable anyway. We have other creative players, they can step up to fill the void. We have a whole half-season with relatively low expectations for Howe to figure it out.

[PauloGeordio]

46 minutes ago, Menace said:

Ashby and Krafth aren't good enough though. So we'd still need to strengthen if he leaves.

Krafth is good enough as cover for Tino. Ashby is an unknown atm.

[Tsunami]

Don’t want to see him sold but, if his head has been turned (and why wouldn’t it) and if we can get close to 15M for a near 34 year old, it’s a bit of a no brainer. 

[Andy]

Frankly can't believe we've laughed off £13m for a 33 year old Kieran Trippier and allegedly want around £25m for Miguel Almiron. Do our owners think they're playing football manager?  

[The Prophet]

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

[Chris_R]

2 hours ago, Alberto2005 said:

How much does it actually help with FFP?

 

Let's assume we paid £12m and we get £12m back.

 

Is it just as simple as we have £12m to play around with?

Yes.

 

Despite the ravings of some, raising £12m doesn't allow you to spend £60m.

 

It can be used towards one year's payments of a £60m deal that's spread over 5 years, but you've still got to find £12m for each of the next 4 years from somewhere. That commitment doesn't disappear just because you shout "amortisation".

[Jaqen]

6 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

Yes.

 

Despite the ravings of some, raising £12m doesn't allow you to spend £60m.

 

It can be used towards one year's payments of a £60m deal that's spread over 5 years, but you've still got to find £12m for each of the next 4 years from somewhere. That commitment doesn't disappear just because you shout "amortisation".

 

Nah that's not right either. We don't get the straight £12m. We get the £12m minus whatever his value is worth based on his fee divided by remaining contract length. So we'd be looking at less than £10m 'profit' from the sale I'm guessing. 

[nufcnick]

20 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

Yes.

 

Despite the ravings of some, raising £12m doesn't allow you to spend £60m.

 

It can be used towards one year's payments of a £60m deal that's spread over 5 years, but you've still got to find £12m for each of the next 4 years from somewhere. That commitment doesn't disappear just because you shout "amortisation".

It gives us room to spend in this window, until new revenue streams become available next year, it also allows us to spend £30-35m not £60m 

 

 

Edited January 23, 2024 by nufcnick

[Chris_R]

1 minute ago, Jaqen said:

 

Nah that's not right either. We don't get the straight £12m. We get the £12m minus whatever his value is worth based on his fee divided by remaining contract length. So we'd be looking at less than £10m 'profit' from the sale I'm guessing. 

 

Well yes if we amortised his initial fee over a number of years and that's not fully paid yet, we still owe it.

[nufcnick]

2 minutes ago, Jaqen said:

 

Nah that's not right either. We don't get the straight £12m. We get the £12m minus whatever his value is worth based on his fee divided by remaining contract length. So we'd be looking at less than £10m 'profit' from the sale I'm guessing. 

His book value is £5.2m so if we got £12m that would allow us to spend around £30-35m on a player paying the same £120k a week wages.

[Chris_R]

Just now, nufcnick said:

It gives us room to spend in this window, until new revenue streams become available next year, it also allows us to spend £35m not £60m 

 

That's all well and good provided those revenue streams materialise and can cover the shortfall. But there's not an infinite amount we can grow revenue by, at a speed we dictate. 

 

It's a nice theory, but it's not a certainty to happen. Far from it. And we can't just keep saying we'll increase revenue streams by 4* every sale we make forever more.

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

1 minute ago, Chris_R said:

 

That's all well and good provided those revenue streams materialise and can cover the shortfall. But there's not an infinite amount we can grow revenue by, at a speed we dictate. 

 

It's a nice theory, but it's not a certainty to happen. Far from it. And we can't just keep saying we'll increase revenue streams by 4* every sale we make forever more.

Well obviously not, but there will be further player trading alongside the increases in commercial revenue, which for the next few years the club can be fairly sure of, given the low base Ashley left us at. Remember the club are actually employing competent people now to manage this stuff. 

[Jaqen]

3 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

 

Well yes if we amortised his initial fee over a number of years and that's not fully paid yet, we still owe it.

 

Every transfer is amortised over the contract length in terms of FFP regardless of when the club actually pays the money. We could have paid the £12 upfront or not paid them a penny yet and it wouldn't make a difference. 

[nufcnick]

3 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

 

That's all well and good provided those revenue streams materialise and can cover the shortfall. But there's not an infinite amount we can grow revenue by, at a speed we dictate. 

 

It's a nice theory, but it's not a certainty to happen. Far from it. And we can't just keep saying we'll increase revenue streams by 4* every sale we make forever more.

We have a new £35m+ revenue stream coming in the summer

[Chris_R]

28 minutes ago, nufcnick said:

We have a new £35m+ revenue stream coming in the summer

Great. But entirely not my point.

 

My only point is that too many people think that amortisation just removes the future commitment. That you can repeatedly sell a player for £10m and that gives you £50m to spend, and that you can just keep doing this infinitely.

 

That's a genuine position some seem to have. All I'm doing is pointing out it's nonsense. Sure, revenue will increase in future allowing more spending. But it would do that anyway without us selling Trippier, the two things aren't connected.

 

 

Edited January 23, 2024 by Chris_R

[The Prophet]

 

[Lish007]

Just now, The Prophet said:

 

Good, shows him how much we want him..

[SUPERTOON]

27 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

I’d expect their next bid to be close to what we want.

[Ronaldo]

Bye Trip.

[oldtype]

We're never going to get this much money for him again and we were probably going to move him on in the summer anyway.

 

Given the reality where we are this season, it makes sense.