Sven Botman back late December/early January 'at the earliest' (Howe)

[Abacus]

53 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

it’s not, they are 2 different transactions.

 

the loan is an operating expense in the year. The obligation to buy at most would be a provision with an equal asset on the book, but overall probably ignored on grounds of materiality as there is no profit impact.

 

im surprised (or maybe not) that FFP hasn’t added a clause to deal with them but accounting wise it’s pretty clean to deal with

 

edit actually it would probably be a future obligation disclosure rather than a provision, so just a note to say it will happen rather than recognising it

 

 

 

My whole point was, if there is a genuine obligation to buy, they're not treated as 2 separate transactions. You'd add the loan fee to the permanent fee, treat the whole thing as a sale, and write the whole lot off equally over the same period. I.e. it does nothing for FFP.

 

To treat it as you suggest, you would need to demonstrate that the loan part is genuinely that, different from the permanent part, and that there is a realistic prospect you can and might back out of the purchase part. 

 

In which case, the substance of that is that it's actually a loan with an option to buy. Meaning, I don't see what this term being used "loan with obligation to buy" really means.

 

Anyway. Might be wrong, could just be loose journalistic language, but happy to leave it there.

 

After all, I'm no football manager, so I'm all for sensible soccer chat instead.

 

 

[et tu brute]

12 minutes ago, Abacus said:

My whole point was, if there is a genuine obligation to buy, they're not treated as 2 separate transactions. You'd add the loan fee to the permanent fee, treat the whole thing as a sale, and write the whole lot off equally over the same period. I.e. it does nothing for FFP.

 

To treat it as you suggest, you would need to demonstrate that the loan part is genuinely that, different from the permanent part, and that there is a realistic prospect you can and might back out of the purchase part. 

 

In which case, the substance of that is that it's actually a loan with an option to buy. Meaning, I don't see what this term being used "loan with obligation to buy" really means.

 

Anyway. Might be wrong, could just be loose journalistic language, but happy to leave it there.

 

After all, I'm no football manager, so I'm all for sensible soccer chat instead.

 

 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

14 minutes ago, Abacus said:

My whole point was, if there is a genuine obligation to buy, they're not treated as 2 separate transactions. You'd add the loan fee to the permanent fee, treat the whole thing as a sale, and write the whole lot off equally over the same period. I.e. it does nothing for FFP.

 

To treat it as you suggest, you would need to demonstrate that the loan part is genuinely that, different from the permanent part, and that there is a realistic prospect you can and might back out of the purchase part. 

 

In which case, the substance of that is that it's actually a loan with an option to buy. Meaning, I don't see what this term being used "loan with obligation to buy" really means.

 

Anyway. Might be wrong, could just be loose journalistic language, but happy to leave it there.

 

After all, I'm no football manager, so I'm all for sensible soccer chat instead.

 

 

It is language, there is no ‘loan with an obligation to buy’, there is (a) a loan and then (b) a second transaction which is the purchase. They are not linked contractually.

 

there are non financial reasons for doing this as well as FFP - insurance, recovery costs from injuries etc.

 

for this discussion the upshot is that the purchase only shows on the accounts when it’s made, not when the loan starts

[OpenC]

28 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

 

Not a 90s videogame fan then

[Abacus]

25 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

It is language, there is no ‘loan with an obligation to buy’, there is (a) a loan and then (b) a second transaction which is the purchase. They are not linked contractually.

 

there are non financial reasons for doing this as well as FFP - insurance, recovery costs from injuries etc.

 

for this discussion the upshot is that the purchase only shows on the accounts when it’s made, not when the loan starts

Right, so it's a meaningless term as I was trying to say. 

 

Honestly, it's hard to think how I could have had a better Saturday afternoon not only entertaining myself but everyone else, no doubt including the whole Botman family.

[Geordie_once_removed]

Just how left sided is he? Personally I'd prefer someone to replace Schar over replacing Burn. Burn and Targett struck up a really good understanding and Schar is quite injury prone. So I'd rather we spent big on a right sided centerback this window and a left sided next window.

[et tu brute]

1 hour ago, OpenC said:

 

Not a 90s videogame fan then

Not football games I'm not (any era)

[The Prophet]

 

Strange that,  Italian reports claimed that he'd entered into a blood pact with Maldini and the thought of moving to any other club brought him out in hives.

[midds]

Bit harsh calling them retards tbh 

[1892er]

2 hours ago, Geordie_once_removed said:

Just how left sided is he? Personally I'd prefer someone to replace Schar over replacing Burn. Burn and Targett struck up a really good understanding and Schar is quite injury prone. So I'd rather we spent big on a right sided centerback this window and a left sided next window.

 

Not sure but I heard he was a massive Jeremy Corbyn fan.

[Coffee_Johnny]

22 minutes ago, midds said:

Bit harsh calling them retards tbh 

Mange tout, mange tout… Rodney.

[Groundhog63]

1 hour ago, 1892er said:

 

Not sure but I heard he was a massive Jeremy Corbyn fan.

He's not. Canny as he is, he fell short when it mattered. 

[Dr Jinx]

Keep coming back to this thread hoping there’ll be a twitter link posted that isn’t complete bullshit ?

[Gawalls]

57 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said:

Keep coming back to this thread hoping there’ll be a twitter link posted that isn’t complete bullshit ?

At this point 100 pages and no real info in it - we’re just scraping the Botman of the barrel now.

[PauloGeordio]

3 minutes ago, Gawalls said:

At this point 100 pages and no real info in it - we’re just scraping the Botman of the barrel now.

[Nucasol]

Sanches / Botman related article - the Italians now commenting that the house of cards of agreeing deals with players without deals with clubs might just be falling down and taking Maldini with it:

 

https://football-italia.net/milan-lose-renato-sanches-to-psg-breaking-point-for-maldini/

 

 

Edited June 18, 2022 by Nucasol

[PauloGeordio]

Just now, Nucasol said:

Sanches / Botman related article - the Italians now commenting that the pack of cards of agreeing deals with players without deals with clubs might just be falling down and taking Maldini with it:

 

https://football-italia.net/milan-lose-renato-sanches-to-psg-breaking-point-for-maldini/

[jack j]

Can we just sign Maldini and be done with it

[Happinesstan]

40 minutes ago, jack j said:

Can we just sign Maldini and be done with it

Just what I was thinking. Our "Man in Milan"

 

 

Edited June 18, 2022 by Happinesstan

[Milanista]

Milan fans are in complete meltdown, they are convinced Maldini will not renew, that our new owners are preventing us from completing the moves that were agreed 6 months ago, and that we are the verge of collapse.

 

Enjoy the schadenfreude.

[Coffee_Johnny]

13 minutes ago, Milanista said:

Milan fans are in complete meltdown, they are convinced Maldini will not renew, that our new owners are preventing us from completing the moves that were agreed 6 months ago, and that we are the verge of collapse.

 

Enjoy the schadenfreude.

It’s a time for patience. As you tell from your visits here too, not a quality that sits easily with true passion for a team. 
Spero che funzioni bene per te ?

[STM]

48 minutes ago, Milanista said:

Milan fans are in complete meltdown, they are convinced Maldini will not renew, that our new owners are preventing us from completing the moves that were agreed 6 months ago, and that we are the verge of collapse.

 

Enjoy the schadenfreude.

?

[NWMag]

nothing that’s not been said already but very good track record this guy

[Mike]

Milan sound like us with Ashley, except the fans actually believed them.

[Mike]

Man we would have been so pissed if we really thought any of our fake transfers were real.