Abacus Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 12:16, 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 Expand 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 13:24, 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. Expand Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 13:24, 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. Expand 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OpenC Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 13:37, et tu brute said: Expand Not a 90s videogame fan then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abacus Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 13:42, 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 Expand 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie_once_removed Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 14:06, OpenC said: Not a 90s videogame fan then Expand Not football games I'm not (any era) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 Bit harsh calling them retards tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1892er Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 14:33, 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. Expand Not sure but I heard he was a massive Jeremy Corbyn fan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee_Johnny Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 17:07, midds said: Bit harsh calling them retards tbh Expand Mange tout, mange tout… Rodney. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groundhog63 Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 17:09, 1892er said: Not sure but I heard he was a massive Jeremy Corbyn fan. Expand He's not. Canny as he is, he fell short when it mattered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 Keep coming back to this thread hoping there’ll be a twitter link posted that isn’t complete bullshit ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawalls Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 18:20, Dr Jinx said: Keep coming back to this thread hoping there’ll be a twitter link posted that isn’t complete bullshit ? Expand At this point 100 pages and no real info in it - we’re just scraping the Botman of the barrel now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 19:18, Gawalls said: At this point 100 pages and no real info in it - we’re just scraping the Botman of the barrel now. Expand Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucasol Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 (edited) 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 19:23, 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/ Expand Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack j Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 Can we just sign Maldini and be done with it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happinesstan Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 (edited) On 18/06/2022 at 19:25, jack j said: Can we just sign Maldini and be done with it Expand Just what I was thinking. Our "Man in Milan" Edited June 18, 2022 by Happinesstan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milanista Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee_Johnny Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 20:13, 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. Expand 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 ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 On 18/06/2022 at 20:13, 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. Expand ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NWMag Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 nothing that’s not been said already but very good track record this guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 Milan sound like us with Ashley, except the fans actually believed them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted June 18, 2022 Share Posted June 18, 2022 Man we would have been so pissed if we really thought any of our fake transfers were real. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now