More transfer rumours

[Kanj]

I think it’s anywhere between 100-200m and there will be sales or at least contracts terminated to free wages. don’t forget we will likely announce some big commercial deals that will literally increase our ability to spend 

[Guest]

We’ll top £50m I reckon on a player.

[gbandit]

5 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

We’ll top £50m I reckon on a player.

What a fucking buzz that would be, I know it’s all arbitrary and a player’s value doesn’t in any way guarantee how they’ll perform for us but it would show that we’re committed to going out there and getting players in the top price bracket

[Keegans Export]

1 hour ago, 1964 said:

I think it depends on the payment agreement, in your examples that works if the payment is spread over the life of the contract rather than all up front 

 

No, KDT is right.

 

It's based on amortisation rather than the terms that were agreed with the selling club, so a £30m player you sign on a 3 year deal is worth (on the books) £30m when you buy him, £20m at the end of the first season, £10m at the end of the second season and £0m at the end of the third season. In this example if you sold that player for £15m at the end of the second season, as far as FFP goes you've made a profit of £5m rather than a loss of £15m.

 

This applies even if you agree with the selling club that you'll pay £10m up front then £20m over two years, it's still a £30m asset that belongs to the club once they've signed their contract.

 

 

[Eveready]

7 minutes ago, Keegans Export said:

 

No, KDT is right.

 

It's based on amortisation rather than the terms that were agreed with the selling club, so a £30m player you sign on a 3 year deal is worth (on the books) £30m when you buy him, £20m at the end of the first season, £10m at the end of the second season and £0m at the end of the third season. In this example if you sold that player for £15m at the end of the second season, as far as FFP goes you've made a profit of £5m rather than a loss of £15m.

 

This applies even if you agree with the selling club that you'll pay £10m up front then £20m over two years, it's still a £30m asset that belongs to the club once they've signed their contract.

 

 

 

Thanks for the explanation, very interesting to know how this stuff actually works.

 

Do you know if a club bought a player for £100m on a 5 year deal but were sold to another club a year later for £50m then would there be a £30m write down of the asset at that point as it would still be valued at £80m on the books?

 

Wondering if this could be a reason why more high valued players get loaned out these days as the clubs can't afford the write down triggered FFP rules.

[Keegans Export]

1 minute ago, Eveready said:

 

Thanks for the explanation, very interesting to know how this stuff actually works.

 

Do you know if a club bought a player for £100m on a 5 year deal but were sold to another club a year later for £50m then would there be a £30m write down of the asset at that point as it would still be valued at £80m on the books?

 

Wondering if this could be a reason why more high valued players get loaned out these days as the clubs can't afford the write down triggered FFP rules.

 

Yeah exactly right. It's more accountancy than Football Manager and, up until six months ago, totally irrelevant to us NUFC fans 

[The College Dropout]

Arsenal and Villa spent 150m this year on transfers. 
 

It’s not an astronomical amount. 
 

if there’s seemingly good deals to bring in 5-6 first teamers at an average of £40m we should do it. 
 

In the starting 11 we have 3 glaring holes (CM, RM, ST). Could easily upgrade at GK, CB and CM. And if the offer is good enough we could do with another forward and CB too. 

[macphisto]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

Arsenal and Villa spent 150m this year on transfers. 

 

It’s not an astronomical amount.

This is a great point. We're not talking about anything that out of the ordinary when people mention £200 million, particularly when you look at the squad pre-takeover. It's only a ridiculous amount when compared to us under Ashley. 

[Guest HTT II]

We were willing to spend 130m + in January, we will spend 200m + including player sales in the summer and I expect we have deals lined up already that were in place in January…

[UpTheToon]

2 minutes ago, macphisto said:

This is a great point. We're not talking about anything that out of the ordinary when people mention £200 million, particularly when you look at the squad pre-takeover. It's only a ridiculous amount when compared to us under Ashley. 

They also got £100m in for one player

[Shearergol]

3 minutes ago, UpTheToon said:

They also got £100m in for one player

 

Step forward Dwight Gayle.

[Nine]

We need to remember that January was also a very desperate situation at the time but I know the summer window is generally more easy going so it might balance that out a bit.

[toon25]

They'll spend as much as they think is needed so that we're not pissing about with being fucking relegated and go from there imo.

[Mazzy]

150m seems like a reasonable amount considering everything. If rumours are to be believed we'd have spent well over that in Janury if certain bids of ours been accepted.

 

3 major signings alone (Paqueta/Nunez/Henderson) would see us over 100m so add to that a couple of youngsters and a experienced Prem player and you're over at 150m.

 

Amanda stated what their aim was and if they want to achieve Champs League qualification and a Premier League title in 5 years they will have to spend roughly 100m every summer for the next 2/3 seasons.

[The College Dropout]

3 minutes ago, Mazzy said:

150m seems like a reasonable amount considering everything. If rumours are to be believed we'd have spent well over that in Janury if certain bids of ours been accepted.

 

3 major signings alone (Paqueta/Nunez/Henderson) would see us over 100m so add to that a couple of youngsters and a experienced Prem player and you're over at 150m.

 

Amanda stated what their aim was and if they want to achieve Champs League qualification and a Premier League title in 5 years they will have to spend roughly 100m every summer for the next 2/3 seasons.

Yeh that's not enough.

[Shak]

Definitely some post-Ashley trauma in here

 

I'm fairly certain we'll spend a shitload this summer and my trousers are down and I'm ready for it.

[macphisto]

8 minutes ago, UpTheToon said:

They also got £100m in for one player

It doesn't matter, Villa still spent the money to improve the team. They also spent a lot the season before that too. 

 

The only things we need to be concerned about are:

1) Getting value for money

2) Conducting as much scouting as possible on our targets

3) Signing players with a cohesive strategy in mind with regards to the overall style of the team 

 

I would not be worried about breaking the wage structure for the right players. This is now by far the best club any of our existing players will ever play for, if they want to leave then see you later. They're not going to get more anywhere else or have a better chance of competing in the future.

[sixx]

1 hour ago, Kanji said:

I disagree with you wholeheartedly, I think they will spend a fuck ton and aren’t going to give any hints what the budget is or could be. I severely doubt there is a true firm number. The only way to grow this club is to be opportunistic and if there’s a way they can secure several top names they will do it. 

You’re essentially describing Man Utd’s approach to transfer the last few years which I think we can all agree hasn’t been very sensible.

 

I’m very unsure we can just ‘spend’ our way towards the top 6 or so. If you look at Man City’s transfer track record since their takeover it’s like they struck gold at least with a couple of signings each year and to be fair there hasn’t been many expensive Mangala-like flops. Why has it worked out so well for them while it hasn’t for Man Utd?  There are definitely some decisve factors behind the scenes in term of recruitment which I can’t really put my finger on. Why didn’t Chelsea recognize Salah’s and de Bruyne’s talent? I’m not entirely sure it’s very much down to the manager in charge each time as Citeh have had some turnover in management since the takeover yet always consistantly brilliant transfers. 
 

I’ve seriously no idea how to spend our newfound money and I’ve really no idea either how much money we are actually capable of spending. All I really want to know is what it really is deep down behind the scenes that decides a great recruitment strategy that City undoubtedly have. Everton have spent half a billion since their takeover and Man Utd have spent a billion since Fergie. Both clubs are worse off. Maybe it’s down to a great technical director. I barely even know what these guys even do. 

[Guest HTT II]

3 minutes ago, sixx said:

You’re essentially describing Man Utd’s approach to transfer the last few years which I think we can all agree hasn’t been very sensible.

 

I’m very unsure we can just ‘spend’ our way towards the top 6 or so. If you look at Man City’s transfer track record since their takeover it’s like they struck gold at least with a couple of signings each year and to be fair there hasn’t been many expensive Mangala-like flops. Why has it worked out so well for them while it hasn’t for Man Utd?  There are definitely some decisve factors behind the scenes in term of recruitment which I can’t really put my finger on. Why didn’t Chelsea recognize Salah’s and de Bruyne’s talent? I’m not entirely sure it’s very much down to the manager in charge each time as Citeh have had some turnover in management since the takeover yet always consistantly brilliant transfers. 
 

I’ve seriously no idea how to spend our newfound money and I’ve really no idea either how much money we are actually capable of spending. All I really want to know is what it really is deep down behind the scenes that decides a great recruitment strategy that City undoubtedly have. Everton have spent half a billion since their takeover and Man Utd have spent a billion since Fergie. Both clubs are worse off. Maybe it’s down to a great technical director. I barely even know what these guys even do. 

It’s down to the manager…

[Mazzy]

15 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Yeh that's not enough.

 

Not enough to win the Premier League no, because we are way behind Liverpool and Man City who will be winning it for the next few years. But I think there is a good possibility if everything goes as it should and the investment is there every summer that we can qualify for Champs League in 5 yrs. 150m this summer and then 3x100m for the next 3 summer windows would see the squad almost entirely overhauled. ? 

[macphisto]

Just now, HTT II said:

It’s down to the manager…

I don't think so, obviously helps but also the fact that Man City are outward looking and have hired some of the best people in the business has a lot to do with it. I suspect their use of data, like Liverpool, is good too.

 

Man City essentially looked at the best in class not long after their takeover, Barcelona, and hired their whole backroom team. Txiki Begiristain, Director of Football at Barcelona from 2003-2010 and Ferran Soriano Vice-President of Barcelona from 2003-2008 both joined Man City in 2012. 

 

Man U on the other hand, though a huge club, are very insular and are not prepared to put money into the infrastructure of the club (Ashley on a much bigger scale). It says it all that their Technical Director is Darren Fletcher and their Director of Football, John Murtough, was an internal appointment. Going back over the last few years, Carrick, Phelan and Ole were also prominent. As a club it's institutionally stuck in the past and stale. I'm not saying you shouldn't have ex-players around the club but you need fresh outside ideas too.

[Hovagod]

This idea that we can’t spend our way to the top…how else are we going to do it?

 

Feel like January tipped our hand a little. If we had not been in bother think we might have taken it slowly so as to mislead others of our true summer intentions, as it was we spent twenty five million on Chris Wood. We’re not going to be shy in the transfer window, we will spend shitloads

[macphisto]

1 minute ago, Hovagod said:

This idea that we can’t spend our way to the top…how else are we going to do it?

 

Feel like January tipped our hand a little. If we had not been in bother think we might have taken it slowly so as to mislead others of our true summer intentions, as it was we spent twenty five million on Chris Wood. We’re not going to be shy in the transfer window, we will spend shitloads

That and investment behind the scenes where they have gone and, from what I've read, recruited in Ashworth one of the best Directors of Football out there. 

[Awaymag]

get signings in so we can challenge for 6-8 position and Europa spot.   If in Jan we are ahead or behind, maybe a little boost.    Either way I can't wait....going be so exciting!

[Hovagod]

1 minute ago, Awaymag said:

get signings in so we can challenge for 6-8 position and Europa spot.   If in Jan we are ahead or behind, maybe a little boost.    Either way I can't wait....going be so exciting!

Imagine how excited we will all be going into the start of the season in August. Will be Coventry ‘95 levels of anticipation.