Pulisic was signed year prior to my knowledge.
Summer Transfer Window 2020/21 - Rumours & Signings *please quote sources*
- Thread starter antijoke
- Start date
- Status
Caporegime
They signed Kovacic last summer
Signed in Jan 2019 and loaned back. This is his first season and ofcourse Kovacic as Shami says.
I cant see how there books allow for Haverts tbh
Transfers are not recorded like you think. Pulisic signed in the 18/19 season - his transfer fee will be accounted for over the life of his contract. Assuming he signed a 5.5 year deal then his £50m odd fee will have cost Chelsea approx £4.5m on the 18/19 accounts and around £9m on this seasons accounts. Kovacic again, assuming a £50m fee and a 5 year contract, will cost Chelsea approx £10m on this seasons accounts. This season Chelsea sold approx £140m worth of players with a combined book value of probably sub £10m - that will mean that on this seasons accounts Chelsea will record a profit on player sales of £130m odd and they will also save a couple of million on from the amortisation of those players sold. So from transfers they made this season, even if you want to include Pulisic, Chelsea profited by approx £110m.
The Morata transfer will go through next season. Until now he's been costing Chelsea approx £12m per season. He's now worth approx £24m and the sale is agreed for around £50m. Chelsea will record a profit of £26m on his sale and save £12m from their amortisation bill, so a total benefit of £36m. Chelsea have or will sign Ziyech and Werner for a combined £90m. Assuming they sign 5 year contracts that will mean a cost of £18m per season on their accounts. Chelsea could afford to spend another £90m on transfers this coming summer and the sale of Morata alone will have paid for them, from an accounting point of view, for next seasons accounts.
Now obviously these signings will effect future years accounts too, so how do Chelsea cover that? By making a big value sale(s) every year. In the 6 seasons prior to this Chelsea have recorded profits on player sales of £65m, £41m, £49m, £69m, £113m and £60m, and as above, they'll make another £100m+ this season and even before selling anybody else, they've already banked a £26m profit on Morata.
So in short, providing Chelsea continue to make big profits on sales in future years, whether that be from selling first team players or their 300 man strong loan army, then they could sign Havertz this summer and make their accounts work. I don't think he'd join them though.
Havertz could sign a three or four year contract and still then be able to go to Barca or Real and still be there for six, seven or eight years if he wanted to. The joys of being a top level, young player. He could have been at three clubs by the time he’s 30.
Caporegime
I personally don't think there will be many transfers with everything going. Most teams simply will not be able to afford it. Unless things were already in progress before all this lockdown.
Clubs bankrolled by billionaires like Chelsea and Man City could more or less have the pick of players. Other clubs using their income like Liverpool from Champions League campaigns, sponsorship etc are likely to be severely hampered by the market at the moment. Very few clubs will need to sell, especially in the bigger leagues.
Last edited:
I think once there's a clearer picture of what's going to happen next season we might see more transfers happening and this is why there's been calls from some quarters to extend the transfer window well into next season.
Give or take clubs will know where they stand this season - touch wood everything runs smoothly and we get through the end of this season. I've done a few very rough calculations and I'd guestimate that Liverpool's revenue will be approx £40m less than what they'd have expected to achieve without corona and if the season isn't completed, around £70m less. Compared to last season's revenue, it would only be around £15m and £45m down. As of Liverpool's last set of accounts, Liverpool made cash profits of around £130m - from that they spent around £60m net on transfers, paid £20-25m towards the new training ground and paid off around £20-25m of debt and stuck the remaining £25m in the bank. Their revenue being even £45m down on last season isn't going to massively effect them. What's going to happen next season is the concern.
At the moment things are looking positive and the hope is that we will be able to get through all of next season but even then, nobody knows when and how many supporters will be allowed in the stadium. Worst case scenario and no fans are allowed all season, that's worth £80m odd to Liverpool, as much as £110m to Utd and possibly even more to Spurs. It's very difficult for clubs to budget what they can spend when such a large amount of revenue is up in the air and that doesn't even factor in the risk of a 2nd peak which shuts everything down again.
It's not ideal but I think there's a very valid argument to having a transfer window that runs from August all the way through until the end of January, just to give clubs time to breathe and see what the future holds. Imagine being a newly promoted club and or a side that's traditionally scrapping relegation - the financial consequences of being relegated may force clubs into playing russian roulette in the transfer window, spending money they haven't yet received in the hope of improving their chances of staying up.
Give or take clubs will know where they stand this season - touch wood everything runs smoothly and we get through the end of this season. I've done a few very rough calculations and I'd guestimate that Liverpool's revenue will be approx £40m less than what they'd have expected to achieve without corona and if the season isn't completed, around £70m less. Compared to last season's revenue, it would only be around £15m and £45m down. As of Liverpool's last set of accounts, Liverpool made cash profits of around £130m - from that they spent around £60m net on transfers, paid £20-25m towards the new training ground and paid off around £20-25m of debt and stuck the remaining £25m in the bank. Their revenue being even £45m down on last season isn't going to massively effect them. What's going to happen next season is the concern.
At the moment things are looking positive and the hope is that we will be able to get through all of next season but even then, nobody knows when and how many supporters will be allowed in the stadium. Worst case scenario and no fans are allowed all season, that's worth £80m odd to Liverpool, as much as £110m to Utd and possibly even more to Spurs. It's very difficult for clubs to budget what they can spend when such a large amount of revenue is up in the air and that doesn't even factor in the risk of a 2nd peak which shuts everything down again.
It's not ideal but I think there's a very valid argument to having a transfer window that runs from August all the way through until the end of January, just to give clubs time to breathe and see what the future holds. Imagine being a newly promoted club and or a side that's traditionally scrapping relegation - the financial consequences of being relegated may force clubs into playing russian roulette in the transfer window, spending money they haven't yet received in the hope of improving their chances of staying up.
Caporegime
Where have you heard that? I've only heard the opposite.
Caporegime
Rumours floating about of Man Utd recalling Dean Henderson at the end of June... Poor ikkle Man Utd scared of Sheff Utd
Why he can't play for them against United?
Caporegime
If it gets really bad, do you think it might convince some unscrupulous owners who are in it for the money, like Kroenke, to try and bail?
Indeed. The Blades also have to play Tottenham, Wolves, Chelsea and Leicester, so any points taken in those games can only help Man Utd, who also have the easiest run of games (on paper anyway...)
I would imagine that the hold up is over wage contributions. Man U gave Henderson a bumper new deal in the summer, which probably puts him on double what most of the top Sheff U players are earning. The original loan deal was probably for a percentage of the wages, which would have been fine then as he had no PL experience. On the back of a great season and an England call-up, plus the probable desperation of the Blades to keep him, Man U are likely playing hard-ball over how much of Henderson's wages are to be paid. I would expect a compromise will be reached at some point.
It's only going to be a short term issue so unless they have financial difficulties personally and are forced to sell then it's highly unlikely.
League rules prevent on loan players from other Premier League clubs from playing against their main club.
Soldato
Yep that came about when Lomana LuaLua scored the winner for Pompey against Newcastle after we let him go there on loan
Obviously, what about the quoted conversation made you think that we didn't already know that?
'Why he can't play for them against United?'?
Caporegime
That was a why do they want to recall him when he cannot play against United. I think the other poster understood that as well when he quoted me.
Dean Henderson needs to stay at the Blades for another couple of seasons. He is the future if he continues to improve. De Gea will get his move to Madrid and he will become the new number 1 and more than likely England's number 1 as well.
Sheffield United are a big threat for that 5th place. It makes total sense to weaken them.
- Status