Winter Transfer Window 22/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everton are finished, Gordons bang average but selling him before any repalcements lined up is the most Everton thing ever. Richarlison all over again.

Club is so bad even Southhampton and Bournemouth are more attractive to players. Going down 100%
 
Last edited:
For clarity, are you asking whether paying the £40m fee in installments changes anything? If so, no. Whether buying or selling, payment terms have no influence on how the fee is accounted for. Whether a club only received 10% or 100% of the fee up front, from an accounting point of view the full profit (or loss if they're sold below their book value) is accounted for on that years accounts.
I thought Chelsea were in the news for spreading it over the number of years of the player's contract?
 
Last edited:
I thought Chelsea were in the news for spreading it over the number of years of the player's contract?
Buying and selling are accounted for differently however it is the guaranteed fee that is accounted for, not the x% that is received up front.

So for example you buy a player for £50m on a 5 year deal and you only pay £20m up front with the rest spread over the next 3 years. The fact you only paid £20m up front counts for nothing. That £50m is spread over the life of a players contract so in this case it will cost the club (from an accounting point of view) £10m per season.

When you sell a player, the player has a value which is based on the above - you signed somebody for £50m on a 5 year deal and after 2 years he's now worth £30m. You sell him for £50m and the buying club only pays £10m up front. He's worth £30m and you sold him for £50m so you record a profit of the difference, £20m. The fact that you only physically received £10m up front is irrelevant in relation to the profit/loss you make. Had that player who is worth £30m been sold for £20m, you'd record a loss of £10m on the accounts.
 
Buying and selling are accounted for differently however it is the guaranteed fee that is accounted for, not the x% that is received up front.

So for example you buy a player for £50m on a 5 year deal and you only pay £20m up front with the rest spread over the next 3 years. The fact you only paid £20m up front counts for nothing. That £50m is spread over the life of a players contract so in this case it will cost the club (from an accounting point of view) £10m per season.

When you sell a player, the player has a value which is based on the above - you signed somebody for £50m on a 5 year deal and after 2 years he's now worth £30m. You sell him for £50m and the buying club only pays £10m up front. He's worth £30m and you sold him for £50m so you record a profit of the difference, £20m. The fact that you only physically received £10m up front is irrelevant in relation to the profit/loss you make. Had that player who is worth £30m been sold for £20m, you'd record a loss of £10m on the accounts.
thanks, that makes sense.
 
Was class at Leipzig, but a lot of players that were have struggled after leaving. I guess it is the best we can do on deadline day and we need someone.
 
No idea what the loan fee is but Sabitzer could be a cracking loan. Hes a quality player and if we can ship out McTominay in the summer and make this permanent if he performs well then we might actually have a good midfield for the first time in decades.
 
Perez loaned to Real Betis. I'm not sure we'll notice the difference. When did he last score for us?


Now we just need to offload Bertrand and Vestergaard and get the wage bill down a bit. Why they thought it was sensible to buy two 30+ year olds from Southampton I'll never understand. They were there for the 9-0 and we beat them on the way to the FA cup. Hardly a glowing case to aquire them. Ironically we've just loaned out one of the hattrick scorers (Perez) from that match!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom