Summer 2017 non-mega transfer thread

[Bluesteel]

10 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

Don't think it is as straight forward as that.

 

Just because we can split the fee for a player over the course of his contract, it doesn't mean the selling club are happy to be paid over that period - they might want the payments over the shorter time period. For example, FFP states if Forestieri signs a 4 year contract, his £3m fee is split over that 4 year contract. What if Watford want the fee settled and paid over 2 years? I don't think the FFP rules and how we pay other clubs for players go hand in hand.

 

Given the FFP rules - the fee is calculated over the course of the players contract - I was simply asking what happens if the player signs a contract extension or is sold from a FFP point of view.

 

 

 

 

 

I understand that clubs can take finance so that the buying club gets the full fee, but the club pays the fee back over a number of years.

[Ellis Rimmer]

1 minute ago, Bluesteel said:

 

I understand that clubs can take finance so that the buying club gets the full fee, but the club pays the fee back over a number of years.

We bought Rhodes on PCP? We're like the air head 21 year old girl driving around in a 2016 Mini Cooper!

[Bluesteel]

25 minutes ago, prowl said:

People are worried about FFP but most posters don't know how it works, how much we have paid for each transfer or how much we are paying in wages. The figures posters think they know might be right or could be completely false. 

DC does know all these figures and I'm sure the clubs accountants know how FFP works.

Stop fretting about it, trust DC and. enjoy the ride. 

 

True. I reckon we are mindful of it and want to get as much done within the boundaries as possible and stretch payments out. The more intricate it becomes the more the club will have to wait for one deal to be confirmed before completing another, hence delays and perhaps missing one or two. It's a bit like waiting for all the pieces to fall into the right place and it often takes the season to start and the deadline to approach to force things.

[Bluesteel]

Just now, Ellis Rimmer said:

We bought Rhodes on PCP? We're like the air head 21 year old girl driving around in a 2016 Mini Cooper!

 

I think we got Rhodes from the approved used section. We let Boro take the hit on depreciation. 

[Bloxwich Owl]

Liverpool right-back Jon Flanagan is being linked with a move to Molineux.
 

[Rogers]

13 minutes ago, Hawkeye said:

 

Wolves were one of the few teams a couple of years back, who's accounts were in the black.

 

Their new owner is richer than that idiot at villa, so he's not short of some cash. He also promised upto £30m investment in the club over the first couple of years to get promoted.

 

The risk in spending £15m on one player, is injuries. That new signing limped off during a friendly, but a bad knock and he's out for 3 months - they don't have squad depth to cover for that.

 

If you look at clubs who have spent sizeable sums and/or expect promotion - wolves, us, villa, Norwich, Derby, Middlesbrough, Fulham, reading, Birmingham, Leeds and Sunderland - only three can go up. Those that don't risk becoming another forest, Cardiff, Bolton or qpr.

 

It's a very risky gamble, I'd rather we were sensible and stayed in contention than went all out, $hit or bust.

If you're mega rich, buy 4 few boxes at £5m each, sponsor the team for £30m, and invest £50m on facilities / investment. 

 

And spend £100m on players. 

 

Do you meet the rules of FFP? 

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

2 minutes ago, Bluesteel said:

 

I understand that clubs can take finance so that the buying club gets the full fee, but the club pays the fee back over a number of years.

 

That makes sense, but I'm still not sure that the terms of payment to the selling club and FFP calculations go hand in hand.

 

For example, if Watford wanted the Forestieri cash over 2 seasons, we could do that, but FFP calculations will still be calculated over the 4 years of Forestieri's contract.

 

Which then led me on to the questions;

 

If a player extends his contract, is the FFP calculation re-calcuated to take that into effect or are the FFP calculations based on that original contract? For example, Forestieri goes into the final year of his 4 year contract and signs a 4 year extension, is his fee now calculated over 8 years for FFP, or the original 4 year contract?

 

If a player leaves 2 years into his 4 year contract, is the FFP calculation re-calcuated to take that into effect or are the FFP calculations based on that original contract? For example, Forestieri is sold 2 years into a 4 year contract, is his fee now calculated over the 2 years he was with us for FFP, or the original 4 year contract?

 

That make sense?

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

1 minute ago, Rogers said:

If you're mega rich, buy 4 few boxes at £5m each, sponsor the team for £30m, and invest £50m on facilities / investment. 

 

And spend £100m on players. 

 

Do you meet the rules of FFP? 

 

No, because boxes, sponsorship, etc. have to be proven to be market rate. For example, if Mr Chansiri takes up 4 boxes at Hillsborough for £1m each, yet no f*cker was interested at £50k each, then we'd be stung for that.

[Hawkeye]

2 minutes ago, Rogers said:

If you're mega rich, buy 4 few boxes at £5m each, sponsor the team for £30m, and invest £50m on facilities / investment. 

 

And spend £100m on players. 

 

Do you meet the rules of FFP? 

 

no.

 

There are rules around how you can sponsor your own team - it'd have to be proven that the sponsorship package is in line with realistic levels.

 

The whole point is to stop a rich owner getting bored, withdrawing his support, and a club instantly going to the wall.

 

If you are bankrolled by your owner sponsoring you for £30m, when the next best offer is £2m, you are not compliant.

[pazowl55]

3 minutes ago, Rogers said:

If you're mega rich, buy 4 few boxes at £5m each, sponsor the team for £30m, and invest £50m on facilities / investment. 

 

And spend £100m on players. 

 

Do you meet the rules of FFP? 

The money you invest has to be in with the going market rates of the clubs. So for example Wolves could sponsor a stand for 50 million if Man Utd couldn't even get 50 million for sponsoring a stand.

[Hawkeye]

4 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

That makes sense, but I'm still not sure that the terms of payment to the selling club and FFP calculations go hand in hand.

 

For example, if Watford wanted the Forestieri cash over 2 seasons, we could do that, but FFP calculations will still be calculated over the 4 years of Forestieri's contract.

 

Which then led me on to the questions;

 

If a player extends his contract, is the FFP calculation re-calcuated to take that into effect or are the FFP calculations based on that original contract? For example, Forestieri goes into the final year of his 4 year contract and signs a 4 year extension, is his fee now calculated over 8 years for FFP, or the original 4 year contract?

 

If a player leaves 2 years into his 4 year contract, is the FFP calculation re-calcuated to take that into effect or are the FFP calculations based on that original contract? For example, Forestieri is sold 2 years into a 4 year contract, is his fee now calculated over the 2 years he was with us for FFP, or the original 4 year contract?

 

That make sense?

 

Itd be down to P&L at that point. Im not an accountant, so there will be people much better qualified to answer this..

 

You could spread the costs out which i believe would show as liabilities/debt in the balance sheet - likewise, you would have assets showing on the balance sheet which would depreciate over time. The money out will be depending on how we make the payment to the club - so it'll either show as a cost, or as a trade liability.

 

Its a tricky balancing act, but the losses will need to be accounted for in some way. Even if we evade the rules on FFP, we cant justify being in a pile of debt again.

[mogbad]

5 minutes ago, Rogers said:

If you're mega rich, buy 4 few boxes at £5m each, sponsor the team for £30m, and invest £50m on facilities / investment. 

 

And spend £100m on players. 

 

Do you meet the rules of FFP? 

 

I'm sure somebody on here will know. As far as sponsorship is concerned I think it had to be in reason. If the average rate for team sponsorship in the Championship is let's say £500k per year Chansiri or any other club owner couldn't get away with sponsoring his team for £30m. I seem to remember Man City being in trouble for something similar.

 

I believe an owner can invest further money into a club by way of equity where he could create a number of new shares in the club & buy them himself. I'm led to believe that DC has already done this with us.

[Rogers]

19 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

No, because boxes, sponsorship, etc. have to be proven to be market rate. For example, if Mr Chansiri takes up 4 boxes at Hillsborough for £1m each, yet no f*cker was interested at £50k each, then we'd be stung for that.

I wonder if the FFP (who ever they are? The FA?) can dictate what they think is the going market rate for something.  Knowing how weak these organisations are. 

 

Do they inspect the books every year or just look at the total loss/profit and then dig further if they need to? How does it work? 

[pazowl55]

Just now, Rogers said:

I wonder if the FFP (who ever they are? The FA?) can dictate what they think is the going market rate for something.  Knowing how weak these organisations are. 

 

Do they inspect the books every year or just look at the total loss/profit and then dig further if they need to? How does it work? 

I would imagine that's exactly what they do. 

Cant imagine them just ringing Wolves and saying how's it going with FFP. 

 

'Yeah perfect no problems here.'

 

Fine! 

 

Right lets ring Ipswich.

 

[BD2OWL]

I'd suggest that the likes of Wolves and Leeds increasing their spending will help Chansiri invest more. 

 

Add to that Villa, Norwich, Newcastle (I know they've gone up but will be included in the 3 year cycle) Fulham etc etc 

 

will all force the "market price" up. 

[stumps]

2 minutes ago, pazowl55 said:

I would imagine that's exactly what they do. 

Cant imagine them just ringing Wolves and saying how's it going with FFP. 

 

'Yeah perfect no problems here.'

 

Fine! 

 

Right lets ring Ipswich.

 

That's ridiculous...surely they'd be ringing clubs in alphabetical order, it would be Leeds next.

[Bluesteel]

33 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

That makes sense, but I'm still not sure that the terms of payment to the selling club and FFP calculations go hand in hand.

 

For example, if Watford wanted the Forestieri cash over 2 seasons, we could do that, but FFP calculations will still be calculated over the 4 years of Forestieri's contract.

 

Which then led me on to the questions;

 

If a player extends his contract, is the FFP calculation re-calcuated to take that into effect or are the FFP calculations based on that original contract? For example, Forestieri goes into the final year of his 4 year contract and signs a 4 year extension, is his fee now calculated over 8 years for FFP, or the original 4 year contract?

 

If a player leaves 2 years into his 4 year contract, is the FFP calculation re-calcuated to take that into effect or are the FFP calculations based on that original contract? For example, Forestieri is sold 2 years into a 4 year contract, is his fee now calculated over the 2 years he was with us for FFP, or the original 4 year contract?

 

That make sense?

 

I think for the purposes of his fee it is probably calculated across the time of his original contract for consistency but obviously his wages will change with the contract. Not sure though. 

 

Selling Clubs will want the full amount of cash up front as that helps FFP which has created a business opportunity for lenders. I'm not sure whether it makes any difference whether the club does this or whether it is just split anyway under FFP.

[LiamK2292]

So much for the 4/5 signings that Carlos stated we needed.

 

Comments like this shows we lack ambition in the transfer market to prepare a team ready for the new season. Good clubs get the players they want, and we're falling behind. To me, it looks like no more players will be coming in due to the mismanagement of keeping a lot of players we don't want or need but no we're "not a selling club." That's the mentality we have at the moment, and it stems from the top. If we do, it'll be a panic buy i.e resigning Sasso as we left it late to get anyone else.

 

I really do question our recruitment policy, last seasons especially. Not one signing was a success. We massively overspent on Rhodes, a player we didn't need as other areas were more important.

 

 

Edited July 25, 2017 by Liamswfc92

[Geoffrey]

4 hours ago, fred mciver said:

Not Hanley as he's got no chance of progressing his international career in Newcastle's junior squad, and no EPL club will touch him.

 

But maybe why we have apparently turned to Dean, but so much smoke and mirrors it's difficult.

 

Clearly, we are trying to drive down prices , wages with FFP talk (£39 million loss over 3 years - no where near).

 

. 

The accounts aren't out. When CC said we wouldn't have bought Boyd if a fee was involved what makes you think we are nowhere near?

 

 

[The Night-Owl]

Sheyi Ojo, a pacy England U20 winger at Liverpool, on loan would be a smart move. Hopefully we can get Charlie Mulgrew, and a top ball playing centre back such as Harlee Dean or Kyle Bartley or similar in soon too.