Selling players

[Neon Nick]

3 minutes ago, dowls said:

 

Next year accounts .. accounts are usually a year out.  Also selling reach for 15 million probably only sees us get 4 million on the following year accounts - unless you get get a deal where you get more upfront - which probably lowers the selling price! 

 

Only way it helps is a submission to EFL to say don’t embargo us .. I.e. a soft embrago at best... because the health of the accounts is going to be far better due to these factors I.e. smaller wage bill and xx million from player sales for x number of years.

Wow, it's an amortization, financially.  Do you think Reach would bring 15 million?  May be.  I guess that ain't all that much in todays market.  Still, it's not 15 "large" NOW, it's amortized.  So, what's the price?  What do the Lords FFP want in the way of money?  And why can't we just pay their price, sort it all out with one payment to whomever?  

[dowls]

10 minutes ago, pazowl55 said:

I thought it was different for player sales. So if we sold Reach for 15m then thats the 15m FFP deficit payed off.

 

No it’s based on accounts - rarely you get the full amount up front .. unless you have a player they really need and the competition for him his high!

In our situation almost mean dropping the price for full payment or version where you get most of it first. 

[dowls]

4 minutes ago, Neon Nick said:

Wow, it's an amortization, financially.  Do you think Reach would bring 15 million?  May be.  I guess that ain't all that much in todays market.  Still, it's not 15 "large" NOW, it's amortized.  So, what's the price?  What do the Lords FFP want in the way of money?  And why can't we just pay their price, sort it all out with one payment to whomever?  

 We can’t break the magic 39 million over 3 years and we’re currnely on the very edge of it. That’s just not to go into an embargo and possible points deduction.. not even about spending lots the following year.

[billyblack]

I said about 3 months ago the club should be lining up players for every position, these are players where contracting are expiring in the summer. We should be planning properly, and the players should line up witb the tactics and formation we want to play next season. We should be talking to these players already and paving the way. Are we? Seriously doubt it in the cluster that is S6

[Neon Nick]

Quote

2 minutes ago, dowls said:

 We can’t break the magic 39 million over 3 years and we’re currnely on the very edge of it. That’s just not to go into an embargo and possible points deduction.. not even about spending lots the following year.

 

39 million in revenue across 3 years?  That's what they want?  Whence this revenue, ticket-sales, support gear, advertising?  I cannot believe that SWFC can't generate 13 million a year, across a lousy 3 years.  150 years old and still counting, 3 years ain't poo, and by todays Football standards, neither is 40 million.  The problem seems to be in "accounting", not actual Football.

[dowls]

6 minutes ago, Neon Nick said:

39 million in revenue across 3 years?  That's what they want?  Whence this revenue, ticket-sales, support gear, advertising?  I cannot believe that SWFC can't generate 13 million a year, across a lousy 3 years.  150 years old and still counting, 3 years ain't poo, and by todays Football standards, neither is 40 million.  The problem seems to be in "accounting", not actual Football.

 No we can’t lose 39 million over 3 years .. and we are very close to doing this based on last 2 accounts ... 

 

thats why a player sale will help .. but not necessarily solve the issue - I.e. they take account of the current season

 

Heres a very brief summary:

 

• The assessment is carried out in March (rather than December)
• The maximum loss limit is now £13m per Championship season (or £5m a season of the owner does not inject equity to cover losses).
•  Losses are assessed over three seasons (rather than just over the single, previous season)
• The assessment of each club’s finances is a combination of a historic assessment (looking at figures for the two previous completed season) and an assessment over the season currently taking place

[pgmetcalf]

Bare in mind that some clubs in the same league are able to spend £39m in a season

[Yellowbelly]

1 hour ago, S36 OWL said:

 

The problem we have is every other club knows we are in the brown stuff , so we will struggle to get the market value for our saleable assets . 

Then we don’t sell.

If it doesn’t solve the problem then what’s the point?

This is where Katrien earns her money, by driving a hard bargain & getting a fair price for our players.

[alanharper]

25 minutes ago, billyblack said:

I said about 3 months ago the club should be lining up players for every position, these are players where contracting are expiring in the summer. We should be planning properly, and the players should line up witb the tactics and formation we want to play next season. We should be talking to these players already and paving the way. Are we? Seriously doubt it in the cluster that is S6

 

Unless we're signing players from abroad we're not yet allowed to talk to players whose contracts are expiring in the summer, I think it's only permitted a month before they expire. If moving to another country players can agree the contract six months in advance like Ramsey is doing with Juventus. 

[pgmetcalf]

1 hour ago, SiJ said:

It's how you survive. 

 

Whether we like it or not, there's a pecking order in football. If a bigger club or a team higher up the totem pole offers you good money for a player then you sell, reinvest and get better.

 

Dunno about that, Wednesday have a recent history of buying good players and turning them into less than average players

[Neon Nick]

4 minutes ago, dowls said:

 No we can’t lose 39 million over 3 years .. and we are very close to doing this based on last 2 accounts ... 

 

thats why a player sale will help .. but not necessarily solve the issue - I.e. they take account of the current season

 

Heres a very brief summary:

 

• The assessment is carried out in March (rather than December)
• The maximum loss limit is now £13m per Championship season (or £5m a season of the owner does not inject equity to cover losses).
•  Losses are assessed over three seasons (rather than just over the single, previous season)
• The assessment of each club’s finances is a combination of a historic assessment (looking at figures for the two previous completed season) and an assessment over the season currently taking place

How uniformed I was, thank you Sir.  It's not a profit thing at all, it's a LOSS thing, still, it's a financial thing and has no place in the realm of pure Football.   So to offset losses SWFC has to sell more advertising, support gear, Players, tickets...but the Owner can't simply write the check to cover these losses.

[Dizzys Dad]

We don’t sell players because we are constantly threatened with, or under an embargo. In these circumstances we can’t replace them, so we hang on to them.

[Sonny]

Could it be that nobody really wants our players at any kind of price that would help resolve the situation? All very well saying we should get £15m for Reach but who’s queuing up to pay this with a hefty chunk up front. The flip side of us having so many expensive players that we don’t want coming to the end of their contracts is that our pool of players that people might want to pay us money for is vastly reduced.

[agentwalker]

I honestly can't see anything happening at all until everyone sees what kind of punishment is dished out to Birmingham. If its a massive points deduction then I'm prediction a lot of teams will be panicking, if they do nothing serious them I'm prediction teams will just go for it and ignore the FFP restrictions. 

[prowl]

1 hour ago, dowls said:

 Agree conservative estimate would put those at the end of their contract to come to a combined 8 million excluding other factors such as rights, bonuses and NI probably comes up to 12 plus million .. it just won’t show in the March accounts.

 

Likewise player sales all depends how payments are spread .. will January sales hit this years accounts?? Again probably not but it would aid a submission to the EFL over the health of the accounts in subsequent years.

 

Trouble is they all have to be replaced - loans being the most obvious solution.

 

 

Players sold on 'terms' where payments are received over say 3 years create a cash influx , the initial payment, and a debt owed to the club. The debt aspect is shown as an amount owed to the club and is a credit as far as the accounts are concerned.

 

P & S follows the accounts broadly. In effect selling a player affects the accounts straight away.

 

The only aspect to watch is where we paid a fee. Say we bought a player for £4M on a 4 year contract. In effect his value is written down by £1M each year in the accounts. so after 2 years he's worth £2M. If we sell him for £6M after 2 years, we get the £6M but we have to deduct the £2M he's worth in the accounts so we make a profit of £4M.

 

I hope that is clear.

[Neon Nick]

4 minutes ago, Sonny said:

Could it be that nobody really wants our players at any kind of price that would help resolve the situation? All very well saying we should get £15m for Reach but who’s queuing up to pay this with a hefty chunk up front. The flip side of us having so many expensive players that we don’t want coming to the end of their contracts is that our pool of players that people might want to pay us money for is vastly reduced.

That's the thing, take our 6 most valuable (to us) Players, who's interested and at what prices? I'd be interested to know your thoughts, our 6 best, at what prices, and to whom?  Not that it would clear the FFP bill, but rather just to hear your thoughts.

[Animis]

My understanding is that 'The League shall refuse any application made by that Club to register any Player or any new contract of an existing Player with that Club '

 

Should we therefore, end up in an official embargo for next season we could potentially end up not even being able to register any existing player whose contract is up, who we want to retain or who we want to tie down by way of an extension.

 

We gave BB and Joao an extension this season so the so called 'soft embargo' does not appear to be subject to this?

[SallyCinnamon]

I wouldn’t be surprised if we can’t sell certain players due to payments from the sale having to be made to third parties.

 

Not saying it’s true but would explain why we are reluctant to offload players.

 

[SallyCinnamon]

48 minutes ago, Sonny said:

Could it be that nobody really wants our players at any kind of price that would help resolve the situation? All very well saying we should get £15m for Reach but who’s queuing up to pay this with a hefty chunk up front. The flip side of us having so many expensive players that we don’t want coming to the end of their contracts is that our pool of players that people might want to pay us money for is vastly reduced.

 

15 million for Reach is a wild fee to place on him.

 

6 million tops for me. Wonder goals aside doesn’t do enough to influence games. A 15 million pound player carries a struggling club into the top half. Reach isn’t doing that for us. 

[Brando17]

16 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

15 million for Reach is a wild fee to place on him.

 

6 million tops for me. Wonder goals aside doesn’t do enough to influence games. A 15 million pound player carries a struggling club into the top half. Reach isn’t doing that for us. 

spot on,never in a million years would you get 15 mill