• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

The January 2025 Window

Xong Kudu said:
I’d say let’s try to pick up one of the many Man U lads who for whatever reason is deemed surplus to requirements. They may thrive with us.

I appreciate it’s always the silly salary that frustrates move liquidity in these cases. Maybe a loan when United start to panic at the size of their wage bill with a day or two left. They can pay half.
Click to expand...
Multiple issues with taking on any of the Man Utd players. One is wages as you say. Even if Man Utd pay half then we would still be paying more than our current highest wages in a lot of cases. Second is I imagine Man Utd would rather loan to a club abroad. Third is many of them are being shown the door due to alleged poor attitudes or disruptive personalities. We don’t want that in our squad. Fourth is most of them are absolutely rubbish
 
Edouard has turned down a move to Atlanta unfortunately. No surprise as he’s happy to take the money and sit on the bench. Pity as the fee would have added to the kitty.

I wonder if Celtic might be considering taking him back as Kyogo is off to Rennes. We can but hope.
 
Last edited:
Lanzo-Ad said:
Huhges, Lerma, Doucoure, Wharton, devveny and Kamada is enough for 2 spots, surely!
Click to expand...
Out of that bunch we have had a spate of Injuries,Doucoure is out now. Hughes collects cards for fun. There are four spots including wing backs need covering. Kamada doean't count due to the simple fact that he is rubbish.No real cover for Munoz or Mitchell.
 
Palacesince64 said:
Edouard has turned down a move to Atlanta unfortunately. No surprise as he’s happy to take the money and sit on the bench. Pity as the fee would have added to the kitty.

I wonder if Celtic might be considering taking him back as Kyogo is off to Rennes. We can but hope.
Click to expand...
After watching ssn I’m not sure he would.

They was talking about garnacho to Napoli and were explaining the sale of academy players over players brought into the club.

The example they used was that if you brought a player for £40m and sold for £80m you wouldn’t have £40m to show on the books due the signing on fees and other related costs. If you sold and academy player instead for £40m you have £40m profit on the books.

Transfer market shows us buying him for around £13.7m which would mean we wouldn’t make any profit at £12m so then wouldn’t be able to spend anymore.

Although the loan fee may make it into a profit depending how much they’ve paid.
 
beak said:
Out of that bunch we have had a spate of Injuries,Doucoure is out now. Hughes collects cards for fun. There are four spots including wing backs need covering. Kamada doean't count due to the simple fact that he is rubbish.No real cover for Munoz or Mitchell.
Click to expand...
Wing backs are the most important players to get in, a bought LWB and a loaned RWB until we can see if Danny Imray is good enough to cover Muñoz next season.
 
Squidgeedee said:
After watching ssn I’m not sure he would.

They was talking about garnacho to Napoli and were explaining the sale of academy players over players brought into the club.

The example they used was that if you brought a player for £40m and sold for £80m you wouldn’t have £40m to show on the books due the signing on fees and other related costs. If you sold and academy player instead for £40m you have £40m profit on the books.

Transfer market shows us buying him for around £13.7m which would mean we wouldn’t make any profit at £12m so then wouldn’t be able to spend anymore.

Although the loan fee may make it into a profit depending how much they’ve paid.
Click to expand...
Not sure I follow your argument. Agreed we wouldn’t make a profit on the sale but we’d be £12 million better off than we are currently and I’m pretty sure we’re ok with respect to PSR so that £12 million could be available for transfers.
 
Palacesince64 said:
Not sure I follow your argument. Agreed we wouldn’t make a profit on the sale but we’d be £12 million better off than we are currently and I’m pretty sure we’re ok with respect to PSR so that £12 million could be available for transfers.
Click to expand...

That is not how it works.

Because you sell a player for say 10m it doesn't mean you have 10m straight away available for transfers.

Contracts and transfers are very complex the pay payments work.

It's the same with people who think when we get new investors in they can pump money into transfer no they can't.
 
grumpymort said:
That is not how it works.

Because you sell a player for say 10m it doesn't mean you have 10m straight away available for transfers.

Contracts and transfers are very complex the pay payments work.

It's the same with people who think when we get new investors in they can pump money into transfer no they can't.
Click to expand...
If you buy a player for say £15m on a 5 year contract, that contract amortises at £3m pa. So after 3 years the ‘book value’ of the player stands at £6m. Get any more than that for him (however payments are phased) and you can show a profit of the difference. Hope that helps.
 
Palacesince64 said:
Not sure I follow your argument. Agreed we wouldn’t make a profit on the sale but we’d be £12 million better off than we are currently and I’m pretty sure we’re ok with respect to PSR so that £12 million could be available for transfers.
Click to expand...
The way it was explained was that you need to show profit for that money to be added to your budget.

If edouard cost us £13m then you add the value on his contract which is apparently £4.68m for 4 years. Then his actual cost to the club is £31.72m

As someone else has mentioned the contract value goes down each year bring to total cost on the books down but the transfer fees remains.

This is why they are saying selling academy products is a better way to increase your transfer budget because you haven’t got a previous transfer fee to be deducted. Unless you can sell for a profit each time. Ayew and Anderson both went for profits as did olise. Edouard won’t go for a profit.

In my opinion it’s a silly rule to protect the big 6 from anyone coming in and taking their place. Newcastle and villa both have the money to spend but others don’t want them to be able to spend it. They already have the revenue and squads to make sure they can stay in European comps.

Until that rule goes no on but the big 6 will consistently play in Europe and for regular trophies.
 
Squidgeedee said:
The way it was explained was that you need to show profit for that money to be added to your budget.

If edouard cost us £13m then you add the value on his contract which is apparently £4.68m for 4 years. Then his actual cost to the club is £31.72m

As someone else has mentioned the contract value goes down each year bring to total cost on the books down but the transfer fees remains.

This is why they are saying selling academy products is a better way to increase your transfer budget because you haven’t got a previous transfer fee to be deducted. Unless you can sell for a profit each time. Ayew and Anderson both went for profits as did olise. Edouard won’t go for a profit.

In my opinion it’s a silly rule to protect the big 6 from anyone coming in and taking their place. Newcastle and villa both have the money to spend but others don’t want them to be able to spend it. They already have the revenue and squads to make sure they can stay in European comps.

Until that rule goes no on but the big 6 will consistently play in Europe and for regular trophies.
Click to expand...
Or you can adopt the Forest approach of just completely ignoring it, swallowing the points deduction and building a squad challenging for Europe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top