Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cheron85

New Contracts

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

Indeed, but they still have to match contracts, so will be zero at the end of the contract.

But people are suggesting extending the contracts and retaining the residual values if I am reading correctly 

Share this post


Link to post

I'd love to know how they arrive at the values they give to each player.

It's not like you can pick up a Glasses guide like a car, or Rightmove for a house.

Obviously a player with 3 years left will have a higher value than if he had 1 year to go, and I assume younger players will have more value than those entering the twilight of their careers, depending on ability as well.

It's just such a subjective thing I don't see how you can value players accurately.

Do clubs game the system, by valuing assets to fit the FFP rules, for instance giving a higher value than realistic in years when the overall spend nears the limit, and reducing the value more than necessary when spending less?

FFP isn't fit for purpose imo, it's a cap on ambition and a way of keeping clubs in their place in the pecking order.

A much fairer system would be to let owners spend what they want, as long as the money was forwarded in advance to the league, and transfer fees, wages, and associated costs were met from this pot, with no way the club itself could be held liable for repayment of such money.

In conjunction with FFP rules for clubs not having an owner willing to piss money away, this would be fairer and easier to understand.

Share this post


Link to post

I’d extend Huddlestone’s, Pearce’s and Roos’. Huddlestone you will probably understand but Roos and Pearce are happy to sit on the bench and won’t cause disruption in the squad as a result and won’t be on “too” high wages. Don’t underestimate this. It will be difficult to find another centre back and goaly happy to sit on the bench, who knows what condition Davies will be in after his injury

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Roboram said:

I say let them all go.

We've been bemoaning the size of the squad & wanting a big clear out for a couple of years now.

No better opportunity to do this than in the summer.

 

At the moment i'm with you on that, although i will be sorry to see bryson go, and huddz to a lesser extent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Roboram said:

I take your point. But surely letting them all go will free up funds to strengthen, especially with the amount of wages the likes of Johnson & Butterfield are on (allegedly).

Only around half the list (maximum) make the match day squad anyway. 

I don’t really understand it myself, but what was explained at the time was that the value of players helps us with FFP and the value is the fee we paid for them.

So in FFP terms, BJ is worth £7,000,000 to us.

Share this post


Link to post

Seeing as how they cost us peanuts,we shouldn’t be too badly affected by letting Bryson,Ledley,Nugent,Pearce,Olsson and Roos go for nothing and I reckon we’ll be saving approximately £100k per week or £5m per annum.Sounds a good deal to me!👍

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cannable said:

I don’t really understand it myself, but what was explained at the time was that the value of players helps us with FFP and the value is the fee we paid for them.

So in FFP terms, BJ is worth £7,000,000 to us.

 We don’t know and publicising a players value would be bad for business.  Prudently, you would reduce BJ value over the period to reflect his likely value if sold.  It’s like any asset in a company’s books it should reflect the expected current value subject to audit approval.  But each depreciation has an  effect on FRR.  Not sure whether it is possible to up value a player.

might get £3m for BJ but I really doubt we have taken that hit in previous years.  Buy over priced players and it will bite you.  Anya, butterfield and a few others could cost us a lot.  Like I say we don’t know whether the club has been prudent over the years though

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, reveldevil said:

I'd love to know how they arrive at the values they give to each player.

It's not like you can pick up a Glasses guide like a car, or Rightmove for a house.

Obviously a player with 3 years left will have a higher value than if he had 1 year to go, and I assume younger players will have more value than those entering the twilight of their careers, depending on ability as well.

It's just such a subjective thing I don't see how you can value players accurately.

Do clubs game the system, by valuing assets to fit the FFP rules, for instance giving a higher value than realistic in years when the overall spend nears the limit, and reducing the value more than necessary when spending less?

FFP isn't fit for purpose imo, it's a cap on ambition and a way of keeping clubs in their place in the pecking order.

A much fairer system would be to let owners spend what they want, as long as the money was forwarded in advance to the league, and transfer fees, wages, and associated costs were met from this pot, with no way the club itself could be held liable for repayment of such money.

In conjunction with FFP rules for clubs not having an owner willing to piss money away, this would be fairer and easier to understand.

Well starting point will always what you have paid for a player.

Where you go from there I have no idea. 

Donot forget though that the accounts are audited and come along with the auditors comment that they give a true and fair view 😮 so there must be formulas or comparables for them to be able to make that assertion.

Share this post


Link to post

Haven't delved into the minutiae but it makes no sense whatsoever if a player's transfer fee isn't amortized over the length of his contract in FFP. Anything else sounds mad.

I'd be fine with releasing them all, freeing up vast wages for Frank's rebuilding in whatever division we find ourselves. Possible short-term extensions for Bryson, Hudds and Roos.

I reckon we'd have something like:

GK Carson, Mitchell, myriad juniors coming through

DF Bogle, Lowe, Keogh, Wisdom, Malone, Gordon [Davies, Forsyth recovering from injuries]

MF Holmes, Evans, Bird, Sibley, Elsnik, Babos, Thorne

CF Marriott, Waghorn, Bennett, Martin

Wingers Lawrence, Josefzoon, Thomas, Blackman

with myriad other decent-looking youngsters coming through. It's a great foundation with money freed up from wages for Frank to shape the squad and bring in key players where he sees fit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Carl Sagan said:

Haven't delved into the minutiae but it makes no sense whatsoever if a player's transfer fee isn't amortized over the length of his contract in FFP. Anything else sounds mad.

I'd be fine with releasing them all, freeing up vast wages for Frank's rebuilding in whatever division we find ourselves. Possible short-term extensions for Bryson, Hudds and Roos.

I reckon we'd have something like:

GK Carson, Mitchell, myriad juniors coming through

DF Bogle, Lowe, Keogh, Wisdom, Malone, Gordon [Davies, Forsyth recovering from injuries]

MF Holmes, Evans, Bird, Sibley, Elsnik, Babos, Thorne

CF Marriott, Waghorn, Bennett, Martin

Wingers Lawrence, Josefzoon, Thomas, Blackman

with myriad other decent-looking youngsters coming through. It's a great foundation with money freed up from wages for Frank to shape the squad and bring in key players where he sees fit.

 

Needs to reflect fair value.  Amortizing on a straight line would mean carrying say keo at 0 when even his worst detractors would expect a reasonable fee. As I have previously mentioned the auditors will need to be convinced as to what a fair value is

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Spanish said:

Needs to reflect fair value.  Amortizing on a straight line would mean carrying say keo at 0 when even his worst detractors would expect a reasonable fee. As I have previously mentioned the auditors will need to be convinced as to what a fair value is

Players are not valued, it's their registration that has a book value. After the Bosman ruling, over 23's can leave for free at the end of their contract, so that is always the value of their registration at the end of the contract.

If a contract is extended, the player's registration regains some value, but their book value cannot go above the actual cost of that registration, thus extending in the final few months of a contract only ever produces a low book value.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

But people are suggesting extending the contracts and retaining the residual values if I am reading correctly 

People on here suggest lots of things.

Player values can never increase in the accounts, unless some cost has been incurred,eg the costs of a new contract. Thus, if a player's value has been written down already, that value doesn't come back, but the existing residual value can be added to the newly incurred costs.

 

eg, if we signed a player for £7m on a 4 year contract and wrote his value down by £1m in year one and another £2m in year two, his rv would be £4m. If we then gave him a new contract and gave him a £1m signing fee and paid his bloodsucking agent another £1m, his rv would then be £6m. The thing is though, we don't gain in FFP terms by doing that as the £2m rise in his rv has come at the cost of £2m...and that's without a salary increase.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.