Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chris Mills

Harry Wilson - Joined Bournemouth

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, EnigmaRam said:

Two weeks ago it was £25 mil, last week it was £21 mil and now it’s down to £15 mil. Give it a couple of weeks and it will be down to a tenner!

And the only comment some would make is that he’d be there 3rd choice of the loan players...

(mine too, but I don’t need that point to be stated again and again on a thread about a good young player)

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Sparkle said:

18 goals - he was excellent 

tomori was great and could be great but centre half’s can be replaced 

mount was very talented but we always seemed unbalanced in midfield 

wilson again - goals win matches and he scores goals and wins games 

If ffp only takes affect if players leave for less, meaning we’ve made a loss...why don’t we go for tomori. Very unlikely we will be selling for less than we buy him for in this market. Another good season in this division and his price will rise yet again 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, jimbobram said:

If ffp only takes affect if players leave for less, meaning we’ve made a loss...why don’t we go for tomori. Very unlikely we will be selling for less than we buy him for in this market. Another good season in this division and his price will rise yet again 

I'm 99.9% sure that's not how FFP works.

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Srg said:

I'm 99.9% sure that's not how FFP works.

whats the reason for giving the flops new contracts then ? to stop their fee from adding to ffp loss

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, jimbobram said:

whats the reason for giving the flops new contracts then ? to stop their fee from adding to ffp loss

FFP doesn't ''only take *effect'' if players leave for less; it monitors, and accounts for, total expenditure, even outside of transfers. Did you really think we could spend 8 figures on Tomori and just because he might have a higher resale price in the future, it wouldn't affect our FFP?

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

FFP doesn't ''only take *effect'' if players leave for less; it monitors, and accounts for, total expenditure, even outside of transfers. Did you really think we could spend 8 figures on Tomori and just because he might have a higher resale price in the future, it wouldn't affect our FFP?

FFP is a rule. It's taken from company accounts it doesn't matter how much you spend on a player. For example we spend £10m on Tomori we loose £10m in cash but we have a player worth £10m, we don't need another £10m to come into the club as we have lost nothing, we would have Tomori and he is worth £10m to us. However what has been stinging us is their wage, they do count so if we pay Tomori 20k per week that is £1m expenditure for the year to offset against your income. we have apparently we have some 30/40/50k players that do not even play that much which will be coming off our income. 

Where the players values do come into play is where you loose players such as Butterflied who has been valued at x amount for the past 3 or so years leaves for free which is an instant multi million pound loss on our accounts. 

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, DcfcJB said:

FFP is a rule. It's taken from company accounts it doesn't matter how much you spend on a player. For example we spend £10m on Tomori we loose £10m in cash but we have a player worth £10m, we don't need another £10m to come into the club as we have lost nothing, we would have Tomori and he is worth £10m to us. However what has been stinging us is their wage, they do count so if we pay Tomori 20k per week that is £1m expenditure for the year to offset against your income. we have apparently we have some 30/40/50k players that do not even play that much which will be coming off our income. 

Where the players values do come into play is where you loose players such as Butterflied who has been valued at x amount for the past 3 or so years leaves for free which is an instant multi million pound loss on our accounts. 

Lose vs Loose.  😱

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, DcfcJB said:

FFP is a rule. It's taken from company accounts it doesn't matter how much you spend on a player. For example we spend £10m on Tomori we loose £10m in cash but we have a player worth £10m, we don't need another £10m to come into the club as we have lost nothing, we would have Tomori and he is worth £10m to us. However what has been stinging us is their wage, they do count so if we pay Tomori 20k per week that is £1m expenditure for the year to offset against your income. we have apparently we have some 30/40/50k players that do not even play that much which will be coming off our income. 

Where the players values do come into play is where you loose players such as Butterflied who has been valued at x amount for the past 3 or so years leaves for free which is an instant multi million pound loss on our accounts. 

It does matter what you spend on a player because you have to amortise their value over their contract e.g. £9m over 3 years is a £3m hit to the P&L each of the 3 seasons.

You have to do that because the player could choose to leave after their contract ends and are worthless to the club at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Mckram said:

It does matter what you spend on a player because you have to amortise their value over their contract e.g. £9m over 3 years is a £3m hit to the P&L each of the 3 seasons.

You have to do that because the player could choose to leave after their contract ends and are worthless to the club at that point.

That is true to an extent, however it is not a simple case of straight line depreciation.

There worth could be £9m, £9m, £0, with the view that you will either extend their contract or sell them in the final year.

The risk is that you get a massive hit if they leave.

Edited by maydrakin

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Mckram said:

It does matter what you spend on a player because you have to amortise their value over their contract e.g. £9m over 3 years is a £3m hit to the P&L each of the 3 seasons.

You have to do that because the player could choose to leave after their contract ends and are worthless to the club at that point.

That’s how the rule used to work but it isn’t now. You attach a residual value on a player and the difference between that and what we paid goes against our FFP figure. So if you think he’s as valuable one year in then you pay zero according to FFP

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Mckram said:

It does matter what you spend on a player because you have to amortise their value over their contract e.g. £9m over 3 years is a £3m hit to the P&L each of the 3 seasons.

You have to do that because the player could choose to leave after their contract ends and are worthless to the club at that point.

That's not strictly true, if they leave for nothing that's a big loss, especially in the cases of Butterfield and co. The club can choose the spread that loss I believe if they feel his value has tarnished but in the cases of someone such as Tomori, he is more of an investment you could spend big on him and then he plays really well making his stock higher - so with him he may sign a 3 year deal but he probably wont loose 3 million in year 1, he could very well be worth 12 million the following year as he is the right age and has good potential... at the end of the day its about how the player performs and what his stock is worth at the time if you decide to change the values of players each year on your books.   

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, DcfcJB said:

That's not strictly true, if they leave for nothing that's a big loss, especially in the cases of Butterfield and co. The club can choose the spread that loss I believe if they feel his value has tarnished but in the cases of someone such as Tomori, he is more of an investment you could spend big on him and then he plays really well making his stock higher - so with him he may sign a 3 year deal but he probably wont loose 3 million in year 1, he could very well be worth 12 million the following year as he is the right age and has good potential... at the end of the day its about how the player performs and what his stock is worth at the time if you decide to change the values of players each year on your books.   

Do you know who/what determines a players value within the P&S rules? Surely it cant be down to how the club value's a player as they can make it up. So is it the value of what the club paid both fee/wages/bonuses or some other format?

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, maydrakin said:

That is true to an extent, however it is not a simple case of straight line depreciation.

There worth could be £9m, £9m, £0, with the view that you will either extend their contract or sell them in the final year.

The risk is that you get a massive hit if they leave.

Yeah I understand it might not be as simple as straight line.

My point to the original post was it does matter what we spend on a player. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, DCFC1388 said:

Do you know who/what determines a players value within the P&S rules? Surely it cant be down to how the club value's a player as they can make it up. So is it the value of what the club paid both fee/wages/bonuses or some other format?

Should be the company's directors because the players are assets of the club (the company).

If the directors do not value the assets reasonably then they will be committing an offence under the Companies Act. 

The audit of the accounts should form an independent view as to the reasonablness or otherwise of the approach taken to valuing the company's assets. 👍

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.