Do we need to sell Sess to spend?!?!

[Jeroen]

It just occurred to me that we haven't spend a penny this transfer window.
Yes maybe loan fees, but we loaned some out as well.

There have been plenty of good (reasonably priced) targets out there, but we haven't done anything yet.

Is it maybe because we need the Sess money to be able to spend?!?

Anyone has any insights?

[the nutflush]

With the parachute payments I cannot see why we can't spend a little. But I would like to hear from a few in the know too.

[Mince n Tatties]

Yes we can,too much being spoken about ffp.

[Roberty]

Spend - if you just mean money - I'm sure TK has cash in the tea-kitty if he needs it

The problem will be FFP and that would need to be resolved before the financial year end - so if we do have problems it would have to be in the January window if not now

[I Ronic]

Spend - if you just mean money - I'm sure TK has cash in the tea-kitty if he needs it

The problem will be FFP and that would need to be resolved before the financial year end - so if we do have problems it would have to be in the January window if not now

You make a good point. To add to it, if SP doesnt meet expectations and is released/leaves. Then there's got to be something in the kitty to persuade a new manager to join.

[Two Ton Ted]

If we do need to sell, then we're clearly not going to make any permanent signings this window.

[Spirit of 2000]

Yes we can,too much being spoken about ffp.

Why is too much being made of FFP when we haven't too much to play with considering wages and amortization of fees on existing players over contract length. If we mess up it could mean points deduction and transfer embargo.

[Statto]

Latest back-of-a-***-packet calculations from me looking at last year's accounts this morning--

Parachute payment £43m
Other revenue (gate receipts, sponsorship etc) say £20m
TOTAL £63m

Wages - £28m according to TK last month but with IC and AK say £32m


£63m

Then factor in last season's spending, which will be accounted for over the terms of the players' contracts, so say £100m spread over an average term of 4 yrs = £25m this season

Leaves about £6m

...but then of course any future spending will also be spread over 3 yrs (eg if we sign Gayle for £15m on a 3yr deal, that's only £5m spent this year)   

[JoelH5]

Latest back-of-a-***-packet calculations from me looking at last year's accounts this morning--

Parachute payment £43m
Other revenue (gate receipts, sponsorship etc) say £20m
TOTAL £63m

Wages - £28m according to TK last month but with IC and AK say £32m


£63m

Then factor in last season's spending, which will be accounted for over the terms of the players' contracts, so say £100m spread over an average term of 4 yrs = £25m this season

Leaves about £6m

...but then of course any future spending will also be spread over 3 yrs (eg if we sign Gayle for £15m on a 3yr deal, that's only £5m spent this year)   

If we dont sign anyone else next year or the year after. But then, if we go up, that figure can increase massively. PS. I dont want Gayle!

[filham]

Remember we havn't sold anyone in this window. Big money buys Anguissa and Seri are only away on loan which is difficult to understand. It would seemed more sensisble and bring a couple of good silod championship players in with the proceeds.

[Spirit of 2000]

Remember we havn't sold anyone in this window. Big money buys Anguissa and Seri are only away on loan which is difficult to understand. It would seemed more sensisble and bring a couple of good silod championship players in with the proceeds.

Not so hard to understand  ... say for arguments sake that we sell Seri and Anguissa for a joint 10 million loss and get 40 mil. Thats NOT 40 mil we can spend..  accounts wise that is a loss and counts against us in as far as FFP is concerned. Loaning them not only brings in loan fees which show as profit but the remainder of their fees are amortized over their remaining contract and the year loan gives opportunity for them to be in the shop window and raise their value which is pretty low after last season. So we hope both players have a blinding 2019/20 and we get our money back or best part of it next summer.

[Twig]

Remember we havn't sold anyone in this window. Big money buys Anguissa and Seri are only away on loan which is difficult to understand. It would seemed more sensisble and bring a couple of good silod championship players in with the proceeds.

Not so hard to understand  ... say for arguments sake that we sell Seri and Anguissa for a joint 10 million loss and get 40 mil. Thats NOT 40 mil we can spend..  accounts wise that is a loss and counts against us in as far as FFP is concerned. Loaning them not only brings in loan fees which show as profit but the remainder of their fees are amortized over their remaining contract and the year loan gives opportunity for them to be in the shop window and raise their value which is pretty low after last season. So we hope both players have a blinding 2019/20 and we get our money back or best part of it next summer.

Exactly. To be fair others like Statto have made the same point repeatedly and yet still people don't seem to understand.

[The Rational Fan]

We spent VERY BIG this transfer window with eleven big investments from an FFP perspective. The biggest two writing off Seri (three seasons left) and Anguissa (four seasons left), then six extensions of a year each for Cairney, Mitrovoic, Odoi, Johasen, Kebano and Atiye plus three loan/buy option signing with Arter, Calverio and Knockaert.

That is collectively a MASSIVE INVESTMENT, anymore spending needs significant money for Elliott and Sessegnon, which we deserve for investing in an academy.

Personally, i think we wasted our money writing off Seri and Anguissa, it was cheaper to keep them in the squad and buy other players instead, but obviously the club didn't want to get stuck with paying their amortisation in future seasons (although we don't know how much is written off but their value must be reduced to their buy option).

Unfortunately, under FFP writing off players is more expensive than buying them or keeping them, but most fans didn't want them and they are rumoured to not feeling welcome so obviously the club took a decision to take a hit now rather than future seasons, but that is where a lot of our parchate payments are going.

[Statto]

We spent VERY BIG this transfer window with eleven big investments from an FFP perspective. The biggest two writing off Seri (three seasons left) and Anguissa (four seasons left), then six extensions of a year each for Cairney, Mitrovoic, Odoi, Johasen, Kebano and Atiye plus three loan/buy option signing with Arter, Calverio and Knockaert.

That is collectively a MASSIVE INVESTMENT, anymore spending needs significant money for Elliott and Sessegnon, which we deserve for investing in an academy.

Personally, i think we wasted our money writing off Seri and Anguissa, it was cheaper to keep them in the squad and buy other players instead, but obviously the club didn't want to get stuck with paying their amortisation in future seasons (although we don't know how much is written off but their value must be reduced to their buy option).

Unfortunately, under FFP writing off players is more expensive than buying them or keeping them, but most fans didn't want them and they are rumoured to not feeling welcome so obviously the club took a decision to take a hit now rather than future seasons, but that is where a lot of our parchate payments are going.

What?
We haven't released Seri and Anguissa on free transfers. We've loaned them out for a year and they'll either be back next year, or sold for a fee that probably reflects their book value at that stage. Are you suggesting their buy options are lower than that, ie lower than £10m-£15m?
We may have to account for their natural amortisation over the year, just as we would if they'd stayed, although now it will probably be significantly offset by loan fees.
Why would we write them off, or incur any additional expenditure by loaning them out?

[The Rational Fan]

We spent VERY BIG this transfer window with eleven big investments from an FFP perspective. The biggest two writing off Seri (three seasons left) and Anguissa (four seasons left), then six extensions of a year each for Cairney, Mitrovoic, Odoi, Johasen, Kebano and Atiye plus three loan/buy option signing with Arter, Calverio and Knockaert.

That is collectively a MASSIVE INVESTMENT, anymore spending needs significant money for Elliott and Sessegnon, which we deserve for investing in an academy.

Personally, i think we wasted our money writing off Seri and Anguissa, it was cheaper to keep them in the squad and buy other players instead, but obviously the club didn't want to get stuck with paying their amortisation in future seasons (although we don't know how much is written off but their value must be reduced to their buy option).

Unfortunately, under FFP writing off players is more expensive than buying them or keeping them, but most fans didn't want them and they are rumoured to not feeling welcome so obviously the club took a decision to take a hit now rather than future seasons, but that is where a lot of our parchate payments are going.

What?
We haven't released Seri and Anguissa on free transfers. We've loaned them out for a year and they'll either be back next year, or sold for a fee that probably reflects their book value at that stage. Are you suggesting their buy options are lower than that, ie lower than £10m-£15m?
We may have to account for their natural amortisation over the year, just as we would if they'd stayed (although it may be offset by decent loan fees) but why would we write them off, or incur any additional expenditure by loaning them out?

Seri and Anguissa have buy options, we have to write them down to that amount if they are bought or not. Besides Seri is reported as having a 1.35 million loan fee, which values him around £5 million over three years (which far below his book value of 3/4 of what we bought Seri for). We basically swapping Seri for Arter, which i don't think is a good deal, because i'd prefer Seri.

[Statto]

Seri and Anguissa have buy options, we have to write them down to that amount if they are bought or not. Besides Seri is reported as having a 1.35 million loan fee, which values him around £5 million over three years (which far below his book value of 3/4 of what we bought Seri for). We basically swapping Seri for Arter, which i don't think is a good deal, because i'd prefer Seri.

OK well obviously there is a difference between the loan fee (£1.35m according to you - fine) and the exercise price for the option to buy. They're two different things. Why would we have to write down his value to the loan fee, or 3x the loan fee?

Or are you suggesting the other figure, the option price we've agreed, will be lower than his book value at the end of the season (which, 2 yrs into a 4yr deal, will be 50% of what we paid for him, so probably about £10m)? If so, what is your source for that?