MPH Posted 5 January Share Posted 5 January On 04/01/2024 at 04:14, Stadt said: You aren't really taking my points on board, we'll leave it at that. For what its worth, McAteer is out with an injury and that would explain why he's not even been in any squads recently... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadt Posted 5 January Share Posted 5 January 2 hours ago, MPH said: For what its worth, McAteer is out with an injury and that would explain why he's not even been in any squads recently... Ah I had no idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 7 January Share Posted 7 January why does he only have 18 months on his contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Posted 7 January Share Posted 7 January 10 hours ago, Chrysalis said: why does he only have 18 months on his contract? Tbf he’s never really shown he’s been a player capable of playing above leave 1 before this season, and now he’s had 2 injuries which have limited his minutes. I hope he’ll be treated like Marcal and Hamza and get given new contracts, then worst case we can shift them all in the summer for a few million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wymsey Posted 7 January Share Posted 7 January Would Everton really be a 'step up' for him?.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzzy Elliot Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January https://tbrfootball.com/tottenham-would-like-to-sign-wonderful-player-from-leicester-city/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January 7 minutes ago, Muzzy Elliot said: https://tbrfootball.com/tottenham-would-like-to-sign-wonderful-player-from-leicester-city/ Stephen Merchant is my least favourite journalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January If we did need to raise some funds because of FFP. £5m for McAteer would be pure profit on the books. Not huge money but might well be something we'd be tempted by. Don't see anyone paying £5m to be fair but who knows. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January 5m is nothing. Not point in selling for that price. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dahnsouff Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January Depends what you can get for 5m and if he is seen as a future first teamer 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmayne7 Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January 12 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: If we did need to raise some funds because of FFP. £5m for McAteer would be pure profit on the books. Not huge money but might well be something we'd be tempted by. Don't see anyone paying £5m to be fair but who knows. What has changed with FFP? Everybody keeps saying things like this as though it appears differently on the accounts. Money in is money in, no? So you spend £50m on players and sell players for £50m, you're breaking even for that accounting/reporting period. If £10m of that relates to one player, who you happened to buy for £20m (player a), then yes you have made a £10m loss on that player, but you're not punished for doing so. If, in another scenario, you also had the £50m in/£50m out but that included selling a home grown player (player b) for £10m instead of player a, what difference does that make? You're talking a difference of £20m in those 2 scenarios but ultimately the over profit/loss is exactly the same. Realise wages and spreading the cost on the books counts, as well as other exclusions but ultimately it's just being the right side of the maximum loss, over the period? I am missing something that changed in the rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dahnsouff Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January Is the 3 year accountancy period rolling or does it have a fixed period? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January 15 minutes ago, dmayne7 said: What has changed with FFP? Everybody keeps saying things like this as though it appears differently on the accounts. Money in is money in, no? So you spend £50m on players and sell players for £50m, you're breaking even for that accounting/reporting period. If £10m of that relates to one player, who you happened to buy for £20m (player a), then yes you have made a £10m loss on that player, but you're not punished for doing so. If, in another scenario, you also had the £50m in/£50m out but that included selling a home grown player (player b) for £10m instead of player a, what difference does that make? You're talking a difference of £20m in those 2 scenarios but ultimately the over profit/loss is exactly the same. Realise wages and spreading the cost on the books counts, as well as other exclusions but ultimately it's just being the right side of the maximum loss, over the period? I am missing something that changed in the rules? When you buy a player you account for it evenly over either the duration of their contract or a set number of years. When you sell a player, you book the entire amount in the year you sell. However, depending how much you have left spread across future years for that player is also posted in full in the year you sell. That is why we refuse to sell players for less than what we've spread across the years and why we often don't end up selling such players. If we spent £50m this month, only £10-15m would be in this years accounts. If we sold £50m of players all £50m would be in the accounts but so would what we paid for them for the years remaining. This is why selling academy players is rife for the likes of Man City and Chelsea as its pyre profit for the year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January (edited) 21 minutes ago, dmayne7 said: What has changed with FFP? Everybody keeps saying things like this as though it appears differently on the accounts. Money in is money in, no? So you spend £50m on players and sell players for £50m, you're breaking even for that accounting/reporting period. If £10m of that relates to one player, who you happened to buy for £20m (player a), then yes you have made a £10m loss on that player, but you're not punished for doing so. If, in another scenario, you also had the £50m in/£50m out but that included selling a home grown player (player b) for £10m instead of player a, what difference does that make? You're talking a difference of £20m in those 2 scenarios but ultimately the over profit/loss is exactly the same. Realise wages and spreading the cost on the books counts, as well as other exclusions but ultimately it's just being the right side of the maximum loss, over the period? I am missing something that changed in the rules? When selling a player you have to take into consideration their amortisation. So for example, Man U brought Maguire for £80m, he's transfer is amortised over of his contract, if it was a four year contract that's 20m a year. Let's say after 2 years they decide to sell Maguire for 50m. He's sill has 2 x 20m amortisation of his transfer fee left in the books for the remaining 2 years of his contract. So that 2 x 20m =40m goes is a debt in the accounts and the 50m goes in a income. So you and up with only 10m profit, 50m income minus the 40m left of his amortisation. So in both scenarios you have sold a player for 50m but in 1 you have made 10m and in another you have made 50m profit. If you sold a youth player, he has not been brought so there no amortisation to worry about so the 50m is pure profit. Which is why the likes of Chelsea and Man City sell their kids because of FFP. Edited 12 January by coolhandfox 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozartfox Posted 12 January Share Posted 12 January Yawn. Everton can still sign players????????, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Posted 13 January Author Share Posted 13 January I like Kasey and all but Tottenham have history of buying youth players and then they sort of don’t play or do a lot. This is them trying to emulate the bigger clubs, like Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City etc so they can buy cheap and then sell on for FFP reasons. Surely people must realise, we’re only in the EFL for a season? It’s not like we’re going to need to sell people like Kasey on the cheap to stay afloat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysalis Posted 13 January Share Posted 13 January (edited) On 12/01/2024 at 16:58, dmayne7 said: What has changed with FFP? Everybody keeps saying things like this as though it appears differently on the accounts. Money in is money in, no? So you spend £50m on players and sell players for £50m, you're breaking even for that accounting/reporting period. If £10m of that relates to one player, who you happened to buy for £20m (player a), then yes you have made a £10m loss on that player, but you're not punished for doing so. If, in another scenario, you also had the £50m in/£50m out but that included selling a home grown player (player b) for £10m instead of player a, what difference does that make? You're talking a difference of £20m in those 2 scenarios but ultimately the over profit/loss is exactly the same. Realise wages and spreading the cost on the books counts, as well as other exclusions but ultimately it's just being the right side of the maximum loss, over the period? I am missing something that changed in the rules? https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12584543/uefas-new-financial-sustainability-regulations-to-replace-ffp-all-you-need-to-know I think if these were in place earlier we would already have fell foul of them. Edited 13 January by Chrysalis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurru991 Posted 15 January Share Posted 15 January On 12/01/2024 at 10:38, mozartfox said: Yawn. Everton can still sign players????????, It looks like Everton & Forest are under investigation & could be in trouble. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indierich06 Posted 17 January Share Posted 17 January Don't get me wrong, I really like Kasey McAteer and it's nice to see young lads from the academy getting their chance, but is he really good enough to get a move to the PL? He's not even really first choice for us. I know he's had injury problems, but Mavididi and Fatawu keep him out of the side comfortably - and I know he's young and likely to improve, but Fatawu is younger! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajthefox Posted 17 January Share Posted 17 January Obviously money is tight but surely it's worth keeping him and giving him some game time in the PL. Others will be more informed but I thought he'd done reasonably well for us, surely we can get some team to take a chance on him as a "PL Squad player" given he probably isn't costing us much at the moment. Maybe it's not worth waiting an extra year for perhaps a few extra million but it seems short sighted to me to let him go for five now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Fox Posted 17 January Share Posted 17 January 42 minutes ago, indierich06 said: Don't get me wrong, I really like Kasey McAteer and it's nice to see young lads from the academy getting their chance, but is he really good enough to get a move to the PL? He's not even really first choice for us. I know he's had injury problems, but Mavididi and Fatawu keep him out of the side comfortably - and I know he's young and likely to improve, but Fatawu is younger! Completely different players and Fatawu has not kept KM out of the team - he has been injured and you will see that EM rates KM every bit as much as Fatawu……they play the same position just in very different ways….KM is a real goal threat and his work rate is extraordinary whereas individual talent Fatawu is superb but also has a phenomenal work rate … We should be keeping both as KM will be invaluable in the prem and has significant potential too - we will not sell him for less than £20m 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
les-tah Posted 17 January Share Posted 17 January Surely agent noise🤣 However i would sell at a reasonable price without hesitation If it meant we can improve areas of the pitch that are more concerning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MalletFox Posted 17 January Share Posted 17 January 6 hours ago, Old Fox said: Completely different players and Fatawu has not kept KM out of the team - he has been injured and you will see that EM rates KM every bit as much as Fatawu……they play the same position just in very different ways….KM is a real goal threat and his work rate is extraordinary whereas individual talent Fatawu is superb but also has a phenomenal work rate … We should be keeping both as KM will be invaluable in the prem and has significant potential too - we will not sell him for less than £20m Guess we’re not selling him ever then … 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cincinnati Fox Posted 17 January Share Posted 17 January We get anything over 8 million id snap there hand off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 18 January Share Posted 18 January 2 hours ago, Cincinnati Fox said: We get anything over 8 million id snap there hand off! to be fair it would be hard to turn down £10 for him for sure. One day he will be worth more than that but sometimes you have to distribute the funds around and get a balanced squad.. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts