Printable View
Listening to a video about 10+2 million for Longstaff being pure profit because he's a homegrown player. I get that concept but can anyone explain it from a PSR standpoint?
If PSR runs on a three year rotation, isn't every player at the club here for more than 3 years tehcnically pure profit as it pertains to PSR reporting?
Anyway - good offer for Sean. Hope he does well at Leeds.
He'll be brilliant for them but ?12 million just feels so cheap for him.
When they say pure profit it is home grown but also any player that has been here longer than the original deal to buy him.
As in we buy a player, and pay off the fee over 5 years.
If we sell that player after 1 year, we still owe the selling club 4 years worth of his transfer fee.
If we sell that same player after he has been at the club 5 years and his fee has been paid off, then it is pure profit.
Longstaff being honest grown means we didnt pay any transfer fee for him, so pure profit.
3 years PSR is just the sum of losses for the previous 3 seasons most of the time, for most clubs, Revenue is less than operating costs (transfer fee yearly payments + Wages + all the other bills) so clubs can lose more than they make, but have to cut their cloth so they balance out the last 3 years to only have lost 105m over the period.
10 mil seems veruy cheap, tbf