Russian Roulette!

[roger_ramjet]

[quote="dcfcdavecov"]The transfer fees are spread out over the course of a contract, whether or not the fee has already been paid in full. As the rulkes have been relaxed, and you put the fees over the course of the contracts given out, we're looking at about an extra 2.5 million a year, we're not in any kind of trouble.

Mel Morris stated we couldn't afford insurance for injured players last year, as it would have tipped us over FFP. This year we are covered. That says everything. We're inside FFP.

Now, obviously we can't do this every summer, it would all start to add up.

As for wages:

Lingard, Ince, Bent, Jamie Ward, Lee Naylor, Mark O'Brien, Shaun Barker, Tom Naylor, Zak Whitbread, John Eustace and Omar Mascarell have gone.

Ince, Bent , Pearce, Weimann, Shackell, Carson and Baird have come in. For me, there isn't a great increase in wages there.

Roos and Rawson have also gone out on loan, and i am expecting more to go out permanently.

For me, we m

[ChellastonRam]

[quote="roger_ramjet"]The transfer fees are spread out over the course of a contract, whether or not the fee has already been paid in full. As the rulkes have been relaxed, and you put the fees over the course of the contracts given out, we're looking at about an extra 2.5 million a year, we're not in any kind of trouble.

Mel Morris stated we couldn't afford insurance for injured players last year, as it would have tipped us over FFP. This year we are covered. That says everything. We're inside FFP.

Now, obviously we can't do this every summer, it would all start to add up.

As for wages:

Lingard, Ince, Bent, Jamie Ward, Lee Naylor, Mark O'Brien, Shaun Barker, Tom Naylor, Zak Whitbread, John Eustace and Omar Mascarell have gone.

Ince, Bent , Pearce, Weimann, Shackell, Carson and Baird have come in. For me, there isn't a great increase in wages there.

Roos and Rawson have also gone out on loan, and i am e

[wristslasher_909]

Roger, explain what you mean by FFP credits.

As I understood it, FFP was looking at losses made by clubs year on year.

[wristslasher_909]

I've always stated that I don't want a sugar daddy and for these exact reasons it's unsustainable and really could see us ending up like Pompey just disintegrating.

MM - "It is not just about getting up there, it is about how you shape the team and what you have to add to it to become a sustainable club.

Yes, I do believe we are in a sugar daddy type situation, similar to the Lionel days back in the 90s, but that regime fell due to unbelievably bad management at all levels of the club. We couldn't make it sustainable. We have a new man at the helm, MM, who I believe, looking at his track record in business, has the skills to turn us into a sustainable PL club.

Decent centre halves come with at least a £2 million price tag, that's a fact!

Proven goalscorers with potential to develop cost £4 million plus. That's the reality.

There is no guarantee of success but you must agree, the squad we have developed over the last 4 years,

[Ramondo]

Interesting thread - I didn't realise that transfer fees were spread out over the contract period for starters. I'm not convinced that's a sustainable sytem that actually does anything to encourage clubs maintain fainancial common sense.

That appears to be making debt 'easier' because of the lack of short term outgoings. Just as any form of credit arrangement - that is the big problem with spreading costs, it encourages people to spend more than they otherwise would. Obviously we are a business and we are being run by very smart and savvy business people, not Wayne and Waynetta who might wish to live a lifestyle well beyond their income.

But the biggest issue for clubs is not actually the transfer fee. Given that many players are sold before their contract expires in order to claw back some, all or more than their original fee, then the major cost to clubs has for years been absurd wages. We can only assume that Shackell is on very good money, so will Ince, so will Weimann. Con

[roger_ramjet]

What I mean is this -

In your annual accounts you would take immediate recognition of the sale of a player for £ 4m and you would write off the costs of acquiring a player over the length of his contract.

So team A sell a development player for £ 4m and so recognise a profit of £ 4m - hence can spend it in FFP terms.

Team B buy the player for £ 4m on a 4 year contract and so they have a net annual outlay of £ 1m (ie their profit is restricted by just £ 1m in the first year).

So team A and team B swap two players at an agreed value of £ 4m, each signing the other player on a 4 year deal. Both therefore recognise an immediate £ 4m profit in their books offset by an annual write off on the purchase of £ 1m. Ergo both show a £ 3m year one profit - which neatly distorts their FFP position for the year.

[wristslasher_909]

I can see that this (FFP) could lead to a spiralling of transfer fees, but if you look around the Championship megabucks aren't being thrown around.

It seems to be us and Boro' leading the charge.

[rhino1980]

[quote="Rattea"]Just reading the Dyche interview and he's talking about the amount of money being offered by Derby. He's states he thinks we over paid for shackell and the wages on offer are record contract even for us (remember ravenelli).

Ok alarm bells going off all over the place here.

I've always stated that I don't want a sugar daddy and for these exact reasons it's unsustainable and really could see us ending up like Pompey just disintegrating.

I know MM appears to be bank rolling it all but I really would like some transparency now. We don't know anything for sure. Have we got another mortgage on the ground or is the money being borrowed or loaned. Are the wages being under written and what about FFP and I think some will have a shock that it will be enforced at some level.

Concerns MM could pull out or God forbid anything happen to him.
We just fail on the pitch and implode.
How are players on old contacts going to feel with other players c

[roger_ramjet]

Since the subject of transparency has come up, I have to ask why on earth does anyone assume that they have a right to know the management strategy of a (mostly) private limited company?

Would you expect Marks & Spencer to provide full details of their marketing and medium term business plans (beyond that required to be disclosed in the accounts) into a general public forum? No - so why should a football club do so, just because it has fans? So do M&S, although I do not number myself as one of them! So we need to get our collective heads out of our ****s and smell the fresh air.

Football fans seem to think that they have some sort of "right" to confidential and potentially commercially sensitive information about the way the club that they follow is run. Fact is, they don't.

Football fans are no more a stakeholder in their club than I am because I buy raspberries in M&S. The average season ticket holder probably spends more per week on his family shop at Sainsbury's etc than h

[AnagRam]

Won't pretend to have the economic expertise of Roger or Rats but don't we have to keep some sense of perspective here? We are a top and aspirational Championship side. We are worrying about around £3m being spent on someone who many regard as a ***** piece of our defensive jigsaw and our missing leader. In comparison, Man.City have just spent the same amount x 13 on a relatively unproven forward with a seriously bad attitude and Liverpool the equivalent of us buying eleven Shackells on an injury prone bludgeon of a striker.

The aim is to get to compete with such teams and all signings are gambles but surely if that £3m gets us to the 'promised land' of the Premiership then it has to be worthwhile.

As for the owners 'tiring of the train set', aren't they in too deep for that to be likely? MM and the rest of the ownership group now appear to have committed so much of their own wealth to the cause of promotion that I can't see it being likely that they'll lose interest and walk away, e