Big Friedkin Rebuild

[Dymak]

If you get 15 million for Beto, you still need to write off the 15 million left on his transfer fee. It's a wash, you'd really only be saving on his salary which would effectively been taken by his replacement.

But without the sale we'd have to meet that liability by some other means. The sale means that the 15 million earmarked for the purchase of Beto is sorted, allowing us to make use of the money that would have been required without the sale.

Is it the same as Football Manager? Obviously not. But I can't accept that Everton can no longer benefit from the age old strategy of sell to buy, or that selling a couple of players for 20 million 'makes no difference'.

 

[pfim]

But without the sale we'd have to meet that liability by some other means. The sale means that the 15 million earmarked for the purchase of Beto is sorted, allowing us to make use of the money that would have been required without the sale.

Is it the same as Football Manager? Obviously not. But I can't accept that Everton can no longer benefit from the age old strategy of sell to buy, or that selling a couple of players for 20 million 'makes no difference'.

You would meet the 15 million liability over the next three years, not all at once. Which is the difference. Once you sell an asset, you need to write off the remaining 15 million all in the same accounting period.

 

[barneygumble]

But on July 1st we'll be in fiscal 2026. So the transactions we complete will be for the PSR years ended 2024, 2025 and 2026. The 89 million will fall out of the equation. We don't know yet what 2024 brings, and obviously not 2025.

My understanding is  somewhat different, but happy to go with your workings.

No sackings, no board removal, hopefully less expenditure on Stadium. But still don't think we'll be seeing anything other than frugal spending.

 

[pfim]

My understanding is  somewhat different, but happy to go with your workings.

No sackings, no board removal, hopefully less expenditure on Stadium. But still don't think we'll be seeing anything other than frugal spending.

They will be forced to spend money in the summer, we're short of numbers. The hope is less about frugality and more about finding value in the market. It's not as if we'll be shelling out 60-70 million for a single player, we need to fill out a squad.

 

[Dymak]

You would meet the 15 million liability over the next three years, not all at once. Which is the difference. Once you sell an asset, you need to write off the remaining 15 million all in the same accounting period.

But the sale figure is also added, in its entirety, within the same accounting period, no?

 

[pfim]

But the sale figure is also added, in its entirety, within the same accounting period, no?

Yes so if he's sold for 15 and you expense 15, that's zero.

 

[Toffeepot]

Would you offer him a 1-year extension? What if he insisted on same terms (approx £80k / week)?

I would
He still looks very fit to me

 

[Dymak]

Yes so if he's sold for 15 and you expense 15, that's zero.

Better than persisting with the big lump imo, and I'd hope to get a bit more than 15, but we will see what happens in January.

How does it work for the likes of Doucoure and Keane, whose initial contracts with Everton were concluded some time ago?

 

[pfim]

Better than persisting with the big lump imo, and I'd hope to get a bit more than 15, but we will see what happens in January.

How does it work for the likes of Doucoure and Keane, whose initial contracts with Everton were concluded some time ago?

They would be profit if their fees were written down (you'd assume they were but the 5 year rule was not in place when they were signed).

That anyone would pay a fee for them doesn't seem likely, however. And as much as we need to move on from both, they are still needed or will need to be replaced, which kinda defeats the purpose of selling them as we have other needs (imo).

 

[Nymzee]

I honestly don't want to get into a tedious accounting debate. I'm not an accountant, and I'd never want to be one tbh. However people say that the sale figure is written down on the accounts immediately, whereas the expenditure is spread across the installment plan. If this is accurate, then it assists the age old sell to buy strategy.

I'm aware that some people are uneasy with good news, but have we really reached a point where we are going to pretend that we cannot even take advantage of the sell to buy strategy? Really?

I'm not poo-pooing a sell-to-buy strategy, that's what all legal football clubs in the world must adhere to, I'm just correcting your baseless optimism in us being able to properly strengthen just because we sold someone like Beto or Doucoure (ignoring the fact no one is grabbing him).

 

[banno]

Yes so if he's sold for 15 and you expense 15, that's zero.

I am not sure like but doesn't the expense still carry on as a per year fees over the length of contract we gave him. Like if we sold for £15m that would show on the books regardless for the current year but we are still paying off yearly. Say £15m in and straight on our profit books but still say £5m out for next few years. So £10 on our profit but -£5m the next year or so. A bit like selling Dobbin to get £10m in our profit section and signing Tim for £9m that will be split in expenditure over his contract???? This is more of a question and not a statement

 

[barneygumble]

They will be forced to spend money in the summer, we're short of numbers. The hope is less about frugality and more about finding value in the market. It's not as if we'll be shelling out 60-70 million for a single player, we need to fill out a squad.

A lot of work to be done.

I've not seen any evidence they won't be able to do it. But if other teams can buy low, sell high, there's no reason we can not.

At least it won't be a circus like Moshiri/Usmanov.

 

[pfim]

I am not sure like but doesn't the expense still carry on as a per year fees over the length of contract we gave him. Like if we sold for £15m that would show on the books regardless for the current year but we are still paying off yearly. Say £15m in and straight on our profit books but still say £5m out for next few years. So £10 on our profit but -£5m the next year or so. A bit like selling Dobbin to get £10m in our profit section and signing Tim for £9m that will be split in expenditure over his contract???? This is more of a question and not a statement

If you sell him, you expense the remainder of the fee. You can't amortize something you don't own or have under contract.

 

[Dymak]

I'm not poo-pooing a sell-to-buy strategy, that's what all legal football clubs in the world must adhere to, I'm just correcting your baseless optimism in us being able to properly strengthen just because we sold someone like Beto or Doucoure (ignoring the fact no one is grabbing him).

The idea that nobody would be interested in Doucoure is another Debbie Downer dismissal. He still has utility operating at the top end of the professional game. If we don't sell him in January, it's more because we want to keep him rather than him being unwanted and valueless. Doucoure still has his suitors.

Beto and Doucoure have both been linked with moves to Roma in the last month. Whilst I'm not stating these moves will definitely happen, absolutely nobody will be surprised to see TFG take advantage of the fact that they own two football clubs.

I believe that the January transfer window provides us with a good opportunity to strengthen. I don't believe that we are in such a bad way that strengthening is an impossibility, or that we cannot even benefit from selling to buy.

 

[Nymzee]

The idea that nobody would be interested in Doucoure is another Debbie Downer dismissal. He still has utility operating at the top end of the professional game. If we don't sell him in January, it's more because we want to keep him rather than him being unwanted and valueless. Doucoure still has his suitors.

Beto and Doucoure have both been linked with moves to Roma in the last month. Whilst I'm not stating these moves will definitely happen, absolutely nobody will be surprised to see TFG take advantage of the fact that they own two football clubs.

I believe that the January transfer window provides us with a good opportunity to strengthen. I don't believe that we are in such a bad way that strengthening is an impossibility, or that we cannot even benefit from selling to buy.

You woke up supporting Zat's transfer posts, now you're telling me Doucoure is a wanted man but only name Roma (whom, despite having the same owner, would be dumb to rile up the Romans by signing him).

I'm guessing you're either WUMing your face off, or high as a kite.

Either way let's just leave this as I can't take you seriously at all.