Everton January 2025 Transfer Thread

Nah mate it’s happening all the time covert loans in place in place for eventual sales with the particulars negotiated to suit PSR requirements that might be at players.

It’s not the same as a straight sale the player Ammortisation goes into an additional year, so you get the benifit of an additional year a amortisation of the book price.

Maupays obligation will see him essentially be pure profit for us as his contract will be fully ammortisatied by the end of this season - that’s why did a loan.

I want debating the point I was making to be honest, just making illustrating it. ;)

Yes the loan is for a season at a minimal amount -- then when converted at the end of the season the total kicks in.

This as you say benefits us with PSR as the players amotised fee has dropped a year, in the case of Maupay it will be 100% profit on book value.

However you had given an example where the FULL cost of a player is paid immediately as a LOAN ..then the player is transferred permanently AFTER the loan.

This would make no sense at all as it may as well be a transfer.
 

Will repeat myself if TFG are serious about keeping Dyche we need a forward who can play accross the front line and make an impact straight away otherwise they are risking their investment
 
Yes the loan is for a season at a minimal amount -- then when converted at the end of the season the total kicks in.

This as you say benefits us with PSR as the players amotised fee has dropped a year, in the case of Maupay it will be 100% profit on book value.

However you had given an example where the FULL cost of a player is paid immediately as a LOAN ..then the player is transferred permanently AFTER the loan.

This would make no sense at all as it may as well be a transfer.
I think the idea is to amortise 1 year and take the full transfer fee as a loan fee in Year 1, then confirm the transfer and therefore amortise the rest of the book value in Year 2. Maximising income in year one and minimising amortisation.
 
How else would you describe someone who has no concept of money?

Picking apart a person at the club, in this case Thelwell (in every possible imaginary way), for not spending money he hasnt been given....for generating profit on players and not actually spending huge sums (that he doesnt have) on top quality players.

Its like @Eggs believes you can walk into a supermarket and pickup whatever you want and not pay for it....

...the same as he believes that signing a star player for ZERO money down is easy -- yet cannot give any examples of it.

Nothing wrong with my post accusing someone of not living in the real world...they clearly do not know the value of money...revenue, profit/loss, FFP & PSR.

Realities they attribute to playing a computer game. I'd say that this attitude is attributed to the wealthy person who has never worked a day in their life.

No one other than a dimwitted idiot (which i dont believe he is) or someone with no concept of monetary value would believe any DOF could magically have a team full of quality when they have no money and in fact need to drive sales for the club to exist.



Apparently a positive net spend means the DOF should be signing quality players for no money down...and their current clubs would be able to replace these players for free as some kind of favour to us?

Its like the lightbulb needs to be fixed for the reality to make sense...at the moment its not even blinking.

We also should have extended the dross which is out of contract this summer...

...because they may not be motivated to showcase their abilities to earn their next move.

Its somewhat of a riddle...where money means nothing and ability is secondary to reality.



Theres almost always a fee for a loan and the buy options are also quite frequent.

Not sure why you believe otherwise?

You can look back to the high fees we were quoted for Zouma which i think were £6mil a season.

There has been no "limited spend"

Try NEGATIVE SPEND.

"Going rate of players" meaning what, NO MONEY DOWN is the "going rate" on which alternate reality?

Free loan signings are "underwhelming"...colour me shocked.

Out of contract crap players being a "major concern" and not a massive opportunity


No idea what your agenda is here but i think you should ask your mrs to turn you off and on again...
Lad you were advocating spending 60million (SIX-TY) on Chris Rigg and Tyler Dibling last week. Are you high?
 
Yes the loan is for a season at a minimal amount -- then when converted at the end of the season the total kicks in.

This as you say benefits us with PSR as the players amotised fee has dropped a year, in the case of Maupay it will be 100% profit on book value.

However you had given an example where the FULL cost of a player is paid immediately as a LOAN ..then the player is transferred permanently AFTER the loan.

This would make no sense at all as it may as well be a transfer.

Mate, not sure your getting this, the benifit of it is in the initial post by Citizen of Suburbia, the advantage is you get the PSR headroom in financial year 24/25 and the benifit of another year being ammortised in financial year 25/26 which lowers his book price, we’ve done something similar but not exact with Maupay.

I don’t know how else I can explain it more clearly.
 
Last edited:


Years of panic signings have got us to where we are yet you have people DEMANDING panic because we didn’t sign someone on New Year’s Day.
We don't need panic signings obviously but it would be nice to get some reinforcements in ASAP. It's a fair point that we have a long standing problem that shows no signs of being solved with the current personnel, and so addressing it as quickly as we can would be ideal. Getting to the end of the window and being in the relegation zone is how you end up making panic decisions, it would be nice to feel like we were slightly ahead of the curve for once.
 
How else would you describe someone who has no concept of money?

Picking apart a person at the club, in this case Thelwell (in every possible imaginary way), for not spending money he hasnt been given....for generating profit on players and not actually spending huge sums (that he doesnt have) on top quality players.

Its like @Eggs believes you can walk into a supermarket and pickup whatever you want and not pay for it....

...the same as he believes that signing a star player for ZERO money down is easy -- yet cannot give any examples of it.

Nothing wrong with my post accusing someone of not living in the real world...they clearly do not know the value of money...revenue, profit/loss, FFP & PSR.

Realities they attribute to playing a computer game. I'd say that this attitude is attributed to the wealthy person who has never worked a day in their life.

No one other than a dimwitted idiot (which i dont believe he is) or someone with no concept of monetary value would believe any DOF could magically have a team full of quality when they have no money and in fact need to drive sales for the club to exist.



Apparently a positive net spend means the DOF should be signing quality players for no money down...and their current clubs would be able to replace these players for free as some kind of favour to us?

Its like the lightbulb needs to be fixed for the reality to make sense...at the moment its not even blinking.

We also should have extended the dross which is out of contract this summer...

...because they may not be motivated to showcase their abilities to earn their next move.

Its somewhat of a riddle...where money means nothing and ability is secondary to reality.



Theres almost always a fee for a loan and the buy options are also quite frequent.

Not sure why you believe otherwise?

You can look back to the high fees we were quoted for Zouma which i think were £6mil a season.
Not reading all that
 
I think the idea is to amortise 1 year and take the full transfer fee as a loan fee in Year 1, then confirm the transfer and therefore amortise the rest of the book value in Year 2. Maximising income in year one and minimising amortisation.

Mate, not sure your getting this, the benifit of it is in the initial post by Citizen of Suburbia, the advantage is you get the PSR headroom in financial year 24/25 and the benifit of another year being ammortised in financial year 25/26 which lowers his book price, we’ve done something similar but not exact with Maupay.

I don’t know how else I can explain it more clearly.


Option A: Straight sale.
Payment structure irrelevant, selling club may put the entire fee as revenue for PSR (to later be removed from any outstanding pending payments).

Option B: Loan with obligation
Player sent on loan with a fee coming immediately onto the books. The remainder of the fee is payable upon completion of the loan when the full amount of the transfer is shown as in 'A'. The benefits here are 1: Instant amount on the books. 2: The players book value being lower upon completion of the loan so the fee goes further for PSR/FFP

Whats this option C if its different?
 


Write your reply...

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top