Everton, our summer transfers and short term cost control regulations

[DW88EFC]

Would a cleverly sale count a just profit? Probably get around 10 million for him with all the new money about the league.

 

[wm02]

I've got it sorted.
Break all the financial rules and buy everyone to win the the league by 12 points.
Take a ten point deduction and still win the league.

*throws tenner into slush fund

 

[Efcjake]

Nothing to do with transfer spending mate. We can spend whatever amount we like on transfers.

In short, it's all about the wages we pay.

No, that's not entirely true. There are rules that prevent us from making too big of a loss on the balance sheet, if the money for transfers comes from Moshiri's pockets then I would assume he would add any of that money as an existing liability to the balance sheet while there are other shareholders or essentially he is inflating the value of their shares out his pocket which he plans to purchase. Right now we are more limited by the ability to grow our salary expenditure than we are by the profit/loss regulations.

 

[Efcjake]

Would a cleverly sale count a just profit? Probably get around 10 million for him with all the new money about the league.

Yes since we did not pay a transfer fee. Though there might be some tricky accounting regarding signing on fees for free players as opposed to transferred players.

 

[sageyefc]

3rd option, flog Ross to the Chinese

Keep stones and rom

 

[Matty_j1878]

3rd option, flog Ross to the Chinese

Keep stones and rom

Easy 150billion yen that.

 

[Efcjake]

Will be sad to see Stones go as we never got to see the best of him; do you really think we'll get a bigger fee for John than we would for Rom? Rom seems to be the one agitating for the move, but after his agent's comments I guess he could be persuaded to keep shtum for a while via a new big deal.

I don't think he is saying it would be a bigger fee, just that it would show as a bigger profit on the balance sheet and enable us to spend more on salary increases as a result of that.

 

[Onwards Evertonians]

Nothing to do with transfer spending mate. We can spend whatever amount we like on transfers.

In short, it's all about the wages we pay.

Well in, it's took me hours worth of reading to get to this point, I now realise what's been getting said over and over again. I'm thick as...

 

[Eggs]

Probably already been mentioned on here but Brazil on TS this morning telling Parry that he had a text telling him Stones to City was a done deal

...interesting. if true it is probably a deal already agreed, the player didn't sign a new contract. The only other consideration is RK thought the offer was too good to turn down. Regardless it's probably a transfer in everybody's interest.

 

[bizzaro]

Everywhere I'm looking all I see as far as penalties are "Potential penalties include:" without anything outlined explicitly on case by case basis. Surely if you are going to administer these rules and some form of punishment it has to be laid out so that the clubs are aware of what sanctions they can face if they break the rules?

The clubs themselves voted the rules in.

So its fair to say they know what will happen if they break them.

 

[sageyefc]

Sell the naming rights to the finch farm lawn mowers to his rich mates

 

[bizzaro]

The rules first came in 3 years ago mate and limited salary increases to £4m or increases in non broadcasting income. This year that increase is £7 million for each of the 3 years assuming the wage bill is above £67 million (from memory)

But given the situation with players being off the books (Osman, Hibbert etc and Kone and so on going)

Commercial contracts ending (Chang).

New commercial contracts potentially starting.

There is certainly slack been generated in the wage bill structure.



Plus the club could put in the individual player contacts a faster wage rise provision after this year.

That would be the way I circumvent the compliance rules at Everton @The Esk

And you know how good I am at knowing how to get around the compliance rules and FFP....

i.e.
Year A .... x
Year B .... x + 1
Year C .... x + 2

Whereas this might in the initial year mean we offer less than other clubs - Moshiri's business guru's can be force multipliers by guarenteeing we are earning more commercial revenue by year C to ensure we attract and retain these players.

 

[CahillsCornerFlag]

I don't think he is saying it would be a bigger fee, just that it would show as a bigger profit on the balance sheet and enable us to spend more on salary increases as a result of that.

Ah, I understand now. I tend to leave finances alone. I'd still not sell Stones for anything less than an extortionate fee though. If 28 year old Troy sodding Deeney is worth £30m, we need shooting if we accept less than £50m.

 

[Efcjake]

The clubs themselves voted the rules in.

So its fair to say they know what will happen if they break them.

But my point is that it hasn't been detailed explicitly as far as I can tell. It appears that any infractions will be reviewed and punished on a case by case basis. Remember the whole aim of these rules is to prevent Premier League teams from unsustainable spending which exceeds their revenue and leads to insolvency.

The rules are not supposed to be designed to limit growth if you can demonstrate that the club will be able to manage that growth. If we can demonstrate our plans to grow our revenue streams to satisfy a Premier League board that while our expenditure might exceed limits now there is a solid financial investment plan for infrastructure that will make this expenditure sustainable while at the same time demonstrating that Moshiri can finance the loss in the meantime then it isn't really going to upset them.

 

[bizzaro]

But my point is that it hasn't been detailed explicitly as far as I can tell. It appears that any infractions will be reviewed and punished on a case by case basis. Remember the whole aim of these rules is to prevent Premier League teams from unsustainable spending which exceeds their revenue and leads to insolvency.

The rules are not supposed to be designed to limit growth if you can demonstrate that the club will be able to manage that growth. If we can demonstrate our plans to grow our revenue streams to satisfy a Premier League board that while our expenditure might exceed limits now there is a solid financial investment plan for infrastructure that will make this expenditure sustainable while at the same time demonstrating that Moshiri can finance the loss in the meantime then it isn't really going to upset them.

No mate. Details of the proposed punishments just haven't been published (not in the public domain).

Doesn't mean they do not exist or are known to the clubs.