Everton, our summer transfers and short term cost control regulations

[bobbydigital]

Not necessarily. I'd imagine that the 'cost' will be amortised over the life of the contract.

So we could actually make a trading profit if we sell Kone for 3m say.

It won't be based on the amount we paid for the player (I don't think).

I think you would be right about that. Just think we would take a bath on Niasse which would wipe out any profits from the others. Maybe we should try find someone to loan him to.
It's also a lot of players that we will need to bring in some sort of replacements for.

 

[JimEFC]

In reality it's not as all singing all dancing happy happy as we all thought is it? I know esk says its same for all clubs but all clubs don't sell there best players very often

Southampton do, and they're a massive club.

 

[Efcjake]

Financial penalties or ultimately points deduction.

Yes we could do a short term naming rights deal on Goodison to help boost non broadcasting revenues.

Would they not see that as the cost of doing business? As you've said before, and as Ryazantsev said also, it is important that we stay as competitive as possible so we do not get left behind. Why not pay the fines and grow as quickly as is feasible if we are able to do so without any serious repercussion?

 

[moylee]

This is why we need a boss DoF

 

[mill]

I think you would be right about that. Just think we would take a bath on Niasse which would wipe out any profits from the others. Maybe we should try find someone to loan him to.
It's also a lot of players that we will need to bring in some sort of replacements for.

Yeah we are deffo effed with niasse. Loan might be the only option for a couple of seasons.

 

[tadpole]

Genuinely don't see why anybody would want McGeady (not even Championship standard), Kone (never been good enough, should do one to China), Niasse (somebody has made a lot of money on this transfer, needs binning off ASAP), Oviedo (always injured), Garbutt (didn't even perform well for Fulham, sell), Cleverley (Aston Villa is his standard, could just about stomach him being an option from the bench at best) at our club any longer.

Let's assume they are earning 50k, 40k, 50k, 30k, 20k, 40k a week (McGeady start, Cleverley end) - that's 12m saved a season. Not one of those players needs replacing

First off, we've already released three squad players. It would be madness to reduce the squad size any further if we've got serious ambitions of pushing for top 6 / top 4 place.

Secondly, I suggest you read Esk's piece more closely. Esk has already factored the sale of a few squad players into the calculations - "the sale of fringe players like Kone and Niasse will likely have limited impact on total salary levels either because of replacements or other smaller increases in squad contracts".

 

[JimEFC]

Genuinely don't see why anybody would want McGeady (not even Championship standard), Kone (never been good enough, should do one to China), Niasse (somebody has made a lot of money on this transfer, needs binning off ASAP), Oviedo (always injured), Garbutt (didn't even perform well for Fulham, sell), Cleverley (Aston Villa is his standard, could just about stomach him being an option from the bench at best) at our club any longer.

Let's assume they are earning 50k, 40k, 50k, 30k, 20k, 40k a week (McGeady start, Cleverley end) - that's 12m saved a season. Not one of those players needs replacing because:

- Lennon, Mirallas, Deulofeu > McGeady
- We'll be getting a new striker anyway who is > Kone & Niasse, plus we already have Lukaku
- We've loads of youngsters (Kenny, Browning, Galloway, Holgate) who are > Oviedo (he's decent, but always injured, so what's the point?) and Garbutt will not dislodge Baines who still has a few years
- Cleverley doesn't even have a position, we have wingers and will be signing a central midfielder, plus those we already have are miles better than him

Then factor in Howard (let's assume 50k), Hibbert (40k), Pienaar (50k) all gone - another 7m. That's 20m saved from all of those players leaving, and from the 9 players I have mentioned here, only really 2 need 'replacing'; Howard and the position of striker (Kone/Niasse).

20m saved on wages, we replace them with a top goalkeeper on 70k and a partner for Lukaku on 80k - that is 8.5m a year wages for those two. Still 12m left saved in wages.

What with us actually having a WAR CHEST, that's some game of football manager Mr Koeman is going to be able to partake in.

You just said what I wanted to in my post, but you said it much better! [Doffs cap]

And i meant Galloway not Garbutt

 

[Efcjake]

Bans from European competition and the revenue that go with them.

In Netherlands FC twente

Banned for three years from Europe.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-division-breaching-transfer-regulations.html

I'd say Everton will be pragmatic. Steady incline of increased commercial revenues and player sales where applicable.

Remember. Infrastructure is entirely excluded from calculations.

We need to look at our books in two season increments. For wages.

Hmmmm....



I don't know if they got in trouble for what we're talking about here Biz.

FC Twente have been relegated to the second division in the Netherlands as punishment for breaching financial regulations linked to the transfer market, the Dutch football association announced on Wednesday.

The threat of sanctions has been hanging over the club for the last two seasons. In the 2014-15 season, they were docked a total of six points when they twice missed recovery targets set them by the FA.

Twente, who finished the latest season in 13th place despite the points sanction, are accused over irregularities in the transfer market.

These include a 5-million euro investment by Doyen Sports Investments in return for a percentage of the proceeds of the sale of players which is banned under FA regulations.

This is a different situation from potentially overspending above the limited salary increase amount. It seems Twente were in danger of going insolvent and that they tried to get around that by invoking 3-rd party ownership.

 

[JimEFC]

When Abu Dhabi took over at City they paid massively over the odds to rename it Etihad Stadium.
I was angry at the time but let's do that. It'll annoy Wenger for sure.

 

[Nymzee]

It's all been a bit of a whirlwind since Moshiri came in but it has highlighted how poor the club was - in part - run before him with our complete ignorance towards the commercial view of the club. Also highlights just how much we need a new stadium with a less than appealing brand name.

 

[bizzaro]

Hmmmm....



I don't know if they got in trouble for what we're talking about here Biz.










This is a different situation from potentially overspending above the limited salary increase amount. It seems Twente were in danger of going insolvent and that they tried to get around that by invoking 3-rd party ownership.

They broke an agreement regarding their finances with the Dutch FA.

No different here.

 

[Efcjake]

No mate they're arbitrary and decided by the PL.

Has the PL ever punished a team for exceeding allowed expenditure on salary increases?

I remember Man City getting punished over that but it was by UEFA and not by the Premier League.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/27445475

Manchester City have been fined £49m, £32m of which is suspended, and can only name a 21-man Champions League squad next season after failing Uefa financial fair play rules.

Another sanction means City can only spend £49m on players this summer, as well as any transfer fees they receive.

From that same article:

Uefa made its first FFP ruling based on club accounts from the past two seasons - 2011-12 and 2012-13.

Under this monitoring period, total losses of €45m (£37m) are permitted as long as clubs have owners who can cover such amounts.

Which, if Farhad can cover the losses out of pocket, and he can, then we can grow the team salary expenditure without having to rely on the revenue growth to support it in the immediate present.

 

[sageyefc]

Sure mosh will have a 'friend' that'll take the naming rights to finch farm for a nice chunk of change

 

[JimEFC]

I think you would be right about that. Just think we would take a bath on Niasse which would wipe out any profits from the others. Maybe we should try find someone to loan him to.
It's also a lot of players that we will need to bring in some sort of replacements for.

Since he's basically still a complete unknown, we'd probably still have to pay at least 75% of his wages so that's a Catch 22.

Plus we'd probably only be able to loan him to Prescot Cables, in which case 100% of his wages.

 

[Tilling]

It might have already been mentioned, but is there a case for flogging Coleman? Given that we've supposedly knocked back interest in him a few times over the last few windows, there's definitely room to make a massive chunk of player trading profit here. He's failed to hit anywhere near the standard set in the first season under Martinez and attacking though he may be, he is quite limited if you ask me, bar that boss game against Arsenal.

That's not to say I would advocate it myself as I think he'll improve in a side actually coached properly on how to defend, and he seems a nice lad to have around; me personally I believe the City ITK's on Stones for 45m to City, and that will fund it. However it is still worth noting at the least.