Let’s talk about Nottingham Forest

[Marius57]

The figures I saw were more around the 120k per week on a one year deal. Factor in no transfer fee and it's not that much of an outlay - even going off the 200k figure it's only around £10M.

Out of interest how will you be gaining access to their books for details of wages paid, transfer fee structures, permitted deductions such as academy spending, infrastructure and women's teams, income streams such as TV money & sponsorship and any other expenses? Or are you just going to guess/make it up?

I mean, all clubs have to publish their accounts each year don’t they? It may not go into minutiae of individual player salaries but there is enough information available to know whether they are in trouble or not.

For example their adjusted losses in the most recent financial report was 45m.

There were also reports in the summer that they weren’t paying agents fees and had a load of over due payments to players when they were meeting clauses in their contracts.

As well as only a few seasons ago only having cash reserves of 25k.

And a net spend of 139m last summer which is the season following their 45m loss.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

He cost £25m plus add ons, not sure he's cost them half of £80m yet but as ever you're the forum drama queen.

£50m minimum them, right?

That's what Forest will definitely sell him for?

Just clarifying for the vaults. You and Mike can bookmark it and fight to the death when he leaves.

 

[SJB]

That's what Forest will definitely sell him for?

They could probably double their money on Gibbs White.

HTH.

 

[MikeH72]

Yeah they definitely need to pay that add on for qualifying for Europe don't they.

“Wolves will reach the £35million fee for Morgan Gibbs-White based on appearance add-ons and Nottingham Forest surviving relegation”

??????

Yes, they’ll have to pay both of those add ons?!?!?!?

 

[ClausThomsen]

Sorry mate you've taken his words literally.

If course he won't be looking at their books ( I suspect even the auditor won't ) but what @MikeH72 is saying is broadly correct.

They must be flying very close to the limit over a 3 year cycle that is if they stay in the PL.

My point is that none of us have access to actual figures. We could argue that they are close to limits if we had actual data but we have a collection of media stories of wildly varying accuracy, no actual idea of how deals are structured both in terms of the transfer fee and player contract and myriad other blind spots.

People seem to state things with a degree of certainty which they don't have.

A mate of mine a few years back worked for an accountancy firm and the project he was involved in gave him access to the RS actual books. He wouldn't go into specifics because he's a professional but he told me that the figures you see in the media have little to no credibility. He said you'd see Deal A reported as £12M and Deal B reported as £30M but the truth of the matter was Deal A would cost the club far more than Deal B ever would and Deal B would never hit £30M.

But Deal B made the better headline if you bundled in every single potential cost - even mutually incompatible potential costs which couldn't be activated.

 

[jazzy]

Fabulous insight.

Thank you

 

[SJB]

“Wolves will reach the £35million fee for Morgan Gibbs-White based on appearance add-ons and Nottingham Forest surviving relegation”

??????

Yes, they’ll have to pay both of those add ons?!?!?!?

From the same article

"It is also understood that some of the more unlikely add-ons include Forest making Europe."

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

HTH.

Stop wriggling. Anything under £50m and Mike has the right to dry bum you.

GOT rules.

 

[jazzy]

My point is that none of us have access to actual figures. We could argue that they are close to limits if we had actual data but we have a collection of media stories of wildly varying accuracy, no actual idea of how deals are structured both in terms of the transfer fee and player contract and myriad other blind spots.

People seem to state things with a degree of certainty which they don't have.

A mate of mine a few years back worked for an accountancy firm and the project he was involved in gave him access to the RS actual books. He wouldn't go into specifics because he's a professional but he told me that the figures you see in the media have little to no credibility. He said you'd see Deal A reported as £12M and Deal B reported as £30M but the truth of the matter was Deal A would cost the club far more than Deal B ever would and Deal B would never hit £30M.

But Deal B made the better headline if you bundled in every single potential cost - even mutually incompatible potential costs which couldn't be activated.

Fabulous insight .

Thank you

 

[MikeH72]

From the same article

"It is also understood that some of the more unlikely add-ons include Forest making Europe."

So the absolute minimum they’ll have to pay is £35m? The European qualification add ons take it up to £42m? So double the price they’ve paid for him is £70m, no they’re not selling him for that either.

 

[ClausThomsen]

I mean, all clubs have to publish their accounts each year don’t they? It may not go into minutiae of individual player salaries but there is enough information available to know whether they are in trouble or not.

For example their adjusted losses in the most recent financial report was 45m.

There were also reports in the summer that they weren’t paying agents fees and had a load of over due payments to players when they were meeting clauses in their contracts.

As well as only a few seasons ago only having cash reserves of 25k.

And a net spend of 139m last summer which is the season following their 45m loss.

I'm genuinely in the dark here so I'll ask if these are verified figures and events or figures sourced from media stories? For instance I'd doubt they paid the full reported figure of Gibbs-White transfer and put it through the books in one go.

 

[Marius57]

25m up front.
10m for staying up/appearances (within the first season). They stayed up and he played 35 times so can safely assume that has been paid.

So that’s £35m already.

Other adds on such as European qualification adding to another 7.5m.

Sell on fee. 10% of any profit over amount paid for him. So currently anything above £35m.

So definitely cost them nearly half of the £80m.

 

[SJB]

Stop wriggling. Anything under £50m and Mike has the right to dry bum you.

GOT rules.

OK but I'm not dressing up as Nathan Patterson for him.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

OK but I'm not dressing up as Nathan Patterson for him.

You strike a hard bargain sir, but deal.

 

[SJB]

You strike a hard bargain sir, but deal.

It's the kilt... I'd feel like I was putting it on a plate for him.