2019/20 Marcel Brands

[Neiler]

Total value yes but I think you will find that transfer budgets and wage budgets are different. Wage budgets are usually a %age of overall income and transfers are on top. Like if we could sign Messi for free we wouldn’t probably be able to do it because his wage demands would be circa €50 mil pa that’s approx 1/3 our turn over but if we could sign him at 60 mil and for €15 mil per an it would be feastable

But it all comes from the same source I.e. revenue. Same way, the fee we get for him will be, same way what we pay him comes from from revenue. Ultimate ones a subtraction from revenue the other an addition, which is why I’m saying he is cost neutral via a small profit.

 

[Neiler]

It seems a bit contradictory to say “hopefully he adds to the team” if you’re confident they’ll buy him back though. If they’re gonna blow 60m on a lad they didn’t rate two years previous then it’s safe to say he’ll have been ‘kin absolutely unreal for us.

Yeah hopefully.

But from Barca perspective they paid 10 mill for him.

Have made a 20 mill profit in 6 months.

Clear his wage for 2 years.

Sign him back at a gaurenteed price st 26, keep him, or comtrol him as an asset and sell him on again.

Works for them as well if he’s successful, which if he is i think it’s a glorified loan.

I do think he will be successful based on evidence so far.

 

[Neiler]

No idea what point your making. Brands in a very short space of time has addressed our weakest points. Punted a load of tosh..,and going the game is now a pleasure not a kin chore... chill we won tonight at a canter.

I’m not criticizing Everton or Brands don’t know why you think I am.

I don’t like this deal and giveing reasons for it.

I’m not unhappy he’s here, maybe it’s the best that could be done, I think it’s probably why he didn’t end up at Utd.

 

[Neiler]

Yeah thats great, but whatever metric you use, we still make a massive profit.

28m+ 80k a week over 5 years = 9.7m per year, 48m total liability, 54m sale price + 12m in wages saving = 66m total sale value.

So even if we do it "your way", we still make 20m profit.

You are on the right track alright, personally I’d minus 12 million for the last three years of his contract in terms of the total cost as its revenue saved as opposed to spent, but your right it would leave space on the wage bill. I see our liability at 46 - 48 million, with the six mill profit give or take. So Ultimately as I have been saying he’s cost neutral via a small profit of a few million.

 

[Goat]

You are on the right track alright, personally I’d minus 12 million for the last three years of his contract in terms of the total cost as its revenue saved as opposed to sprint, but your right it would leave space on the wage bill. I see our liability at 46 - 48 million, with the six mill profit give or take so as I say. So Ultimately as I have been saying he’s cost neutral via a small profit of a few million.

MATE, ive literally just shown you a 20m profit doing it "your way" and a 26m profit doing it the "normal way" and your still going on about cost neutral FFS.

 

[Neiler]

MATE, ive literally just shown you a 20m profit doing it "your way" and a 26m profit doing it the "normal way" and your still going on about cost neutral FFS.

Yeah but I don’t agree with your figures, the 12 mill in revenue saved on the last three years of his contract to be precise it’s revenue saved as opposed to incoming, it’s existing revenue, space on the wage bill essentially with no asset. That’s the deviation in our figures.

It works the opposite way to if I was to add the total liability by five years, which I haven’t then it’s not cost neutral. But I don’t think he will be here beyond five years. The total liability would be if stayed by your figures. Your in the right track though if he stayed 5 years his total liability would be the 60 odd million you suggest,

 

[Michaelcoyb]

Why bishes be arguing this late I will never know

 

[Goat]

Yeah but I don’t agree with your figures, the 12 mill in revenue saved on the last three years of his contract to be precise it’s revenue saved as opposed to incoming, it’s existing revenue, space on the wage bill essentially with no asset. That’s the deviation in our figures.

Im getting the feeling you are making things up as you go, so we will leave this here.

 

[Neiler]

Im getting the feeling you are making things up as you go, so we will leave this here.

I’m honestly not, I’d be a bit more creative to be honest, it’s my personal break down, I’ve stated my opinion and giving reasons for it.

It’s a rare thing on here these days, not to upset the #zeeladz or anything! lol

 

[Goat]

I’m honestly not, I’d be a bit more creative to be honest, it’s my personal break down, I’ve stated my opinion and giving reasons for it.

It’s a rare thing on here these days, not to upset the #zeeladz or anything! lol

My final point, you cant include his wages in his total liability, if you arent going to remove the final 3 years of his wages at the end.

Which is why I said that no matter what metric you wish to use, we still make 20m+ profit.

 

[Neiler]

My final point, you cant include his wages in his total liability, if you arent going to remove the final 3 years of his wages at the end.

Which is why I said that no matter what metric you wish to use, we still make 20m+ profit.

Your right in a way and I acknowledge that the total liability over the 5 years is the north of the 60 million figure.

However if he stays for two years, the liability is somewhere in the 45-48 mill range. So is cost neutral ultimately with a small profit.

We save the final three years of his contract as a liability, the wage creates money on the wage bill of not having to pay him the five years of his contract 60 mill, we make a 6 odd million profit and don’t have to pay him, but two years leaving makes him cost neutral as a liability. Over the remaing three years we don’t pay him and we save his wage. But we have no asset and likely have to reinvest.

So the saving in terms of the total liability if he goes to Barca is his wage for three years that’s cleared from the wage bill and a six mill odd profit on his fee. But we loose him as an asset. If he leaves after two he’s pretty cost neutral and we save his wage for the remaing three years on the books as a liability.

 

[Goat]

Your right in a way and I acknowledge that the total liability over the 5 years is the north of the 60 million figure.

However if he stays for two years, the liability is somewhere in the 45-48 mill range. So is cost neutral ultimately with a small profit.

We save the final three years of his contract as a liability, the wage creates money on the wage billi, we make a 6 odd million profit, likely to be put toward a replacement and wages.

So the saving in terms of the total liability if he goes to Barca is his wage for three years that’s cleared from the wage bill and a six mill odd profit on his fee. But we loose him as an asset.

No.

 

[Connor]

Well in, TheLads.

All led by KingLad, Marcel.

 

[Neiler]

No.

Right so,

 

[Neiler]

Well in, TheLads.

All led by KingLad, Marcel.

KingLad. lol

Hi, featuring alchopops.

Touchdown.