Surely with that amount spent, Chelsea should be winning the league?antdad wrote: ↑Mon Aug 14, 2023 2:11 pm You need to get your head around depreciation of players and not having to balance the books...
Jordan explained how it might work @ approx 10.30am today.
£600m spent last year amortised over 8 years - £75m pa
£300m spent this year amortised over 5 years - £60m pa
Total = £135m of transfer loses pa
+ around £250m+ generated through sales with possibly more to come.
Therefore technically CFC are up this financial year £100m +, crazy huh?
Yes revenues will need to improve as that sort of spend isn't sustainable but it is manageable for the time being.
Can anyone explain this?
- JudgeTedd
- Registered user
- Posts: 8673
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 12:55 pm
Re: Can anyone explain this?
It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand. ~ Brian Stimpson
POTY winner 2022
GROTY winner 2022
POTY winner 2022
GROTY winner 2022
-
- Registered user
- Posts: 2495
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2021 4:17 pm
Re: Can anyone explain this?
The issue is whose rules you are using.
UEFA won't allow 8 year amortisation. Prem does.
But if you are not in a UEFA competition ( which Liverpool are) they can't do the 8 year trick.
Chelsea aren't.
But have a problem if they do qualify , and their policy is both taking money from future spends, as well as betting on the resale value of players in 8 years. Most auditors would qualify that practice
UEFA won't allow 8 year amortisation. Prem does.
But if you are not in a UEFA competition ( which Liverpool are) they can't do the 8 year trick.
Chelsea aren't.
But have a problem if they do qualify , and their policy is both taking money from future spends, as well as betting on the resale value of players in 8 years. Most auditors would qualify that practice
- antdad
- Registered user
- Posts: 6608
- Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:16 am
Re: Can anyone explain this?
No it isn't, clubs now have a maximum of five years to amortise transfer fees in their accounts regardless of a player's contract length following amendments to UEFA regulations. Whereas previous regulations had stated that transfer fees had to be paid off — amortised — over the duration of a player's contract, however long that may be.
Caicedo's personal contract being 7+ years with Brighton's transfer fee being paid over 5 years so will not affect his future ability to play in European comps.
There is a risk if income doesn't improve but I don't think length of contract will be a huge issue either. I doubt players will be running down their contracts in the same way they can atm. I'd expect players will either be sold on or contracts renewed well before term.
Caicedo's personal contract being 7+ years with Brighton's transfer fee being paid over 5 years so will not affect his future ability to play in European comps.
There is a risk if income doesn't improve but I don't think length of contract will be a huge issue either. I doubt players will be running down their contracts in the same way they can atm. I'd expect players will either be sold on or contracts renewed well before term.
- antdad
- Registered user
- Posts: 6608
- Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:16 am
Re: Can anyone explain this?
Danny Murphy, it maybe difficult for you to believe but the boy just wanted to come to Chelsea.
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)