• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Post Match Chelsea Caribao Cup Final

as
Yepp, I think @Beamrider explained this was due to all non-academy players having a 'book price' equating to their purchase fee + wage cost spread over term of contract. So selling them was sale price - book price, whereas academy dudes were wages only deducted
Cost plus levies and agent fees, written off over the life of the contract. Wages just go straight to the profit and loss account when due.
For Academy players, there would be no purchase price, but there may be agent fees. As a result, their book value will be negligible compared to a bought-in player, so if sold for the same price, there's be a higher profit on sale.
However, the equation isn't as simple as all the "financial experts" in the press make out. If you keep a player with considerable book value, then you will still write off part of that value in the year (and subsequent years) so whilst selling an Academy player gives you a better result in year one, you're just kicking the can down the road as you'll still book the same costs overall over the next couple of years.
And under the UEFA squad cost rules, the impact is actually reversed as you only get to take 1/3 of the benefit of the higher profit
on sale in year one as profits on sale are averaged over three years. So under UEFA's rules (to be adopted by the PL shortly) you'd be better off in the short term keeping the academy player and selling the guy you bought in. The academy product will probably be on lower wages too because he likely loves the club so won't have negotiated as hard on pay.
But the experts in the press don't understand this.
 
Which is ironic, dont they have to sell Gallagher to appease FFP? Lots of rumours that they have to do what Arsenal did for years with some of their best players regard to having to sell to make sure they stay in line with FFP. If this is true then this is a terrible long term strategy.
He's got 18 months left on his contract. They have to decide keep him or sell him this Summer.
 
as

Cost plus levies and agent fees, written off over the life of the contract. Wages just go straight to the profit and loss account when due.
For Academy players, there would be no purchase price, but there may be agent fees. As a result, their book value will be negligible compared to a bought-in player, so if sold for the same price, there's be a higher profit on sale.
However, the equation isn't as simple as all the "financial experts" in the press make out. If you keep a player with considerable book value, then you will still write off part of that value in the year (and subsequent years) so whilst selling an Academy player gives you a better result in year one, you're just kicking the can down the road as you'll still book the same costs overall over the next couple of years.
And under the UEFA squad cost rules, the impact is actually reversed as you only get to take 1/3 of the benefit of the higher profit
on sale in year one as profits on sale are averaged over three years. So under UEFA's rules (to be adopted by the PL shortly) you'd be better off in the short term keeping the academy player and selling the guy you bought in. The academy product will probably be on lower wages too because he likely loves the club so won't have negotiated as hard on pay.
But the experts in the press don't understand this.

Does that Profit on Sale calc get past IFRS?
 
According to 442, Gallagher was the only one who presses and the rest follows. Once he was taken off they stopped pressing, giving our youngsters space and time to play.

Playing for the pens is ridiculous for the money they are on. Bunch of fannies.
 
According to 442, Gallagher was the only one who presses and the rest follows. Once he was taken off they stopped pressing, giving our youngsters space and time to play.

Playing for the pens is ridiculous for the money they are on. Bunch of fannies.
One the rare occasions I've watched Chelsea he is pretty much always the only one on it
 
This should be getting a lot more love (and likes for @rurikbird ). Absolutely love him now. Will have to save this and replay every time he hits the post :-D

It’s an instant classic - I really hope they will recreate this scene at some point. Salah disappearing, never to be seen again, poor Curtis on crutches holding on for dear life - it’s utter Darwin-patented chaos.
 
Does that Profit on Sale calc get past IFRS?
Yes. The only tweak for IFRS is some minor discounting of the initial costs due to the instalment payment basis being treated as an interest-free loan. Typically takes one or two percent off the value of the intangible asset, which is recycled through interest payable. Similar process with the value of the sale proceeds.
The three year averaging thing under the new rules is a FFP rule and is totally independent of accounting treatment - it's just to allow clubs the benefit of a big sale across a longer period rather than having 1 year where they are well under the target and then 2 where they are over. With the averaging, they could potentially pass the test in all three years. But it does mean if your backs are against the wall under the new rules then a fire sale is not going to give immediate relief like it does now. because you only get 1/3 of the benefit immediately
 
1923.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom