Fair play for sticking to our guns like. Played like 5 mins last season, made one Alonso pass in the kids euros, we get 15 mil from a club almost too broke to be in Ligue 1. Not bad, Hughes
Clear out
- Thread starter dee
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
And a 20% sell on clause, which, if he does do well, could rack up a few million quite easily.
I'm surprised you didn't assocate him with his fellow Spaniard first.
"Players like Thiago always try to help me and every day I feel like I'm learning something different. At my age you need to get more experience and I get that here, especially training with these players."
He picked up the wrong attributes from the right guy. 🙁
Soooo, am I reading this correctly?
This fella thinks that because he believes Nunez is worth £35m and he's getting sold for £45m the club have made a profit? What about the other £30m (plus the £45m) that was spent on him in the first place?
- Liverpool signed Nunez from Benfica in 2022 for an initial fee of £64 million, with potential add-ons taking the total to £85 million.
- The guaranteed £64 million is amortized over Nunez's six-year contract (2022–2028), resulting in an annual amortization charge of £64 million ÷ 6 = ~£10.67 million per year.
- By the summer of 2025, three years into the contract, approximately £32 million (£10.67 million × 3) has been amortized, leaving a remaining book value of ~£32 million.
- Add-ons of £12.8 million (£4.3 million after 10 appearances and £8.5 million after 60 appearances) have already been triggered, and these are treated as exceptional items, not affecting the amortization of the guaranteed fee but increasing the total cost.
- Liverpool signed Nunez from Benfica in 2022 for an initial fee of £64 million, with potential add-ons taking the total to £85 million.
- Sale Price:
- Liverpool agreed to sell Nunez to Al-Hilal for a guaranteed fee of €53 million (~£46.2 million) plus add-ons of ~£10 million, potentially totaling ~£56.6 million.
- Liverpool agreed to sell Nunez to Al-Hilal for a guaranteed fee of €53 million (~£46.2 million) plus add-ons of ~£10 million, potentially totaling ~£56.6 million.
- Profit Calculation:
- For accounting purposes, profit is calculated as the sale price minus the remaining book value.
- Remaining book value by summer 2025: ~£32 million.
- Guaranteed sale fee: £46.2 million.
- Accounting profit = £46.2 million - £32 million = ~£14.2 million.
- If add-ons (£10 million) are fully realized, the total sale fee becomes £56.6 million, increasing the profit to £56.6 million - £32 million = ~£24.6 million.
- Considerations:
- The actual financial loss in absolute terms (total paid vs. total received) is higher, as Liverpool paid £64 million upfront plus £12.8 million in add-ons (£76.8 million total), compared to the £46.2–£56.6 million received. However, for Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR), the accounting profit (sale price minus remaining book value) is what matters, and this shows a profit.
- Additional costs like wages (£140,000/week, £7 million/year) and agent fees (£13 million) are not factored into the transfer profit calculation but impact the overall financial picture.
- The actual financial loss in absolute terms (total paid vs. total received) is higher, as Liverpool paid £64 million upfront plus £12.8 million in add-ons (£76.8 million total), compared to the £46.2–£56.6 million received. However, for Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR), the accounting profit (sale price minus remaining book value) is what matters, and this shows a profit.
Shit. Bluebell got @Beamrider login details
Half a lifetime ago I had to pass an Accounting exam as part of qualifying as a company secretary. This kind of thread reminds me how good it felt to throw those shackles off and leave it all to real experts like the Rider. 😎
... or hallucinating AI leading us astray... 😀
Without getting too technical, this bit:
Add-ons of £12.8 million (£4.3 million after 10 appearances and £8.5 million after 60 appearances) have already been triggered, and these are treated as exceptional items, not affecting the amortization of the guaranteed fee but increasing the total cost.
... is total bullshit. Add-ons are added to the total cost and amortised from the date they are triggered until the end of the contract.
I make the profit something like £5m before any add-ons we receive, IF the original post is right about the add-ons we paid. I haven't factored them into my previous workings as I'm not convinced as to what was triggered and when.
I got Grok to write it up
"But Yossarian still didn't understand how Milo could buy eggs in Malta for seven cents apiece and sell them at a profit in Pianosa for five cents."
Basically, it's bullshit. There's no profit. People get waaaay too wound up in whether there's some paper profit or not which hardly ever makes any difference to anyone. What really matters is that we lost money on Nunez as well as a shitload of time.
I guessed it was AI, that's why I didn't shy away from calling BS - I'd have been more gentle if I thought you'd just misunderstood, but with the best of intentions!
Your a nice guy. Don't be afraid to call out any BS including mine. I have thick skin. You are so different from the guy who would go by the moniker, "themanwithnopenis". The irony was he was a real big prick, including working for the Shite newspaper
Yeah, leaving the numbers to one side (sort of) my view is that if you've had value out of a player then the number at the end isn't that important. Strictly speaking, that's the deal when you sign them. We may expect to keep Wirtz here for 10 years, but the back-up plan is he costs us £30m a year (including wages) for 5 years and we think his contribution is worth that.
Chances are Mo and Virgil will leave for no fee in 2 year's time but I'll have no complaints because of what they've achieved in their time - they were worth what we paid for them (and then some).
I wouldn't care that much about our return on Darwin if he'd been successful in his time here either.
It's also why I'm not as bothered about Trent as some are. Yeah, it would have been nice if we'd made more money on him on the way out, but we didn't pay big bucks to sign him and, for the most part, we can look back on positive contributions from him over his time with us. Plus, when all's said and done, it's hardly constrained our spending this summer.
I just think there are a lot of people who follow football who have a basic grasp of accountancy but no real appreciation of its significance or otherwise.
Talking about profits in terms of proceeds less book value is almost always putting the cart before the horse. Not always - sometime you'll need an urgent sale or something to move profits from later years to now, but GENERALLY it's much more important to just look at proceeds less purchase price if you want to know whether a sale is good or not.
The relative lack of importance of accounting metrics is one of the things FSG grasped quite early on. I don't think it's specifically football-related but they are very cash-focused when it comes to transfers and the accounting profit just kind of drops out. Because they don't spend beyond their means, cash-wise, the profit side of things is usually OK. It's a combination of luck (because it's not planned) and judgement (because they don't go wild and spend within their means).
Yeah I mean the way footballers are accounted for is just fundamentally absurd, really. Barcelona will have an asset like Yamal worth maybe £300m on the balance sheet at precisely zero euros. We both know why that's the case and ultimately it kiiiind of has to be like that, but it's still a mockery of the actual real world situation.
I thought the whole reason we didn't START Nunez towards the end of last season was NOT to trigger one of the add-ons?
Yep, that was my understanding too. I think that would have been in addition to the ones quoted in Grok's original summary.
I disagree. If I buy a mansion for £1m and sell it 3 years later for £900k I have not exactly lost £100k because I've had the use of that house for 3 years and haven't paid a huge rent for it (council tax for this purpose could equal wages). So rent + £900k could equal more than £1m. Hence a profit (Ignoring tax which also applies to player sales).
And as has been mentioned we won the PL with him scoring some key goals. Who knows, maybe we would have bought someone else who would have been a bigger failure. If, buts and maybes but #20 is on the wall.
Its probably more important that we sold a player we didnt want in the squad for a decent fee and recouped a large part of our investment. But equally important is that the deal sees us receive a large part of the fee upfront and favorable terms. The Napoli offer was structured in a way that wouldn't see us receive any payment until 2026.
I mean it's some pretty tortured logic when you're arguing that a guy who underperformed all expectations and has been sold to Saudi at a significant loss while still in his prime isn't a bad signing.
It was a bad signing. That it could probably have been even worse doesn't really change that.
It lucky they offered anything. Them and the Turkish clubs just waste people's times
FFS! I am NOT a nice guy, it is fucking "you're" not "your". Jaysus!
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked