• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Transfer Other Team Transfers

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Cranston said:
So here’s the bit I don’t understand (not an accountant in any way shape or form).

If you can ‘amortise’ (if that’s a verb) the value of a contract for any given year, and essentially divide your expenditure by the length of the contract, why do you also get to benefit from the full value of a sale immediately?

So, you have 100 million pound player on a ten year contract and can say ‘I’ve only spent 10 million this year’. Fine.

But for Havertz by way of example, they’re claiming the full value of his sale immediately to the tune of 65 million. Shouldn’t the same principle apply; they only get the annual value of that sale, being whatever Woolwich give them this calendar year?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, the thing is, the amortization cuts both ways in that sense.

Take your 100 million, 10 year player.

If you sell him for 60 million two years later, sure, you realize the 60m all at once, but it hits the books as a 20m loss.

If you sell him for 110 million two years later, you're realizing "only" a 10m gain.

It's looking at the squad as a fluctuating book of assets rather than just money in-money out transactions in a given window.
 
Cranston said:
So here’s the bit I don’t understand (not an accountant in any way shape or form).

If you can ‘amortise’ (if that’s a verb) the value of a contract for any given year, and essentially divide your expenditure by the length of the contract, why do you also get to benefit from the full value of a sale immediately?

So, you have 100 million pound player on a ten year contract and can say ‘I’ve only spent 10 million this year’. Fine.

But for Havertz by way of example, they’re claiming the full value of his sale immediately to the tune of 65 million. Shouldn’t the same principle apply; they only get the annual value of that sale, being whatever Woolwich give them this calendar year?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That’s pretty straightforward as r-u-s-x r-u-s-x explained.

What I don’t get is, if the Premier League have now limited amortisation on players to 5 years why Chelsea are still giving players eight year contracts. I can see some upsides (it could potentially avoid the running down contract player gambit) but seems to have massive potential pitfalls if they end up poor signings or injury prone.
 
Cranston said:
It’s intriguing.

In any regulated financial activity, you would have to pledge collateral to offset your exposure. Whether that be a central bank or commercial scheme. That said, presumably that must be part of the fit and proper ownership test. Clearlake have 70 billion under asset.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The player is the asset, think of them as a tractor. When you buy a tractor with a life span of 20 years you can recognise the cost at the time of purchase which doesn't make a lot of sense as your using the asset over 20 years. Also good not to confuse ffp and financial activities, plenty of clubs could fail ffp but be completely stable. For new business they tend to run at a loss with invedemt before profit. I think uber got their first profit last year6

Fit and proper person test is basically are you bankrupt or in jail not that your a good owner. Again the rules are based on the city.
 
Football continues to accelerate towards its LIV golf moment.

I fully appreciate that it’s not quite the same and that the underlying cultural value of European clubs does carry weight, but the Super League is going to arrive one way or another.
 
Fattynomates said:
We should be buying Brighton’s scouts!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I know what you're saying, but the scouts aren't worth much without the overarching system supporting it. What you want is to bring someone in, with the skill set to implement a similar scouting network and analytics behind it. Give them full control over, if not football operations then at least transfer strategy.

Not holding my breath on Levy being willing to do so. If he were though, someone like Haralabos Voulgaris springs to mind. He's dipping his toe into football waters, and if I owned a football club, I'd be keeping a close eye on what he does or does not achieve in Spain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top