Summer transfer window 2021

[alreadyexists]

2 minutes ago, Phil Silvers said:

If we do not sign Cantwell, could the mods change word removed to Todd Cantwell please.

or preferably just Cantwell.

And any poo based swear words to Todd

[Lerner's Driver]

32 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Percy said 10 days ago that nothing was imminent about Bailey. He's not the oracle.

10 days ago City hadn't triggered Jack's release clause.

[osmark86]

3 minutes ago, alreadyexists said:

And any poo based swear words to Todd

Thought that was reserved for Bob Saget

[quazzie goat]

38 minutes ago, Xela said:

I'll say it, I like Cantwell. He's got something about him, think he could really push on and improve in a good team. 

We’re in the same camp. Watching the clips of Buendia on YouTube when we signed him, Cantwell was involved in a lot of it. Last year of his contact and for £15-20m or so we could do a lot worse. 

[daggy_333]

28 minutes ago, MWARLEY2 said:

He is so weak though for his size. But defo potential to transform that. 

Grealish used to be weak as piss though too but he put in the hard work with the strength and conditioning coaches, to Grealish's credit though it sounds like he did a lot of work on his own to. Nothing to say Cantwell couldn't bulk up.

[MaVilla]

@Czarnikjak, with the estimated 30m signing of Bailey, does FFP imply we have now spunked all our available transfer budget now? (not including the Grealish saga).

[AXD]

1 hour ago, HalfTimePost said:

 

Exclusive= I’m the only one making this up.
Expected to bid if… so there is nothing

[sharkyvilla]

43 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

I don't mind him he's just another one that I'd have concerns over cost and role that he'd have here, as a £20m+ squad player he starts to not sound so good

If we'd signed him 2 years ago during the original promotion splurge id have been very happy

I'd have thought with a year left he would be less than £20m, nearer £15m.  Then if he is half decent for us that value could double pretty quickly.

[MaVilla]

Just now, AXD said:

Exclusive= I’m the only one making this up.
Expected to bid if… so there is nothing

does "expected to bid" come before or after "preparing a bid"?, and where do both of those fit in with "in the process of launching a bid"?

[Czarnikjak]

4 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

@Czarnikjak, with the estimated 30m signing of Bailey, does FFP imply we have now spunked all our available transfer budget now? (not including the Grealish saga).

Close to it.

Although some smaller outgoings later on in the window (like Connor) would free more budget (we could buy before sell, the order of transactions doesn't matter as the FFP is submitted  in March)

[AXD]

4 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

does "expected to bid" come before or after "preparing a bid"?, and where do both of those fit in with "in the process of launching a bid"?

It all comes after ‘considering a bid’

[MaVilla]

4 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Close to it.

Although some smaller outgoings later on in the window (like Connor) would free more budget (we could buy before sell, the order of transactions doesn't matter as the FFP is submitted  in March)

cheers, so unlikely to be able to fix the DM issue if we dont get any major outgoings!

[DaveAV1]

6 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

does "expected to bid" come before or after "preparing a bid"?, and where do both of those fit in with "in the process of launching a bid"?

Expecting to prepare talks before we decide on launching a bid. The bid could be a straight launch or be of the cheeky variety. Alternatively a preparatory, initial bid could be expected in the following days. It’s a minefield. 

[Czarnikjak]

2 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

cheers, so unlikely to be able to fix the DM issue if we dont get any major outgoings!

Depends how much that fix would cost.

With the way transfer amortisation works, selling Connor for £4m allows you to sign £20m player (cost spread over 5 years contract), assuming the wages of both players are the same. From FFP perspective those 2 transactions equal to 0 in this accounting period.

[DaveAV1]

10 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Close to it.

Although some smaller outgoings later on in the window (like Connor) would free more budget (we could buy before sell, the order of transactions doesn't matter as the FFP is submitted  in March)

You need to pop over to Manchester and mention this to them. 

[OutByEaster?]

Are you sure that's how transfers work for FFP?

 

 

[OutByEaster?]

19 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Close to it.

Although some smaller outgoings later on in the window (like Connor) would free more budget (we could buy before sell, the order of transactions doesn't matter as the FFP is submitted  in March)

I have a feeling that the way in which fees are applied for FFP is based on the book value of the asset amortised over the length of the contract or some such - in short that we might agree a fee of £30m for Bailey that might only appear as an outgoing of £6m on this years accounts (followed by a further £6m a year for the next four seasons).

I'm pretty sure that it's not the case that you can simply take the reported transfer fees for players coming in and the reported selling fees for players leaving and come up with a number that's profit or loss for the summer.

There's a cleverer explanations here:

https://www.linklaters.com/en/insights/blogs/sportinglinks/2021/january/player-transfers-ffp-and-the-break-even-test

Quote

 

Capitalisation and amortisation method

Acquisition of player registration 

C&A treats the registration of a new player as an acquisition of asset. The costs of registration (being the amount paid by the purchaser club to the seller club and other transaction costs) are recorded as an intangible asset on balance sheets. The value of the player registration is allocated over the period of that player’s contract with the purchaser club. The amount capitalised on the balance sheet is thus amortised in each reporting period, starting with the reporting period in which the player registration is acquired.

To illustrate the C&A method, let us assume that the purchaser club acquires a new player for EUR 100m (including transaction costs) on a five-year contract. The amount paid by the purchaser club is capitalised on the balance sheet and then amortised in each reporting period.

Acquisition value of player registration	Amortisation in Reporting Period T	Amortisation in Reporting Period T+1	Amortisation in Reporting Period T+2	Amortisation in Reporting Period T+3	Amortisation in Reporting Period T+4
EUR 100m	– EUR 20m	– EUR 20m	– EUR 20m	– EUR 20m	– EUR 20m

In the above example, for the purpose of the break-even result the purchaser club will record as a relevant expense in each reporting period the amount of EUR 20m from that player’s acquisition. At the end of the player’s five-year contract (end of year T+4), that player’s acquisition amount will be expensed in full.

Sale of player registration

Clubs that use the C&A method for acquisition of new player registrations must also apply the C&A method for the disposal of player registrations.

Let us consider the following example – after three years (in year T+3) the club transfers that player registration for a fee of EUR 90m. At that time, the book value of the player registration on the balance sheet of the club is EUR 40m (carrying amount after the respective amortisation in years T, T+1 and T+2 as shown in the table below).

Acquisition value of player registration	Amortisation in Reporting Period T	Amortisation in Reporting Period T+1	Amortisation in Reporting Period T+2	Book Value in Reporting Period T+3
EUR 100m	– EUR 20m	– EUR 20m	– EUR 20m	EUR 40m

That means the original purchaser club disposes of an asset which costs EUR 40m (book value) and receives for such asset EUR 90m. For the purposes of the break-even result that transaction will increase the relevant income of the club in the reporting period T+3 by EUR 50m (the realised profit on the disposal).

On the other hand, if the club transfers the player registration for a fee of EUR 30m then it will report a loss from such transaction. That is because the net disposal proceeds from the transfer of that player registration are less than the book value (EUR 40m). In such a scenario, the negative difference of EUR 10m will be recorded as a relevant expense and accordingly decrease the break-even result.

Unsurprisingly, the C&A method is preferred by most clubs, as under it the purchaser club does not take the whole acquisition amount for the calculation of the break-even result in a single reporting period. As illustrated above, such benefit is, however, balanced out with the treatment by the C&A method of outgoing transfers.

 

[Czarnikjak]

9 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Are you sure that's how transfers work for FFP?

 

 

Yes. Normally you would deduct residual net book value of the player from your sale price, but Connors value in our books will be zero ( he was signed years ago for 1m, that will be almost fully amortised by now).

Obviously that only balances this year, next year you still need to find another £4m to balance next year's amortisation. But we only worry about this year atm.

Edited July 31, 2021 by Czarnikjak

[rubberman]

1 hour ago, Shay said:

Its a good time to be a Villan! 

Well that's certainly an optimistic view for this weekend!

[Danishlad]

3 hours ago, MJ_1874 said:

Some people are completely deluded, who are we going to sign Messi 

Someone wrote Sterling is shite yesterday. Some of our fans are expecting Ronaldo and Messi or MbAppe