• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Federico Fazio

Bedfordspurs said:
You can't account for it unless you can invoice it and the acrue it, that's the law in this country... how can you accrue for a player sale that's a variable???
Click to expand...

Ok, in simpler terms. I don't think Levy wouldn't have authorised signing Sissoko on deadline day if Bentaleb, Njie and Fazio had gone on simple loans, rather than loans-to-buy (i.e. 98% money in the bank/wages off the bill)
 
Bedfordspurs said:
But you said we had spent the money already .... which of course is impossible as you can't spend what you don't have
Click to expand...
Someone tell Leeds, Bolton and Portsmouth... They will be delighted to find out it was impossible. Probably some accounting error or other such confusion. Should be in excellent shape financially having learned this.
 
Gutter Boy said:
Accounted for it, not spent.

Our net summer spending last summer was exactly zero again (8th consecutive year), once the 3 loans-to-buy were accounted in.

The key point is that our 'war chest' for deadline day will be £54m + the Sissoko fee, not £80m + Sissoko
Click to expand...
I don't think it matters much at all how it's accounted for. We're in a very solid financial situation and I don't think we go in to any window with a strict transfer budget.
 
braineclipse said:
Someone tell Leeds, Bolton and Portsmouth... They will be delighted to find out it was impossible. Probably some accounting error or other such confusion. Should be in excellent shape financially having learned this.
Click to expand...

The spent money they didn't have.... or committed to spend money they didn't have. It's basically a lease purchase arrangement that they defaulted on
 
braineclipse said:
Which is what GB is suggesting we did isn't it?
Click to expand...

No

Leeds brought players on deals where the paid over say 4 years, not based on potential sales just their best guess in income and speculating. Pompey had owners who couldnt cover their bills in pretty much the same way

GB is saying we had deals in place to sell these players before the start of the next season (who may even be a new financial year) so spent that money on Sissoko which would be us spending money we didn't have on the basis it would come in pre arranged transfer fees. So it's not a finance arrangement, but a spend against future sales.... pretty much an Enron type arrangement of booking sales in advance to increase profit and turnover etc...
 
Bedfordspurs said:
No

Leeds brought players on deals where the paid over say 4 years, not based on potential sales just their best guess in income and speculating. Pompey had owners who couldnt cover their bills in pretty much the same way

GB is saying we had deals in place to sell these players before the start of the next season (who may even be a new financial year) so spent that money on Sissoko which would be us spending money we didn't have on the basis it would come in pre arranged transfer fees. So it's not a finance arrangement, but a spend against future sales.... pretty much an Enron type arrangement of booking sales in advance to increase profit and turnover etc...
Click to expand...

Most transfer deals are paid over a few years. For Sissoko it has been reported that we're paying installments over years. And in accounting terms deals are usually amortized over the length of the player's contract.

Assuming that we would sell Fazio, Njie and Bentaleb over the following 12 months giving us a bit more money to spend seems reasonable enough. If it's described like that or as a net spend for Sissoko and a net earn this summer for those outgoings makes very little practical difference imo.
 
braineclipse said:
Most transfer deals are paid over a few years. For Sissoko it has been reported that we're paying installments over years. And in accounting terms deals are usually amortized over the length of the player's contract.

Assuming that we would sell Fazio, Njie and Bentaleb over the following 12 months giving us a bit more money to spend seems reasonable enough. If it's described like that or as a net spend for Sissoko and a net earn this summer for those outgoings makes very little practical difference imo.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree but we would have brought sissoko in 2016

Yet sold Bentelab, Fazio and Njie in 2017 to pay for it.... so one deal would be don win dance of the others which you can't do

Where GB has gone wrong with his argument is correlating sales hadn't made (and still haven't in the case of Njie) with a purchase we had.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
Good luck to him, he wasn't as bad as some have said, we've had far worse at cb, but the high line and pace of game did not suit him.
Click to expand...

Could not agree more ( we have probably had more crap CB's here then any other position) and he was not that bad just did not suit the English game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back