Summer transfer thread

[justme]

It all depends on how many games you win over a season (i know thats obvious) but with Fernandes he way win you 50% of the games. But on defensive side of things with him playing in a 3 he may lose you 25% of the matches as well.
Man-united against the top sides will struggle to control a game..

[LFC-DPG]

Man-united against the top sides will struggle to control a game..

They might struggle to control against the top 6 but they certainly didn’t have an issue winning them.

Played: 10
Won: 5
Drawn: 3
Lost: 2

[CCTV]

It's not a big shout when you consider what our midfield offers in terms of goals and assists. As i said earlier, others were raving about him before he signed for United. Time will tell if he keeps his good form up but others wanted him.

Good work rate too when ive seen him play and seems like he could be a little like Milner in deputising in several positions if needed.

[skyebo]

Good work rate too when ive seen him play and seems like he could be a little like Milner in deputising in several positions if needed.

Indeed CCTV.

[miller0863]

Lots of links with Jeremy Doku (18 years old) looks a real talent, talk of buying him and loaning him back to Anderlecht for a year, hope it happens.

[miller0863]

Georginio Wijnaldum has held positive talks with Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp over his future at Anfield.

The pair held a meeting on Wednesday concerning the prospect of him staying with the Reds. Wijnaldum has one year remaining on his current deal but talks over extending his contract have yet to take place.
The Netherlands central midfielder has been tipped to link up with his former national team manager Ronald Koeman at Barcelona, with the duo having worked closely together at international level.

Wijnaldum wants to stay at Liverpool and hopes an offer of a contract extension from the club will be the result of a productive conversation with his manager, who is keen for him to stay.

The 29-year-old, who joined Liverpool from Newcastle in 2016, has won the Premier League and Champions League during his time at Anfield and has scored 19 times in 187 games in all competitions

[CCTV]

The piece was meant to give an overview of player amortisation and illustrate why net spend isn't a super useful metric.



Yes, exactly!



But does it list the cost of player amortisation during that timeframe? Since "net spend" apparently isn't really an all that meaningful metric (I mean it's more meaningful than just "spend", but still falls a ways short of telling a full story)? That seems to be the big factor along with wages.



1 It doesn't matter how much they're paid individually, does it? As you said, we still pay 60-ish (iirc) % for wages. Think that's really the important metric here.



But has it though? According to the chart that's not been the case in the three seasons, since the operating profit has remained basically the same.

We don't have the numbers to confirm if that's the case compared to the previous period you mentioned. At least not easily accessible.



The way I see it is that since we've made those large signings they are on higher wages (let's say the total wage bill has remained at exactly the same level as it was in the previous period you mention) so the "remaining" cash should be greater, since the turnover has increased. I would guess that that "remaining" cash gets eaten up by the higher player amortisation caused by the exact expensive transfers you mention. Does that make sense? I'm a bit confused tbh, finances aren't my strong suit.



That is a very interesting question. I'd love to see some numbers on it, perhaps something by SR. Anything else would at this point be pure guesswork. Unfortunately I don't have the numbers in an understandable for a layman like me format. Or any format for that matter.

What I think the thread demonstrates, along with the video I posted the other day, is that FSG are investing everything the club is currently making back into it. It'd be very surprising if they were being much less prudent prior to 2015, though even that is possible as they were very much learning on the job.

Imo youve interjected at too many points to reply sensibly to each.

Amortisation i believe was introduced as an accounting procedure to deal with FFP.
Seems to me the SR thread is trying to say the profits resulting from this procedure are not real, but the amortisation costs from this same procedure are real.
This doesnt make much sense.

One cannot get away from net spend via an accounting practice. Klopps success is based on a ridiculously low net spend, players sold for their worth or thereabouts and players bought which in the main were bargins realtive to their value now.
To try and discount net spend is pretty stupid imo.
Amortisation is nothing more from what i recall/perceive to be a means of setting club accounts up to give it more leeway with FFP.

Yet it is queried by me how the same owners could afford to spend/lose 123 million more on squad turnover over 5 years - when their income, bills and surpluses were smaller.

The growth of both revenue and expenditure has created more surpluses.
If we have greater surpluses and have spent vastly less on squad turnover, what has happened to that money.

Its like saying our success on and off the pitch has crippled the club. Or to use your car, income, expense and surplus.

I earn 300 k a year
My bills are 200k a year
My surplus 100k
Over 5 years i spent 195 upgrading my cars. Deemed fiscally sound.

Now i earn 450k a year
My bills are 310k a year
My surplus is 140 k per year
Yet over these 5 years i couldnt have spent more than 73k upgrading cars.

By earning more money, having more disposable income after bills, i also have less disposable income somehow.

In terms of our amortised players costs.

Mane 16/17 signings in their last year now.
Salah 17/18 signings last year next season.
VVD (6 years) and 18/19 signings last year the season after, in year 3 of 5 now.
Taki & Tsimi our only real purchases since for the seasons thereafter.
The big expenditure is at the halfway point in terms of time now.

Imo it would seem absolutely possible for the club to spend big now as it has the ffp leeway.
It would also be looking at declining amortisation costs this season, next season and the season after the big signings would be complete.
Then it would be looking at a very low amortisation costs for tsiki & taki.
The club imo will likely sell one of our front 3 to reinvest in the squad. Given the likely timeline of one of their sale, wed be looking at a recorded profit of the full sale amount.

In terms of Mbappe, perhaps the club are looking at next year owing to PSGs stance. If things continue as they are he'll be in his final year and available on a precontract that January.

People who say there are no means to improve the starting lineup, well i disagree.

Ali
Back 4
Hendo +2
3 amigos

Ali
Back 4
Hendo +1
3 amigos
Mbappe

[Balinkay]

I'll try to be brief from now on.

SR isn't saying profits are fake and losses - real. He's using a model (Player Amortisation) and following it to its logical conclusion. I see no double standard in any of his posts. Could you provide an example of this?

Whether or not you accept PA as a fitting accounting practice, it's the one used by everyone. Decisions are made in the boardroom based on it. We as fans should at least for that reason familiarise ourselves with it. If it was introduced to deal with FFP as you claim, it would underreport spending and overreport income. You claim SR has done the opposite somehow and seem to blame PA. This doesn't make sense.

You don't know how much they've lost in terms of "squad turnover" because you only take supposed transfer sums into account. Wages, bonuses and agents' fees aren't accounted for. Neither are infrastructure works. Your car example is far too simplistic to be of any real use.

It's also irrelevant at what point the big expenditure is in terms of PA. It's constant. I do agree that LFC will be looking at the falling PA due to clever transfers and try to reinvest money. Hopefully as soon as prudent.

[CCTV]

I'll try to be brief from now on.

1 SR isn't saying profits are fake and losses - real. He's using a model (Player Amortisation) and following it to its logical conclusion. I see no double standard in any of his posts. Could you provide an example of this?

2) Whether or not you accept PA as a fitting accounting practice, it's the one used by everyone. Decisions are made in the boardroom based on it. We as fans should at least for that reason familiarise ourselves with it. If it was introduced to deal with FFP as you claim, it would underreport spending and overreport losses. You claim SR has done the opposite somehow and seem to blame PA. This doesn't make sense.

3) You don't know how much they've lost in terms of "squad turnover" because you only take supposed transfer sums into account. Wages, bonuses and agents' fees aren't accounted for. Neither are infrastructure works. Your car example is far too simplistic to be of any real use.

4) It's also irrelevant at what point the big expenditure is in terms of PA. It's constant. I do agree that LFC will be looking at the falling PA due to clever transfers and try to reinvest money.

The accounting practice generates profits from the manner that sales are banked immediately and purchases are amortised.
In reality we pay and get money up front.
By focusing on the differnece between cash and accounting profits it seems as though he is delegitimising the accounting profit whilst retaining the amortised costs which are generated by the same accounting procedure.

The reason i believe it was brought in for FFP was to create a profit for ffp, by banking sales immediately and amortising purchases over time.
This would allow clubs to create a time lag between the reality of their spending and the generated player sales. The time lag gives a cushion. (Iirc)
It benefits clubs ability to spend and be ffp compliant. Last i read our break even point was very high for our allowed spending under ffp.

I can use net spend as a proxy for the costs of transfer dealings. I can also use the difference between the 5 year periods totals for purchases as a proxy for agent fees associated with signings.
Under Klopp we have net spent 123 million less than from the 11/12 season to the 15/16 season.
As things stand the total money spent on players was 12.4 million pound greater in the 5 years prior to Klopp 5 seasons.
(59.87+63.54+52.29+136.29
+113.85−71.91−156.49
−163.98−9.36−11.7)
If wages are a percentage of turnover and agent fees are a percentage of wages and not transfer fees, then the agents fees would be relatively stable as has the wage bill been.
What details did SR provide on agent fees ?

How is the PA constant and falling ?
It would seem the pa cost per player over their contract is constant. Like with mane say 35/5 7 mill a year.
But the overall cost to the club would be continually changing with players traded or not each season.
For example this yea5 well have to amortise Tsimikas contract over 5 years say 2.4 million added but we shift Bobby off as he hes here 5 years.
So in effect our pa cost is down this year, no ?

[Insidious]

It's not a big shout when you consider what our midfield offers in terms of goals and assists. As i said earlier, others were raving about him before he signed for United. Time will tell if he keeps his good form up but others wanted him.

I can't word this in such a way that it doesn't sound like I'm being pedantic / nitpicky, but had you initially said "he's better than anything we have in terms of goals and assists" that's one discussion - you said he's better than anything we face in midfield, which I took at face value, ie you're saying he's better than someone like Henderson, who I think has a better "all-round" game, hope that's clear.

Still reserving judgement either way mind - also we have to bear roles in mind too - look at how Wijnaldum scores for Holland yet comparatively (goals per minutes played) puts away very little for us.

Not that I think Fernandes is rubbish or anything, but I do feel he needs judged over a longer period, plus it's also fair to say that Ole's United have had "purple patches" and I'd be intrigued to see what Fernandes contributes when they're not on form - if he drags them out of the mire when they're truly rubbish, like '04-'09 Stevie did more than a few times for us, that may prove a better yard-stick.