Summer transfer thread

[miller0863]

Everton have confirmed the signing of Abdoulaye Doucoure from Watford on a three-year contract for around £20m.

The French midfielder joins the Blues to further bolster Carlo Ancelotti's midfield options ahead of the 2020/21 season getting underway, following the addition of Allan from Napoli over the weekend.

[miller0863]

Newcastle have signed full-back Jamal Lewis from Norwich City on a five-year contract.

Lewis, 22, is the fifth player to move to St James' Park in the summer transfer window.

[miller0863]

Aston Villa are closing in on a club-record deal for Brentford striker Ollie Watkins after agreeing a fee of £28m which could rise to £33m with add-ons.

Villa moved swiftly for the 24-year-old forward after failing in a bid to sign Callum Wilson from Bournemouth.

The England striker preferred to make a £20m move to Newcastle United.

Watkins was a key player for The Bees last season, scoring 26 goals as they missed out on promotion against Fulham in the Championship play-off final.

[Kev0909]

But no clubs are spending money!!

At least we've signed cadbury's

[CCTV]

I'll try, CC, but I'm no financial expert, so I might not be reading this correctly.

@SwissRamble






The big factor we as fans apparently haven't really been thinking enough about is "player amortisation". As you can see it's cost us 250m over the last three years. From my limited understanding player amortisation is basically PA = (player transfer fee / length of contract). So not basically not paying all the money when you sign the player according to the books (even if you do), but reporting him costing you PA per year. Player sales are reported as "all da moneez come in at once" I think. Which is why we had such a huge transfer profit in 17/18.

This is a decent piece on it I think: https://www.theguardian.com/football/the-set-pieces-blog/2016/aug/24/transfer-window-market-myths

Your last question (how can we afford more before Klopp vs after Klopp) seems to not reflect reality. From what I can tell. Money is dirty business and one I don't understand particularly well.

Im not sure how the guardian piece was supposed to help, doesnt seem very on point.

I had a reply that was timed out a quick reply.

I understand the amortisation as such, in reality we pay fees up front for the most part.
With Mane say at 35mill, we'll have paid 28 of his fee on our accounts now with the last installment this season.
Were we to sell Mane tomorrow for £35 mill, with amortisation paid already we would register a 28 mill profit.
Traditionally speaking wed see that as a no profit/loss sale or breaking even.

Were we to sell him for 150mill, amortised accounting practices would give us a 143mill profit.
Whereas most would say we made a 115 mill profit.

Off transfermarkt:
Prior to Klopps arrival - 5 seasons - net spend was £195 mill
Since klopps arrival - 5 seasons - £72 mill

Our wage bill still remains in what would be deemed a healthy range of turnover. Our top players arent being paid that much more than Lovren or Gerrard in the pre-klopp era.

Since the 3 seasons SR looked at weve seen high/higher waged but underperforming players leave:
Sturridge, Ings, Clyne, Moreno, Lallana, Lovren, Migno
With only Adrian, Minamino and Tsimikas arriving.

So if revenue has grown, above the real term rise in costs, leaving a surplus.
If wages are stable and healthy enough.
How can a net spend of 123 million less mean the club cant spend any money and certainly not like it did in the years prior to Klopp.

Those years prior to Klopp had early exits from Europe, no consistemt top 4/CL finishes, no titles, less revenue, less revenue available tv money and a rather similar wages as a % of turnover iirc.
Were FSG running LFC into the ground in the pre-Klopp era (5 years) as per SRs thread ?

[RedNoodle]

The rest of your post very much suggests otherwise though. At least in my view.

I won't go through it line by line, but broadly you say you've given reasons as to why our finances are in much better shape. You haven't. What you give is "we won the league => we should be flush with cash". Sounds decent but it's a bit of a non sequitur. You've not looked any deeper as to why that might not be the case. By that same logic I can (somewhat baselessly) assert "we won the league by 18 points => we've got the best team and don't need to add to it". Or "we have some of the best players in the league, of course we're broke - we're spending it all on wages!".

Our dependency on individual players does not play a role in this discussion. We can talk about that, but it would dilute the current post. Broadly I agree with you.

You talk about scales but refuse to actually put anything beyond what you call "common sense" on either side. Then you proclaim one side weighs more. Put some numbers there and let's weigh them - this is exactly what was done in the two sources I provided - it would seem they do exactly what you want, but for some reason you think they're paid FSG shills. Or that FSG are cooking the books I guess? You don't trust the numbers. You trust your gut on purely financial matters above all else. Which is precisely why I consider your view to be based not on facts but on your personal feelings.

This is why I asked you what would convince you that you're wrong - a simple answer to that question would get us a long way to understanding each other's position I think. What I'm currently getting is that your view cannot be changed by any means, which is, in my book at least, an incredibly bad thing.

So, Noods, what would convince you that you're wrong?

Again I'm going to assume that your 'naivety' is down to your age.

As I said before, one day you'll learn that what people say/spin/release, and what the 'reality' of things is, are very often two vastly different things, especially when it comes to big business (which is what we/FSG are) and politics. I have given you plenty of reasons (as have others) as to why logically/almost certainly there is a disparity between what we are being lead to believe is our financial position, and what it actually is. I cannot say exactly what our finances are simply because none of us have access to our books, however ALL big businesses manipulate their finances as much as possible in order make/save themselves as much as possible. I can tell you that is a fact as a past student of finance and as someone who has lived long enough and seen enough to know how the real world operates, something that many young people (you included) think they know, but really don't.

I'm sorry Bali but in this case you are wrong, but you simply won't be convinced because you lack the logic, experience and common sense needed in order to see through the BS. You will only be convinced if someone can magic up our accounts, but unfortunately that is never going to happen. If you want to believe the spin/BS that people like FSG put out (why wouldn't they when people like you lap it up?) then so be it, but anybody/everybody with an ounce of those three things I mentioned in the first line of this paragraph knows that FSG are spinning things to make it look like we don't have a pot to pee in. I mean they tried to save even more money via furloughing staff FFS!!! Of course the reigning PL and WCC champions, the 2019 CL winners, and the FIFTH MOST VALUABLE brand in world football who have just signed potentially the largest sponsorship deal in British football history are broke.

Unless we suddenly go into administration and have a mass fire sale, nothing will convince me I'm wrong, which I'm not. I mean FFS Bali, If we are broke now, how much money did we have a few years back before our recent succeses when FSG decided to build a new stand and training ground? Think about it.

Some people.

[toneata]

The footballing juggernaut that is Aston Villa have just signed Brentford striker Ollie Watkins for a club record £28m that could rise to £33m.

One day lads. One day.

Nice to see these predicted 'Covid bargains' starting to kick in.

[RedNoodle]

We've now linked up with Cadburys chocolate as an "official partner"
All these partners and seemly no money to spend on players. Someone is telling porkies me thinks.

Like I keep trying to tell Balinkay, FSG will continue to Fudge the accounts as it's in their interest to do so. Wispa it quitely, but if one or two of our key players end up being out for a while, this season is likely to end up being no Picnic.

[RedNoodle]

Nice to see these predicted 'Covid bargains' starting to kick in.

'Bargains' similar to those picked up in a Harrods 10% off sale.

[Insidious]

Wispa it quitely, but if one or two of our key players end up being out for a while, this season is likely to end up being no Picnic.

As is the case with most clubs.

In our case most of our key players have some of the best fitness records in Europe.

We can't have every circumstance covered, but we play the percentage game pretty well.