Convo from a supporter's group (on a another platform)

**eggy81** · 29th October 2022, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by Taksin

If net spend is above zero, it means the club is spending on transfer fees what it could be spending on wages. Unless dividends are being taken. In our case, they aren't.

Don't understand why people still can't understand this simple fact.

Explain this to me

**Taksin** · 29th October 2022, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by eggy81

Explain this to me

A club has a balance sheet. It has income and expenditure. If our income is x and we spend x minus y million pounds in a year on costs (which are mainly footballers wages), then we have the option to spend y on "net spend", increase wages (as in the case of Salah) or spend more than y by going into debt.

Other clubs find ways of getting around this - for example Abramovic's one billion pound 'loan' to Chelsea - otherwise this is the constraint. Wages and Net spend. they can't be seen in isolation, which is what the average football fan wants to do.

Even in our case fans like to omit the fee on Diaz in this summer's net spend as it suits the complaint.

If rumours are to be believed, we were intending to spend big on Tchoumeni last summer but couldn't. One would assume we have that spend burning a hole in the pocket for someone else - presumably there is some anxiety at the club that their planning hasn't worked well this season and one wonders if they have contemplated going into debt to bring forward their future plans.

But the wages of somone like Tchoumeni would be a part of the calculation of what we can afford, not just his transfer fee. Only considering one aspect of the spend is, frankly, retarded. Have you seen the spend on Haaland's wages? It can only be that the agent was so bowled over by them that his low transfer fee was forced upon the club in some way.

**justme** · 29th October 2022, 07:13 PM

"What we can afford" heres me thinking we are one of the richest clubs on the planet

**Nineteenx** · 29th October 2022, 07:20 PM

I don't believe you Taskin

We're 7th on the World highest earning clubs list - There are regularly 14 or more clubs whose net spend is far greater than ours - Are you saying all these other clubs are cheating or circumventing FFP?

Are you saying that despite turning over 613m a season, we can only afford 24m net spend a season?

**eggy81** · 29th October 2022, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by Taksin

A club has a balance sheet. It has income and expenditure. If our income is x and we spend x minus y million pounds in a year on costs (which are mainly footballers wages), then we have the option to spend y on "net spend", increase wages (as in the case of Salah) or spend more than y by going into debt.

Other clubs find ways of getting around this - for example Abramovic's one billion pound 'loan' to Chelsea - otherwise this is the constraint. Wages and Net spend. they can't be seen in isolation, which is what the average football fan wants to do.

Even in our case fans like to omit the fee on Diaz in this summer's net spend as it suits the complaint.

If rumours are to be believed, we were intending to spend big on Tchoumeni last summer but couldn't. One would assume we have that spend burning a hole in the pocket for someone else - presumably there is some anxiety at the club that their planning hasn't worked well this season and one wonders if they have contemplated going into debt to bring forward their future plans.

But the wages of somone like Tchoumeni would be a part of the calculation of what we can afford, not just his transfer fee. Only considering one aspect of the spend is, frankly, retarded. Have you seen the spend on Haaland's wages? It can only be that the agent was so bowled over by them that his low transfer fee was forced upon the club in some way.

Suppose it depends whether we view going into debt as bad or not. You’d be thinking our revenue would have increased by more that’s the increase in wages over recent seasons but I’m no expert in these areas. I do think we seem stingy at times but then if we’d got touchsmeni it’d be hard to argue that.

**Insidious** · 29th October 2022, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by Nineteenx

I don't believe you Taskin

We're 7th on the World highest earning clubs list - There are regularly 14 or more clubs whose net spend is far greater than ours - Are you saying all these other clubs are cheating or circumventing FFP?

I don't think he is suggesting that they will ALL be circumventing FFP.

What some will do (risk v reward) is adding more to their debt. Also some clubs are spending in an attempt to get back into the Top Four, which we don't need to do as of yet - though we may do soon given how this season is going.

**Taksin** · 29th October 2022, 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by Nineteenx

I don't believe you Taskin

We're 7th on the World highest earning clubs list - There are regularly 14 or more clubs whose net spend is far greater than ours - Are you saying all these other clubs are cheating or circumventing FFP?

Are you saying that despite turning over 613m a season, we can only afford 24m net spend a season?

I don't think there's anything I've said that can't be believed. My statement is fairly neutral

I don't know what we can afford. Presumably your 24m figure excludes the Diaz fee and definitely excludes the rumoured Tchoumeni fee. So its a number that can be plucked out of the air but it's not a very sophisticated number. And again, it ignores our spend on wages, including the Salah increase, for example.

As for other clubs, they have to be taken on a case by case basis. Barcelona earn and spend more than us and they are in a desperate situation as far as I can see.

**redebreck** · 29th October 2022, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by Taksin

If net spend is above zero, it means the club is spending on transfer fees what it could be spending on wages. Unless dividends are being taken. In our case, they aren't.

Don't understand why people still can't understand this simple fact.

Dividends taken - would this include whatever John Henry is reportedly pocketing?