Jonathan Kodjia - SOLD

[Risso]

Take McCormack

Signed for £12m over 4years.

His book value will be £6m, so if we sold him for £4 (which is about as good as we could possibly hope) we'd make a loss and add to the FFP deficit, before wages.

His wages would save us £2m p/a but we'd end up like subsidising a million a year. So the deal would be just about, breaking even for FFP.

Best players to sell are home grown with no acquisition costs or players with low acquisition costs like Angela, Hourihane and Thor who were circa a £3m, £1.5m and £2m.

There's no way we'd get £4m for him.  If there's thing that should have been crsytal clear over the last few years is that bomb squadding somebody effectively wipes out any hope of selling them at all.  Bruce needs to suck it up, get McCormack fit and at least try to showcase him a bit.  Everything you say is correct, but while he's here, he's costing us £3m a year in amortisaton, and probably the same again in wages.

[Ads]

We'd be lucky to get £4 and a Skittles grab bag for him.

He's an absolute drain and it's pointless to sell him this state as it makes things worse. If Jack is going, play Fat Lad in Jack's spot, only more advanced. Nowt else we can do.

[Brassneck]

You can't build in losses to signed players without applying the same policy to home grown.  Otherwise you could argue that the value of Grealish is an asset and this asset should be offset against losses

As i said previously, we would not lose on RM because the deficit would cover the benefit we had by him being here for 2 years.

Otherwise, you could argue that we lost £2 million on Snodgrass (or whatever his loan fee was)

[Ads]

No, that's not how it works. There's no acquisition cost to amortize over a length of a contract for Jack. McCormack is worth £6m on the book because we bought him for £12m and gave him 4 years.

You have to account for the disposal of an asset and that's disposal against his value. £4m purchase (and that's highly unlikely) of him buy another club adds £2m extra onto the FFP deficit before wages. £8m sale would be £2m knocked off before wages.

In reality there's no way of getting McCormack out without making a significant loss and adding to FFP. So get him counselling, get him fit and play him.

Worst case scenario he's shite and we're no worse off. Best case, he scores 10 goals and sets John Boy up for a few while he's at it.

[tomd2103]

No, that's not how it works. There's no acquisition cost to amortize over a length of a contract for Jack. McCormack is worth £6m on the book because we bought him for £12m and gave him 4 years.

You have to account for the disposal of an asset and that's disposal against his value. £4m purchase (and that's highly unlikely) of him buy another club adds £2m extra onto the FFP deficit before wages. £8m sale would be £2m knocked off before wages.

In reality there's no way of getting McCormack out without making a significant loss and adding to FFP. So get him counselling, get him fit and play him.

Worst case scenario he's shite and we're no worse off. Best case, he scores 10 goals and sets John Boy up for a few while he's at it.

I can't really understand why FFP goes into that kind of detail really.  All I've ever heard is that the wage bill has to be a certain percentage of the turnover and that seems simple enough really.  What happens with FFP if a player is bought for a considerable amount of money, gets a serious injury and isn't the same player again.  Do the club get punished for selling him for a smaller fee?

[Brassneck]

It doesn't seem like FFP at all.

You can burn whatever you want on a loan fee but are punished if you try to put your house in order by selling a player for less than you paid for him.  If correct (and Ass seems pretty sure) then there is indeed no incentive to sell anyone we bought under RDM other than a physical saving in wages. In terms of FFP, we're better off not selling

[Ads]

Loan fees and wages count towards FFP as well. There's no need to take account of any disposal or amortization as the loan is usually 12 months or less.

[CT]

What a great word "amortization" is!

[TopDeck113]

I yearn for the days when following the machinations of your club didn't involve any knowledge of accountancy or business administration.

[SoccerHQ]

Sorry to go OT again on this thread but did we get that 8m for Amavi in the end or did we sell off that fee sometime in the season like we did with Veretout and Westwood?

[achilles]

Ads, did you forget about the £1 million bonus scumbag McCormack gets if we are promoted (that was the only consolation of not getting promoted)!

[Ad@m]

What a great word "amortization" is!

It's significantly worse than 'amortisation'! #englishnotamerican!!!

[mr underhill]

meanwhile. back on the Kodjia thread...

[Brassneck]

meanwhile. back on the Kodjia thread...

We haven't detracted from the Kodjia thread.  We've been discussing the ability, merits and pitfalls in selling JK during this transfer window.

[kippaxvilla2]

Only a derangely devised scheme called FFP would mean you are better off keeping the likes of McCaramac whilst losing all of the home grown future Crown Jewels of the club.  What a joke it is. 

In addition, there are up to 12 clubs already falling foul of this and so far, to our knowledge at least fcuk all has happened to them.  The only rumour we have heard is the Blues embargo one that Monk seems confident will be sorted.

FFP would be better served looking at a cap on transfer spending as well as wages.  It will never happen of course.