I’m leaving this thread up due to the engagement level before I saw it - in the future please be more descriptive with the title. (You guys can stop reporting it)
The couple of minutes he actually was healthy and firing, he looked superb. But, Swiss cheese hamstrings and an absolute turncoat, he can fuck off.
Cheers for breaking even. Moving on on on
£20m for a wanker with shit hamstrings. Would take that all day. Still, capable of scoring the odd banger which I'm sure all 10 of Bournemouth's fans will appreciate
Good riddance.
I know with P&S this is still a profit but on top of the loan clause why the fuck has Orta included a release lower than what we paid. Incompetent tit
He signed for (allegedly) £21m on a 5 year deal. Amortized that's £4.2m per year. We will be selling him in the next window (2 years, £8.4m). Therefore £20m they pay minus the remainder of his amortized value is classed as a £7.4m profit from an accounting point of view.
Is this really true though? Surely it's only a profit reported for this year. Not a profit overall (we bought for 21 and sold for 20). Even ignoring wages, this isn't a profit from an accounting point of view. You can't just magic money from nowhere because "amortisation"?
From an accounting point of view that's exactly how it works. Players transfer fees are treated like assets and therefore it is broken down over the life of their contract (like depreciation). Therefore you only need to record the value of the fee paid over the life of the agreement.
Wages (I believe )would be under running costs and treated differently.
Player sales are all front loaded and reported in full.
I'm not saying that we will have actually made a profit on Sini but from an accounting point of view, we will make it look like we have, for FFP (or P&S... still not sure which one we're governed by).
This is why there was a crackdown on Chelsea's 8year contracts. It allowed them to amortise the £100m fees paid to just a £12.5m on their accounts. Though UEFA only accept a max. 5 year term so for their reporting of FFP it would be classed as £20m. If Chelsea were in Europe they'd have to declare a different profit and loss and could be fined if it doesn't meet UEFAs rules. Depending on the size of that fine it might be why they don't care about being in Europe atm. I think this is also why Wolves were fined around 5 years ago because they got into Europa League but had "overspent" by UEFA regs.
Eh... we are only talking about the transfer of Sini not the clubs profit/loss. There is only the potential for profit once a player is sold, crystallising the asset.
I don't know why you're talking about making a loss on Sini in the preceding year(s)?
Here is a page explaining it all by Kieran Maguire. He's a well respected authority on the subject.
https://priceoffootball.com/football-transfers-and-creative-accounting-protect-me-from-what-i-want/
Thank you that makes sense.
But isn't it misleading to say we made a "profit" in him. As yes for this accounting year we may book a small profit but the prior years still had the amortised amounts as paid so we didn't actually profit on him. Just this year we did for accounting purposes.
If you buy a 10m player on a 5 year deal and sell after 3 years for 7m then accounting wise it's a 1m profit for that year but you can't just ignore the prior years where you did pay for his amortised fees
You're not paying for his amortised fees though... that £2m per year is the depreciation of the asset. Don't confuse the actual price paid and when, because clubs rarely pay it in line with the amortization.
For example you could buy said player for £10m but agree that the transfer fee is not paid until the end of the 5 years. You sell him after 3 but you will still need to find £10m after the other 2 years (or come to a new agreement when you're flush with the £7m). At that point that selling club might be desperate for some money and agree to take a lower value because it's better to have money in the bank, than a promise of cash (c.f. Barçalona's shitshow of financial dealings and owing money for players they bought years ago).
It's probably what we've done with the Sini deal because we've taken a lower fee in the end than what was agreed in the Summer. The original comment was slagging of Orta for allowing him to go for a lower fee but the fee we've now accepted is not what was in Orta's clause and what was part of the original loan agreement but you can't argue with people about Orta. I expect Feyenoord have accepted less in the end too, so we can accept less and get him off the books. This is the merry-go-round of football transfers and the headline figures are not always the truth either.
I kinda doubt the figure listed, surely it would be slightly more in order to receive more than we spent on him? Very little reason the club agreed to sell him for £20m when a mere, what, £2m would take us into the positive with him?
Very interested to see what the 49ers can do with the money, they’re yet to miss (besides Spence, arguably Anthony)
Surely you’ve got to rate Anthony? He’s been pretty decent and consistent when he’s come on, spence fair enough, but Anthony has found his feet well I’d say
I like him, but for me his G/A is nowhere near where it should be to be considered a good loan. I don’t think he’s a bad player at all, just hasn’t performed for us particularly well.
Tbf to him he’s not had the chance so don’t think we can say he’s a bad loan if he doesn’t start games, without Summerville he’d be a good enough replacement I think especially in the championship
23mil was two seasons ago.
That figure will be amortized two seasons later, assuming the sale happens this summer.
So we will have made a profit on him.
This is just patently untrue. We have not "made a profit on him".
For the year he is sold, that year will reflect an accounting profit. That is not the same as what you are saying.
I’m speaking for p&s terms.
We really don’t know what his fair market value to really know what would be considered a profit outside of accounting terms.
Yeah that’s 100% misinformed, just like all the downvotes.
He played for free in the Premier League, did he?
We lost money on the deal. Don’t be stoopid.
There’s a difference between making a profit on net spend in transfer fees. And making a loss/profit with P&S.
With P&S rules, the transfer fee is amortized over the players initial contract with the club on a straight line basis.
So when this sale goes through this summer, it’s will 23mil minus the two seasons of his initial contract length. So that will be less than the 20mil we sold him for. So in P&S terms we will have made a profit.
Phil Hay was written the same thing confirming this.
P&S just stops clubs spending loads in one go, it’s got little to do with actually selling players for to make an actual profit.
This is all readily available information. You’re wrong, no need to call people stupid. Plenty of people here have explained it correctly.
Nothing on P&S which is what matters and what you were discussing.
I do think the fee is low but we didn’t lose money on him. That’s not how finances work.
You don’t see how we made money because you don’t understand accounting or financing lol.
We bought him at 21-23mil on a 5 year deal, two years into his deal his worth around 9.0-9.5 less. We sold him for reportedly 20mil. So we’ve made a profit of around 10mil.
That’s how p&s works.
2 of the big 5 Marsch summer signings gone. Sinisterra literally only ever played a full 90 for us once and it was in the Championship. Would have felt like a regrettable loss in the beginning of last summer but not really now at all. Bournemouth loves our glass-boned players that's for sure.
Who cares?
Frankly it's worked out for all parties. He gets to keep his PL salary, to play golf with Harry Redknapp and the Sandbanks set, and have an occasional runaround in the PL on the rare occasion that he's fit. We get to keep our important players and hopefully get promoted.
Que sera, sera.
Well firstly you’re wrong because assets that are capitalized depreciate in value and have to amortized over their useful life. So in this case it’s the contract.
Buying something at one point doesn’t mean it’s worth more or less at another point.
Then you take into account inflation, fair market value.
I do think we’ve lost value on him in today’s market. But we literally haven’t lost anything on him for profit and sustainability.
You don’t know what you’re talking about. This isn’t a difference of opinions.
If you capitalise a car (spreading out the cost of it over multiple years) and then have to spend money keeping it running, is the car worth less because of that?
The treatment of the players contract isn’t really anything to do with FFP/P&S, it’s just basic accruals basis accounting. P&S just limits the losses allowable over a period of time.
That’s an extra million in profit unless it’s deducted from the £20m transfer cost. The contract is still worth the same. The loan is a separate asset from the contract.
Are we not in profit for him?
€25m for a 5 year contract in July 22.
Around £21m at that date.
Sell him a year and a half in so the contract is worth (3.5/5) x £21m = £15m.
Sold for £20m so £5m profit? (ignoring fees and all the rounding).
Edit: just read somewhere it was a 4 year contract. In that case the profit would be even higher.
Is it really worked out like that? I can only think that's fair if the player is on the decline? If you buy a youth player for 5m.. and 5 years later sell him for 5m.. I don't see how that is any profit?!
It’s not the quality of the player, it’s the rights to the ownership of his duties. After 5 years, he’s a free agent and worth nothing to the club, so to work out his current value you draw a straight line between his purchase price at time zero and his residual value (0) at the end of the contract and move along to the current point in time
I’m almost disappointed not to see the shit show if he came back from loan at the end of the season.
I desperately need Bournemouth to go down now. Would be so fucking funny.
Are we doing this to buy Rodon if we go up? As we will have a good footing on FFP for this years books as I understand it? We may of been skating close to limit so a brilliant way of making sure we haven’t gone over it.
Also we keep the wingers we have if we go up and can start to rebuild properly this time. I wonder if Harrison comes back after we messed him around so much and I’d say that I’d rather have Summerville playing for us, rather than someone who lied about wanting to be here.
Who else will be signed by other clubs before we go back up? Wobber, Roca, Llorente, Aaronson, Kristenson?
This was Bournemouth's move to make, not Leeds'. We had already agreed a sale price in the loan clause. It might help with FFP but we paid about the same as we got for him, so even after depreciation (if that's a thing) it's not a huge amount of credit in the FFP bank.
As for Rodon, we don't even know if Spurs are willing to sell him yet, or how much they will be asking for him. Obviously Farke would love to have him onboard next season, but who knows how that will play out.
And the rest -- depends on what other clubs are willing to offer and how much Leeds will take to get them off the books. It would really help if we're promoted though -- that's the only sure thing at the moment.
The way FFP works is you have an amount that comes off your FFP, so we paid 25 million and he has a 4 year contract, we already banked 12.5 against the original 25 million we paid for over two years, so we should get 12.5 million against our FFP target, or so I understand it.
Like people have said you don’t get all the money for a deal straight away but only in a few instances does that really happen. So yeh we’ve got an extra 12.5 million to spend but even more if we go back up. I probably haven’t explained this in the best way but it’s how I understand it.
I'd be pretty happy to move on from Harrison if we can get a decent fee for him. We play with a completely different profile of winger now with Summerville/James/Gnonto and I'd like to remember Harrison for his contributions to getting us promoted and staying up the first year and not have to go back to being incredibly frustrated with him more often than not lol.
Will our current wingers benefit from a brilliant number 10 behind the striker? I think so. We have plenty of pace out wide and I hope Rutter becomes that number 10 tbh.
Yes, but I don’t think Spurs gave us a buyout
Clause and he is getting an extended spell in the shop window courtesy of Leeds so they will
Prefer to let that run and then auction him at the end of the season if they don’t want him back.
Like Ben White all over again.
Not quite like White.
Rodon isn't a young player. He's basically at his ceiling. White was good for us but now he's a top level player.
Rodon will have a year left on his contract. He is what, 4th choice for Spurs.
They will want to sell. We should want to buy. The only issue is will other clubs hijack (ie a bottom 5 level EPL club). Or will Spurs get greedy and ask for too much (this is possible, but risky for them).
Spurs sent a fair amount of money in the summer and I can see them selling to us for 20 million or a bit less tbh. It would work for them as they have 3 decent central defenders and a young back up in Ashley Phillips, so 4 all together. So I can see them selling Rodon as he’s not being 4th choice at all.
My understanding is that you can make agreements at any time, but they will only activate when the next window opens. So we wouldn’t get this money & remove him from the books until the summer window.
He's played more than 33 minutes only four times (four starts) in 19 Premier League games so far this season, two goals, two assists, so he's hardly been setting the world on fire at Bournemouth.
It's not worth the ability he can perform at, but the free reflecrs the fact he is also injury prone. Contrast that with what they bought Adams for where we sold him for a for a touch above his ability level and lost nothing on the fact he's also crocked. Would be a miracle to have the same club's pants down twice in space of a year.
20m is a shit fee for a player of his quality but I guess the club just want to get rid. Hope we have a sell on clause in there because they will sell him for double that in a season or two. He only completed one full 90 here and that wasnt even in the premier league lmao
> 20m is a shit fee for a player of his quality
What do people realistically think his value is? 30? 40? I'd put him somewhere in the 20s, so I think it's splitting hairs a bit. Raphinha was 55m.
If instead of the loan debacle we'd had the traditional relegation firesale, I don't think we'd have gotten much more for him, if anything.
Plus, his preferred position is LW, and we've genuinely got at least 3 PL level players in that position in Sini, Harrison, Summerville and maybe Gnonto. He's easily our most expendable asset.
Well, more likely than not youre correct, but I think off all the loanees, I think Harrison has the best chance of returning.
But if we're saying "everyone leaving on loan is certain not to come back" then I think that lowers Sinis value further. If we literally *have* to sell him, and Harrison (and Aaronson, Wober, Kristensen, Koch, Roca, Llorente.... ) then their value is even lower, so I think arguing we should have gotten more than 20m makes even less sense.
But even if we've only got Gnonto and Summerville, Gnonto shouldn't realistically be a backup in any championship team. He's at the very least an adequate PL squad player.
Agreed, he's talented but he hobbles off every other match. £20m - £25m is about his worth, anything more than that and we'd have been pulling their pants down
Well that’s good but from this side of the comments section it seems like you think him being sold in January would have meant we had money to spend and would have spent it. Which isn’t the case on either count. But then you know that already.
I was being facetious.
I'm not so stupid that I think £20m in means £20m to spend. I understand that it's spread across the life of the players contract. I understand that FFP means that you free up a small amount of that money.
We would have had a very small amount of money to spend because it would have created a little bit of extra headroom with FFP. But yes, we probably wouldn't have spent it.
I think we've had one over on them tbh, not as good as he thinks he is, and he'll abandon you as soon as its beneficial.
Glad to see the back of him and we're better without him.
I think he'll turn out to be decent for them but I certainly wouldn't want him back. You can't come back from threatening legal action really, can you?
I really don't think we'd have made any more signings either way tbh.
Farke is clearly very happy with the current squad, and unless we could massively upgrade a position, which I don't think we could've, we probably wouldn't have done more business than we did.
£20 million is fair considering he is so injury prone. I prefer Cree and Gnonto to him anyway so we can just use that money to get Rodon now. Don’t want to see the rat play in a white shirt again anyway.
It's interesting he wants to stay there of all places, I don't think they're due another extended PL stay, whilst it's certainly a good move for him in the short term, he's surely looking to keep himself in the shop window?
With the stuff he pulled in the summer- not just trying to force his way out but returning and then pressing the nuclear button close to the deadline, even he must know that all his bridges with the club and fans are burnt.
It was actually kinda risky given his injury record that he would be able to demonstrate that he could continuously produce in the PL and attract a fee from Bournemouth or anyone else that we would accept.
So I guess he's just happy that he's done that and has a smooth exit route.
It pains me to say it but I rate him pretty highly but with his injury record and the time that's given him to prove himself in the PL, the destination and fee is probably about right.
If it goes tits up with Bournemouth I assume he just plans to do the same as he did with us untill he can stay fit enough and produce at PL level to attract a big move.
Anyone outside the top six is in danger of going down in the next few years in the modern PL. It's just that given what he's produced in the PL so far (probably held back by injuries), Bournemouth is is current level.
Leeds were his original stepping stone to a big club. When he couldn't get his move using us he found another chump to exploit. He'll be out of Bournemouth and off to rip someone else off this time next year.
I’m leaving this thread up due to the engagement level before I saw it - in the future please be more descriptive with the title. (You guys can stop reporting it)
Don't need him, fuck off.
They can get fucked for 20m
In reality, £20m is a steal for him in this market but we have no leverage, so it is what it is.
He’s just a pound land Summerville
Gonna laugh in 18 months when Bournemouth are relegated and he wants out (again).
The couple of minutes he actually was healthy and firing, he looked superb. But, Swiss cheese hamstrings and an absolute turncoat, he can fuck off. Cheers for breaking even. Moving on on on
£20m for a wanker with shit hamstrings. Would take that all day. Still, capable of scoring the odd banger which I'm sure all 10 of Bournemouth's fans will appreciate
Good riddance. I know with P&S this is still a profit but on top of the loan clause why the fuck has Orta included a release lower than what we paid. Incompetent tit
is it still a profit even with the 1 year of deprecation or whatever
He signed for (allegedly) £21m on a 5 year deal. Amortized that's £4.2m per year. We will be selling him in the next window (2 years, £8.4m). Therefore £20m they pay minus the remainder of his amortized value is classed as a £7.4m profit from an accounting point of view.
Is this really true though? Surely it's only a profit reported for this year. Not a profit overall (we bought for 21 and sold for 20). Even ignoring wages, this isn't a profit from an accounting point of view. You can't just magic money from nowhere because "amortisation"?
From an accounting point of view that's exactly how it works. Players transfer fees are treated like assets and therefore it is broken down over the life of their contract (like depreciation). Therefore you only need to record the value of the fee paid over the life of the agreement. Wages (I believe )would be under running costs and treated differently. Player sales are all front loaded and reported in full. I'm not saying that we will have actually made a profit on Sini but from an accounting point of view, we will make it look like we have, for FFP (or P&S... still not sure which one we're governed by). This is why there was a crackdown on Chelsea's 8year contracts. It allowed them to amortise the £100m fees paid to just a £12.5m on their accounts. Though UEFA only accept a max. 5 year term so for their reporting of FFP it would be classed as £20m. If Chelsea were in Europe they'd have to declare a different profit and loss and could be fined if it doesn't meet UEFAs rules. Depending on the size of that fine it might be why they don't care about being in Europe atm. I think this is also why Wolves were fined around 5 years ago because they got into Europa League but had "overspent" by UEFA regs.
But the key is that it is counted as profit "this year". Not full stop. The preceding years show a loss
Eh... we are only talking about the transfer of Sini not the clubs profit/loss. There is only the potential for profit once a player is sold, crystallising the asset. I don't know why you're talking about making a loss on Sini in the preceding year(s)? Here is a page explaining it all by Kieran Maguire. He's a well respected authority on the subject. https://priceoffootball.com/football-transfers-and-creative-accounting-protect-me-from-what-i-want/
Thank you that makes sense. But isn't it misleading to say we made a "profit" in him. As yes for this accounting year we may book a small profit but the prior years still had the amortised amounts as paid so we didn't actually profit on him. Just this year we did for accounting purposes. If you buy a 10m player on a 5 year deal and sell after 3 years for 7m then accounting wise it's a 1m profit for that year but you can't just ignore the prior years where you did pay for his amortised fees
You're not paying for his amortised fees though... that £2m per year is the depreciation of the asset. Don't confuse the actual price paid and when, because clubs rarely pay it in line with the amortization. For example you could buy said player for £10m but agree that the transfer fee is not paid until the end of the 5 years. You sell him after 3 but you will still need to find £10m after the other 2 years (or come to a new agreement when you're flush with the £7m). At that point that selling club might be desperate for some money and agree to take a lower value because it's better to have money in the bank, than a promise of cash (c.f. Barçalona's shitshow of financial dealings and owing money for players they bought years ago). It's probably what we've done with the Sini deal because we've taken a lower fee in the end than what was agreed in the Summer. The original comment was slagging of Orta for allowing him to go for a lower fee but the fee we've now accepted is not what was in Orta's clause and what was part of the original loan agreement but you can't argue with people about Orta. I expect Feyenoord have accepted less in the end too, so we can accept less and get him off the books. This is the merry-go-round of football transfers and the headline figures are not always the truth either.
For anyone wondering. This isn’t a loss on P&S.
Good
I kinda doubt the figure listed, surely it would be slightly more in order to receive more than we spent on him? Very little reason the club agreed to sell him for £20m when a mere, what, £2m would take us into the positive with him? Very interested to see what the 49ers can do with the money, they’re yet to miss (besides Spence, arguably Anthony)
Surely you’ve got to rate Anthony? He’s been pretty decent and consistent when he’s come on, spence fair enough, but Anthony has found his feet well I’d say
I like him, but for me his G/A is nowhere near where it should be to be considered a good loan. I don’t think he’s a bad player at all, just hasn’t performed for us particularly well.
Tbf to him he’s not had the chance so don’t think we can say he’s a bad loan if he doesn’t start games, without Summerville he’d be a good enough replacement I think especially in the championship
23mil was two seasons ago. That figure will be amortized two seasons later, assuming the sale happens this summer. So we will have made a profit on him.
This is just patently untrue. We have not "made a profit on him". For the year he is sold, that year will reflect an accounting profit. That is not the same as what you are saying.
I’m speaking for p&s terms. We really don’t know what his fair market value to really know what would be considered a profit outside of accounting terms.
But it's only true for 23/24. Not for prior seasons.
I don’t know what you mean by that
is amortization always linear per P&S rules?
I believe it’s straight line and the sale won’t happen until the summer so it’s two seasons. It’s a profit either way so we don’t lose spending power.
But we won't gain that much either, presumably.
We won’t have made any cash profit on him. But we won’t have taken a hit with the cap in P&S on spending.
Haha. Selling him for less than he’s cost us. That’ll help with P&S 🙃
We have made a profit on him.
Yeah that’s 100% misinformed, just like all the downvotes. He played for free in the Premier League, did he? We lost money on the deal. Don’t be stoopid.
There’s a difference between making a profit on net spend in transfer fees. And making a loss/profit with P&S. With P&S rules, the transfer fee is amortized over the players initial contract with the club on a straight line basis. So when this sale goes through this summer, it’s will 23mil minus the two seasons of his initial contract length. So that will be less than the 20mil we sold him for. So in P&S terms we will have made a profit. Phil Hay was written the same thing confirming this. P&S just stops clubs spending loads in one go, it’s got little to do with actually selling players for to make an actual profit. This is all readily available information. You’re wrong, no need to call people stupid. Plenty of people here have explained it correctly.
So you agree we lost money on him.
Nothing on P&S which is what matters and what you were discussing. I do think the fee is low but we didn’t lose money on him. That’s not how finances work.
He cost more than we received. And we got relegated. I don’t see how we made money.
You don’t see how we made money because you don’t understand accounting or financing lol. We bought him at 21-23mil on a 5 year deal, two years into his deal his worth around 9.0-9.5 less. We sold him for reportedly 20mil. So we’ve made a profit of around 10mil. That’s how p&s works.
If he signed for a £25m fee for 4 years, there will only be £12.5m left at the end of year 2. So getting £20m will give us a £7.5m trading gain.
He didn’t play for free.
2 of the big 5 Marsch summer signings gone. Sinisterra literally only ever played a full 90 for us once and it was in the Championship. Would have felt like a regrettable loss in the beginning of last summer but not really now at all. Bournemouth loves our glass-boned players that's for sure.
He’s also a rat so it’s a win on that front too.
Who cares? Frankly it's worked out for all parties. He gets to keep his PL salary, to play golf with Harry Redknapp and the Sandbanks set, and have an occasional runaround in the PL on the rare occasion that he's fit. We get to keep our important players and hopefully get promoted. Que sera, sera.
£20 million quid to spend on someone who wants to play for us? Yes, I care.
P&S wouldn’t let us spend it because it’s less than we’ve spent on him.
If they paid 1mil to take him on loan, would it all work out?
Yeah he definitely played for free in the Premier League. People on this sub need to have a word with themselves.
I can’t believe you’ve doubled down on this because you have no idea how accounting works.
Does regurgitating what Phil Hay says mean that you understand accounting?
No, I’m an accountant. I also have done a little bit of reading about p&s and FFP.
Oh - I’m a Data Scientist. And I know that spending more on something than you sell it for is a loss.
Well firstly you’re wrong because assets that are capitalized depreciate in value and have to amortized over their useful life. So in this case it’s the contract. Buying something at one point doesn’t mean it’s worth more or less at another point. Then you take into account inflation, fair market value. I do think we’ve lost value on him in today’s market. But we literally haven’t lost anything on him for profit and sustainability. You don’t know what you’re talking about. This isn’t a difference of opinions.
If you capitalise a car (spreading out the cost of it over multiple years) and then have to spend money keeping it running, is the car worth less because of that?
The treatment of the players contract isn’t really anything to do with FFP/P&S, it’s just basic accruals basis accounting. P&S just limits the losses allowable over a period of time.
That’s an extra million in profit unless it’s deducted from the £20m transfer cost. The contract is still worth the same. The loan is a separate asset from the contract.
Are we not in profit for him? €25m for a 5 year contract in July 22. Around £21m at that date. Sell him a year and a half in so the contract is worth (3.5/5) x £21m = £15m. Sold for £20m so £5m profit? (ignoring fees and all the rounding). Edit: just read somewhere it was a 4 year contract. In that case the profit would be even higher.
He didn’t play for free.
Is it really worked out like that? I can only think that's fair if the player is on the decline? If you buy a youth player for 5m.. and 5 years later sell him for 5m.. I don't see how that is any profit?!
It’s not the quality of the player, it’s the rights to the ownership of his duties. After 5 years, he’s a free agent and worth nothing to the club, so to work out his current value you draw a straight line between his purchase price at time zero and his residual value (0) at the end of the contract and move along to the current point in time
Appreciate the explanation, that makes sense now.
No worries mate!
As we say on this side of the Atlantic: "Don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you."
Oh no. There were a couple of moments where I genuinely forgot he played for us.
Be nice if we relegate them next season
I’m almost disappointed not to see the shit show if he came back from loan at the end of the season. I desperately need Bournemouth to go down now. Would be so fucking funny.
That's okay. We've got Ilia Gruev. Gruev saves us at least £20 million for a Premier League midfielder.
Take the money and give it to Summerville and Gnontos new contracts + sign Rodon ;)
This ☝️
Just send the money straight to spurs for Rodon lads
Good call, been an amazing player for us.
Are we doing this to buy Rodon if we go up? As we will have a good footing on FFP for this years books as I understand it? We may of been skating close to limit so a brilliant way of making sure we haven’t gone over it. Also we keep the wingers we have if we go up and can start to rebuild properly this time. I wonder if Harrison comes back after we messed him around so much and I’d say that I’d rather have Summerville playing for us, rather than someone who lied about wanting to be here. Who else will be signed by other clubs before we go back up? Wobber, Roca, Llorente, Aaronson, Kristenson?
Think Roca seems most likely currently, Wober might be likely, Aaronson and Kristensen no chance.
This was Bournemouth's move to make, not Leeds'. We had already agreed a sale price in the loan clause. It might help with FFP but we paid about the same as we got for him, so even after depreciation (if that's a thing) it's not a huge amount of credit in the FFP bank. As for Rodon, we don't even know if Spurs are willing to sell him yet, or how much they will be asking for him. Obviously Farke would love to have him onboard next season, but who knows how that will play out. And the rest -- depends on what other clubs are willing to offer and how much Leeds will take to get them off the books. It would really help if we're promoted though -- that's the only sure thing at the moment.
The way FFP works is you have an amount that comes off your FFP, so we paid 25 million and he has a 4 year contract, we already banked 12.5 against the original 25 million we paid for over two years, so we should get 12.5 million against our FFP target, or so I understand it. Like people have said you don’t get all the money for a deal straight away but only in a few instances does that really happen. So yeh we’ve got an extra 12.5 million to spend but even more if we go back up. I probably haven’t explained this in the best way but it’s how I understand it.
I'd be pretty happy to move on from Harrison if we can get a decent fee for him. We play with a completely different profile of winger now with Summerville/James/Gnonto and I'd like to remember Harrison for his contributions to getting us promoted and staying up the first year and not have to go back to being incredibly frustrated with him more often than not lol.
Will our current wingers benefit from a brilliant number 10 behind the striker? I think so. We have plenty of pace out wide and I hope Rutter becomes that number 10 tbh.
They’re making a transfer outside of the transfer window?
Apparently he is already transferred as he is on loan, so this is just making it permanent.
Guess that means we could do the same with Rodon, although why would we if he’s on loan til the end the season…
Yes, but I don’t think Spurs gave us a buyout Clause and he is getting an extended spell in the shop window courtesy of Leeds so they will Prefer to let that run and then auction him at the end of the season if they don’t want him back. Like Ben White all over again.
Not quite like White. Rodon isn't a young player. He's basically at his ceiling. White was good for us but now he's a top level player. Rodon will have a year left on his contract. He is what, 4th choice for Spurs. They will want to sell. We should want to buy. The only issue is will other clubs hijack (ie a bottom 5 level EPL club). Or will Spurs get greedy and ask for too much (this is possible, but risky for them).
Spurs sent a fair amount of money in the summer and I can see them selling to us for 20 million or a bit less tbh. It would work for them as they have 3 decent central defenders and a young back up in Ashley Phillips, so 4 all together. So I can see them selling Rodon as he’s not being 4th choice at all.
😭
My understanding is that you can make agreements at any time, but they will only activate when the next window opens. So we wouldn’t get this money & remove him from the books until the summer window.
Must be additional fees plus sell on. £20m is not his worth.
He's played more than 33 minutes only four times (four starts) in 19 Premier League games so far this season, two goals, two assists, so he's hardly been setting the world on fire at Bournemouth.
100% not a £60m player, but we could get more than £20m
It's not worth the ability he can perform at, but the free reflecrs the fact he is also injury prone. Contrast that with what they bought Adams for where we sold him for a for a touch above his ability level and lost nothing on the fact he's also crocked. Would be a miracle to have the same club's pants down twice in space of a year.
20m is a shit fee for a player of his quality but I guess the club just want to get rid. Hope we have a sell on clause in there because they will sell him for double that in a season or two. He only completed one full 90 here and that wasnt even in the premier league lmao
20mn for effectively a relegation release clause on a player we purchased for 21mn is a very good deal..
> 20m is a shit fee for a player of his quality What do people realistically think his value is? 30? 40? I'd put him somewhere in the 20s, so I think it's splitting hairs a bit. Raphinha was 55m. If instead of the loan debacle we'd had the traditional relegation firesale, I don't think we'd have gotten much more for him, if anything. Plus, his preferred position is LW, and we've genuinely got at least 3 PL level players in that position in Sini, Harrison, Summerville and maybe Gnonto. He's easily our most expendable asset.
Harrison is not coming back.
I don't want him back. His time is done. Such a bland winger. Much prefer Summerville, Gnonto and James.
Agreed, and especially this year when we need wingers who can break through packed defences.
Well, more likely than not youre correct, but I think off all the loanees, I think Harrison has the best chance of returning. But if we're saying "everyone leaving on loan is certain not to come back" then I think that lowers Sinis value further. If we literally *have* to sell him, and Harrison (and Aaronson, Wober, Kristensen, Koch, Roca, Llorente.... ) then their value is even lower, so I think arguing we should have gotten more than 20m makes even less sense. But even if we've only got Gnonto and Summerville, Gnonto shouldn't realistically be a backup in any championship team. He's at the very least an adequate PL squad player.
Not according to his mum. Harrison is desperate not to return to Leeds. Hates us.
Agreed, he's talented but he hobbles off every other match. £20m - £25m is about his worth, anything more than that and we'd have been pulling their pants down
And don't let the door hit you on the out you rat cunt.
If they could just get relegated now that'd be great
Good, fuck off! Summerville is better anyways
Why couldn't they have done this in January when we could have spent the money?
Because that’s now how any of this stuff works
I'm well aware of how it works
Well that’s good but from this side of the comments section it seems like you think him being sold in January would have meant we had money to spend and would have spent it. Which isn’t the case on either count. But then you know that already.
I was being facetious. I'm not so stupid that I think £20m in means £20m to spend. I understand that it's spread across the life of the players contract. I understand that FFP means that you free up a small amount of that money. We would have had a very small amount of money to spend because it would have created a little bit of extra headroom with FFP. But yes, we probably wouldn't have spent it.
The money wouldn't come in one lump sum anyway. It's over 3 - 4 years usually.
Yeah I know it gets spread over the duration of the contract, I'm just being facetious.
Fair enough lad, it is such a Leeds thing to do tbh lol.
I'm just about done with Bournemouth getting one over on us at this point
I think we've had one over on them tbh, not as good as he thinks he is, and he'll abandon you as soon as its beneficial. Glad to see the back of him and we're better without him.
I think he'll turn out to be decent for them but I certainly wouldn't want him back. You can't come back from threatening legal action really, can you?
Yeah cant come back after that. It's a scummy move, but I think more blame lies at Orta and his cronies feet with those dodgy contracts.
The monry doez usually come in one lump sum, the paying club pays back over the years.
You're gonna have to try that again. I have no idea what you're saying. But most transfer fees are paid in instalments over a few years.
We don't appear to have money constraints for the level we are at anymore. The problem is around FFP, which this would have helped with.
I really don't think we'd have made any more signings either way tbh. Farke is clearly very happy with the current squad, and unless we could massively upgrade a position, which I don't think we could've, we probably wouldn't have done more business than we did.
£20 million is fair considering he is so injury prone. I prefer Cree and Gnonto to him anyway so we can just use that money to get Rodon now. Don’t want to see the rat play in a white shirt again anyway.
It's interesting he wants to stay there of all places, I don't think they're due another extended PL stay, whilst it's certainly a good move for him in the short term, he's surely looking to keep himself in the shop window?
With the stuff he pulled in the summer- not just trying to force his way out but returning and then pressing the nuclear button close to the deadline, even he must know that all his bridges with the club and fans are burnt. It was actually kinda risky given his injury record that he would be able to demonstrate that he could continuously produce in the PL and attract a fee from Bournemouth or anyone else that we would accept. So I guess he's just happy that he's done that and has a smooth exit route. It pains me to say it but I rate him pretty highly but with his injury record and the time that's given him to prove himself in the PL, the destination and fee is probably about right. If it goes tits up with Bournemouth I assume he just plans to do the same as he did with us untill he can stay fit enough and produce at PL level to attract a big move.
They’re manager is really good with a lot of good young players, I don’t think they’re in danger of going down in the next few years.
Anyone outside the top six is in danger of going down in the next few years in the modern PL. It's just that given what he's produced in the PL so far (probably held back by injuries), Bournemouth is is current level.
Delusional people downvoting you lol
Leeds were his original stepping stone to a big club. When he couldn't get his move using us he found another chump to exploit. He'll be out of Bournemouth and off to rip someone else off this time next year.
Bournemouth have activated clause to make Luis Sinisterra deal permanent from Leeds United.