Bid in for Mount

comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 12 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm actually a fan of Mount, rosso. Think he has numbers in him and is a managers dream off the ball as well.

Great attitude, good experience, even marketable if we look at things outside of actual football. At £45m I wouldn't mind if Liverpool had a look as long as it's not daft wages.

Chelsea do have to raise funds, I'm hoping Liverpool tempt them for Colwill too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I posted the other day about Chelsea’s transfer predicament.

Generally-speaking, their best performing players and most exciting prospects are the ones they’ll both find easiest to shift and benefit most from selling from the perspective of FFP accounting.

The ones they’ll actually want to shift because they really aren’t performing and in some cases are getting on a bit are going to be difficult to move and, even if they are moved, won’t really help them much.

They’re going to have to sell multiple very promising young and homegrown players - some or most of Mount, Gallagher, James, Colwill, Broja, etc. - over the next couple of windows, and it’s going to rile their fans up a treat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I would disagree slightly.

Selling Lukaku and getting his £20m a year amortisation and £18m a year wages off the books will help a lot more than selling Gallagher who has low wages and contributes nothing to amortisation figures.

They might get the better fees for Gallagher Colwill etc but it will be a short term hit of player trading profit, which will not help the long term FFP position as the big transfer payments and wages remain on the books.

You are right that the ones they dont want to sell are the ones that will be more in demand & are more sellable.

I hope we get Mount. Evan Ferguson, and a goalie.
Kim I think we have. Then we would have a new spine, the defence looks good with Kim and Lissandro, Shaw and AWB.
Mids, Mount, Casemiro, Bruno, Fred for cover.
Attack, Antony, Pellistri. Ferguson, Rashford.
Garnacho, Rashy.
Armadillo for cover.
Sancho and Martial goodbye.p

comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 6 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 2 hours, 36 minutes ago
comment by Ali - (U1192)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 3 seconds ago
Mount would do a great job for United in place of Eriksen in matches you need more legs in.
———
Issue is that’s the vast majority of games.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye. I've never seen what others see in Eriksen since he's been at our club.
He's 'ok', but SAF would never have had him here, the guy is useless if the game is fast, which most are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tbf he’s very reminiscent of Scholes once he couldn’t run.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps a bit, but scholes was more talented and also about 6-7 years older at similar points in their career
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah definitely, just meant with regard to being a passenger. Obviously Scholes at the same age was vastly superior.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 12 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm actually a fan of Mount, rosso. Think he has numbers in him and is a managers dream off the ball as well.

Great attitude, good experience, even marketable if we look at things outside of actual football. At £45m I wouldn't mind if Liverpool had a look as long as it's not daft wages.

Chelsea do have to raise funds, I'm hoping Liverpool tempt them for Colwill too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I posted the other day about Chelsea’s transfer predicament.

Generally-speaking, their best performing players and most exciting prospects are the ones they’ll both find easiest to shift and benefit most from selling from the perspective of FFP accounting.

The ones they’ll actually want to shift because they really aren’t performing and in some cases are getting on a bit are going to be difficult to move and, even if they are moved, won’t really help them much.

They’re going to have to sell multiple very promising young and homegrown players - some or most of Mount, Gallagher, James, Colwill, Broja, etc. - over the next couple of windows, and it’s going to rile their fans up a treat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I would disagree slightly.

Selling Lukaku and getting his £20m a year amortisation and £18m a year wages off the books will help a lot more than selling Gallagher who has low wages and contributes nothing to amortisation figures.

They might get the better fees for Gallagher Colwill etc but it will be a short term hit of player trading profit, which will not help the long term FFP position as the big transfer payments and wages remain on the books.

You are right that the ones they dont want to sell are the ones that will be more in demand & are more sellable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Getting Lukaku off the books is a perfect example though: it isn’t going to be easy, and they likely won’t get any kind of fee which will help adjust their accounts for 2023/24 (assuming he isn’t sold before 30 June). Effectively, they’ll likely only be getting (at least some of) his wages and the amortisation off the books. What they need, though, is contributions in the income column, which he won’t deliver.

Selling the likes of Mount, Gallagher, James and Colwill will put, immediately, the entire fees they generate straight in the income column.

If Mount went for £50m, say, that’d do twice for Chelsea next season as shifting Lukaku for £60m would, wages and amortisation considered..

Outside their academy graduates, I’m struggling to think of a player they’ll want to sell who won’t actually see the transaction itself put an entry in the loss column. Kovacic done, Pulisic, Havertz and possibly Lukaku look like the only ones to me, *if* they can shift them.

Getting rid of wages and amortisation is obviously important, but that alone isn’t going to help them sign the new players they want given their existing obligations (mainly, of course, in the astronomical size of the amortisation they have on the books, which was a PL high £163m *before* last summer and winter’s spending sprees ).

comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 12 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - At the end of a storm (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
I'm actually a fan of Mount, rosso. Think he has numbers in him and is a managers dream off the ball as well.

Great attitude, good experience, even marketable if we look at things outside of actual football. At £45m I wouldn't mind if Liverpool had a look as long as it's not daft wages.

Chelsea do have to raise funds, I'm hoping Liverpool tempt them for Colwill too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I posted the other day about Chelsea’s transfer predicament.

Generally-speaking, their best performing players and most exciting prospects are the ones they’ll both find easiest to shift and benefit most from selling from the perspective of FFP accounting.

The ones they’ll actually want to shift because they really aren’t performing and in some cases are getting on a bit are going to be difficult to move and, even if they are moved, won’t really help them much.

They’re going to have to sell multiple very promising young and homegrown players - some or most of Mount, Gallagher, James, Colwill, Broja, etc. - over the next couple of windows, and it’s going to rile their fans up a treat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I would disagree slightly.

Selling Lukaku and getting his £20m a year amortisation and £18m a year wages off the books will help a lot more than selling Gallagher who has low wages and contributes nothing to amortisation figures.

They might get the better fees for Gallagher Colwill etc but it will be a short term hit of player trading profit, which will not help the long term FFP position as the big transfer payments and wages remain on the books.

You are right that the ones they dont want to sell are the ones that will be more in demand & are more sellable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Getting Lukaku off the books is a perfect example though: it isn’t going to be easy, and they likely won’t get any kind of fee which will help adjust their accounts for 2023/24 (assuming he isn’t sold before 30 June). Effectively, they’ll likely only be getting (at least some of) his wages and the amortisation off the books. What they need, though, is contributions in the income column, which he won’t deliver.

Selling the likes of Mount, Gallagher, James and Colwill will put, immediately, the entire fees they generate straight in the income column.

If Mount went for £50m, say, that’d do twice for Chelsea next season as shifting Lukaku for £60m would, wages and amortisation considered..
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I take your point but it is a short term view only.

Lukaku has 3 more years which will have a 3 x 38m impact on their books on amortisation & wages

In 21/22 CFC lost £120m and thats before their big spending which will have added loads to amortisation and wages. Those massive costs will remain largely unchanged until they sell some of their expensive acquisitions.

If you take their splurge in 22/23 as costing £80m a season in amortisation, then they are going to have to sell Mount and Gallagher just to off set that, but it only offsets it in year 1 and even then it hardly improves their financial position (massive losses) compared to the year before.

In reality they will probably need to do both. Selling their academy products will deliver the short term hit to perhaps balance things out this season, and allow for some spending if they get a lot out of the door, but looking to next season, when their figures will be missing any European football (£60-100m down) they will have cut further and cannot afford to be carrying players who are a drain on their accounts, with Lukaku being the biggest nightmare.

comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
Outside their academy graduates, I’m struggling to think of a player they’ll want to sell who won’t actually see the transaction itself put an entry in the loss column. Kovacic done, Pulisic, Havertz and possibly Lukaku look like the only ones to me, *if* they can shift them.

Getting rid of wages and amortisation is obviously important, but that alone isn’t going to help them sign the new players they want given their existing obligations (mainly, of course, in the astronomical size of the amortisation they have on the books, which was a PL high £163m *before* last summer and winter’s spending sprees).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Taking their 600m spending over deals of 5-8 years, that adds about £80m a season to their amortisation, so that would make it about £240m.

If you add that to their wages which is £220m excluding players out on loan then that is £460m.

Their last financial figures showed revenue of £480m so they are currently @ 96% of revenue before you add agents costs.

In the future if you take UCL money out of that then it gets a lot worse.

And as of next season they need to be 80% of revenue and the 70% the season after that so they are going to have to boost revenues big time or cut costs a lot.

If they miss out on UCL this season, it really could be financial disaster in terms of UEFA & PL FFP.

Any smart chairman will see this knife edge they are standing on and will take advantage.

“Selling their academy products will deliver the short term hit to perhaps balance things out this season, and allow for some spending if they get a lot out of the door…”

This is really the only way they’ll be able to make signings, unless they can shift a truly vast amount of that amortisation, which shipping players out on loan again won’t do.

The long term might not be quite so bad if they can send a few players out for successful loan periods, then cash in on them down the line.

In the immediate future, though, they have to get numbers in the income column *and* amortisation of the books, which means parting with eight or so established players whose contracts aren’t expiring anyway, or three or four academy products they can decent fees for, or a mixture of the two.

It really is a mess.

United haven't done any business yet, have they?

comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 34 minutes ago
United haven't done any business yet, have they?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only new contracts for Garnacho and Dalot.