Pretty much every transfer is paid over years, normally the length of the contract signed. It’s how the buying club writes off the value of the player
I'll leave the accountancy stuff to others but my point was that in order to trigger the buy out clause they may have to pay the full amount up front (this is the standard in buy out clauses). i.e. a buying club may not have an option to unilaterally declare that it is paying £86m in installments. If a buyer can't afford the full amount upfront then it may have to agree terms with Sporting who may a) refuse to sell or b) ask for (e.g.) £100m spread over 5 years. In the current climate £20m a year may be more attractive than £86m in one go.Pretty much every transfer is paid over years, normally the length of the contract signed. It’s how the buying club writes off the value of the player
I thought Everton put in an offer but Vik didn't want to go thereHe’s pricing himself out of a move ffs. No need to score a hatrick just showing off.
Said it way back though, who pays the money? Only big clubs in the PL that need a striker are Chelsea and Arsenal. Despite signing 136 players this summer, Chelsea still need a proper centre forward. Gyokeres improves their team massively. With Arsenal, Arteta think he is too clever for a striker, Havertz experiment working tbf but he seems desperate to win the PL without one, will be his and Arsenal’s downfall.
It’s still absolute madness that a lower premier club didn’t take him that January from us. Must be kicking themselves….mostly Everton.
And playing to his strengths in the process, probably a major sticking point as any, always searching for that perfect way as certain managers do, unorthodox!An extra few quid will obviously be nice but it’s great to see a lad who’s worked hard, continued to believe in himself and improved himself year on year, deliver and get the recognition he deserves.
So many people in all walks of life are looking for the quick money without all the effort and any hardship but gyokeres is proving that with the right mentality and belief (and talent) you can reach the top
Pretty much every transfer is paid over years, normally the length of the contract signed. It’s how the buying club writes off the value of the player
Arsenal are like the socialists in the Labour Party only happy finishing secondHe’s pricing himself out of a move ffs. No need to score a hatrick just showing off.
Said it way back though, who pays the money? Only big clubs in the PL that need a striker are Chelsea and Arsenal. Despite signing 136 players this summer, Chelsea still need a proper centre forward. Gyokeres improves their team massively. With Arsenal, Arteta think he is too clever for a striker, Havertz experiment working tbf but he seems desperate to win the PL without one, will be his and Arsenal’s downfall.
It’s still absolute madness that a lower premier club didn’t take him that January from us. Must be kicking themselves….mostly Everton.
In other words, I'll be gone by the end of the week!
Here we go..... agent working again.
Still got to stick it in the onion bag as they say!Absolute quality player…..but he’s not facing the toughest defences at times is he
I wouldn’t, they’d probably pay double his release clause for the lolsI’d be gutted if he ended up at Chelsea
I wouldn’t, they’d probably pay double his release clause for the lols
In the long run, I think he would too.I’d be gutted if he ended up at Chelsea
Twice6
Chelsea paid 100 million plus for a Argentinian midfield player playing in Portugal. Vik has now scored 6 goals in 3 games.A lot of PL teams were not prepared to pay 21m for him when he left us. Their minds aren't going to change now at 80m+ based on a season in a weak European league. If he does the business in the CL it may change. (Obviously I could be wrong - hope so).
Not necessarily true. It can be paid over years/length of the contract. But a lot are also paid up front. It's why you see lots of transfers drag on as the clubs negotiate the structure. Good example this year is Zirkzee to United. They paid higher than the release clause so they could pay it over a longer period whereas if they wanted to pay less it was all up front.
You may be getting confused with the amortisation of the contract, where the value account wise is spread over the length of the contract.
Not true, there is no connection between the payment terms and how the club writes off the value of the player. The transfer value is amortized (effectively written down) over the number of years of the contract term; the payment terms/schedule are completely irrelevant.
Chelsea are the most obvious and extreme exponent of this with their recent 8 year contracts, enabling them to write off the player value over 8 years (and thus minimise their annual PSR exposure).
Given recent events I think it’s more likely we’re working on any targets regardless of Vik moving or not.I think Gykores will move, probably to Arsenal, in this transfer window.
The problem for us may be that it happens so late that there is insufficient time for us to spend the money on the players we need.
Well Doug will have to risk itI think Gykores will move, probably to Arsenal, in this transfer window.
The problem for us may be that it happens so late that there is insufficient time for us to spend the money on the players we need.
Not sure he is the risking kind.Well Doug will have to risk it
We shall have to agree to differ
I will need to dig out the article what learned me a lot. It was from a series of articles about transfers run by the Guardian. I forget the details but most transfers, according to the football agent, are funded over years
You can differ as much as you want, but you’re factually incorrect in saying payment terms affect how the value is written off. Of course transfer fees might well be funded over years but that’s not the point. The point is that from an accounting (and thus PSR) perspective the value of the player is written off in equal amounts annually over the length of the contract, i.e. if a transfer fee is £10m and the player has a five year contract it will be written off (amortised) at £2m per year for 5 years. It has nothing to do with payment terms; payment terms have no relevance to the club accounts or for PSR, they just affect the club’s cash flow.
I suggest you listen to “The Price of Football” pod by Kevin Maguire, an accountant who teaches football finance at the Uni of Liverpool and is the UK’s foremost authority on amortisation in football. That will you “learn” you a lot too.
You don’t have to react so badly. I have read several sources of information. And to be honest, I don’t care. Because the main thrust of my original comment is that most transfer fees are structured over years. But you take care now
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?