Incoming- extortionate transfer/loan fees to the their feeder clubs or fellow cheats
They got 33 million of pure book profit for Gallagher. That allows 165 of new spending this summer (they can worry about how to cover the balance of that over the next 4 years later).
2 Likes
I understand unknown young players who come from relative poverty and are used as a tool to make their agents richer. I don’t understand a player like Neto choosing Chelsea - unless Chelsea are the only ones who will take him because of his previous injuries.
1 Like
I expect Neto to be sold to the Saudis in the next couple of seasons. Chelsea will show a profit in their books.
1 Like
Maybe I’m misunderstanding something but I always see “pure profit” in reference to youth team players. However, given that they are now limited to 5 years to pay off a transfer on the books then isn’t any player who is sold after 5 years at the club also “pure profit”? They don’t actually care about the money they just care how it looks on the books.
Either I’m not understanding finance or it’s just a vernacular that is unclear but I think when they run out of youth team graduates they’ll churn through former big signings in the same way.
So for example Kepa will be “pure profit” if they sell him now because they signed him six years ago, meaning they no longer owe anything against him on their books.
2 Likes
Yeah, that’s probably more or less accurate. There is some additional liabilities added to the books when players sign extensions as bonus payments for resigning are often amortized, but its nothing like the accounting liability of a new signing. So it might be true that Kepa might now be free and clear, but very few of their players who aren’t youth graduates would be in that situation, and you cant see too many if any of their signings under Bohely’s time having raised their value to generate any net profit given how bad they’ve been and few years of the initial fees they been able to clear this soon.
EDIT: Also, while the league did add in the 5 year max amortization period to address what Chelsea were doing, it didn’t cover the big bulk of early signings.
3 Likes
Can anyone spell Ponzi for me?
Inb4 Todd signs Ponzi for £60m on an 87-year contract.
5 Likes
I don’t think they do either, which is probably why we’ll hear about this sometime in 2030.
5 Likes
You’ve got to be kidding me. Someone should check their accounting department, these people are probably the most competent part of their club.
They’re also signing some kid from Atletico
Yeah, apparently some kid who Atletico signed last year, only to flip him for like three times the fee.
They’ll be able to field an XI of goalkeepers soon.
2 Likes
I still bet they would concede at least 2 goals in most games
1 Like
Imagine being the HC and genuinely not knowing everyone on your roster? 
1 Like
I think all those criminal gangs engaging in money-laundering are missing a trick. They should buy a football club.
1 Like
I feel Bohley is working on some sort of Airbud like loophole.
“you said we needed 11 players. You didnt say that only 1 of them can be a goalie”.
4 Likes
