That’s not what was being said. Before we were being told we weren’t going to be able to spend as we were going to miss out on CL money (an impact of anywhere up to £100m loss depending on commercial deals which can pay higher or lower depending on European qualification sometimes). Then we were told we would be able to significantly strengthen. Then a decision was seemingly made to be cautious this summer and wait for next summer to make and significant changes/refreshing of the squad.
1 Like
This is so wrong in so many ways and on so many levels it is almost comic genius.
Please someone, make it stop. 
4 Likes
I agree at every L1 match he gets booed copiously by a section of the supporters
1 Like
“spend” “strengthen” your are just using those words to mean incoming transfers. That’s one way of doing both yes, but there are other ways (Klopp mentions this a lot).
Spend = Putting several of our best players on new improved contracts
Strengthen = Promoting Elliot and signing Konate
No? Have we not spent and strengthened this window?
3 Likes
Stop with your logic, it’s about to result in a lecture on poor accounting methods…
3 Likes
And we definitely DO NOT need another one of those. 
2 Likes
Rumours of another Lucas. Could Zag resurface?
2 Likes
So exactly why was that dependent on making the Champions League/securing the Champions League money? There’s a lot of revisionism going on to support the club. We had our expectations lowered on the fact not making CL would severely impact our plans for the summer. Then there was a celebration because we made CL and that meant we would no longer be constrained, along with the FSG investment quoted as meaning we would not be shackled by the losses of those previous financial years. Now everything is being rewritten that its all about being able to extend deals etc.! Things that were being talked about as certain as they “weren’t going to harm us if we didn’t make CL” back when we looked like we wouldn’t qualify. We don’t need to extend contracts during the summer it can be done anytime, same with the likes of Elliott coming through. So why are these the “strengthening this summer” when they were always said to be happening and not dependent on the summer. There’s been a change in plans. It’s that simple. Everything else is PR.
1 Like
Based on what I’ve seen of, and now expect from, Elliot and Jones, you’d have to spend a significant amount to get similar improvements from new singings.
2 Likes
Yep, both are £50mil or so + (based on nothing but my own guess work before others try and dissect this value!!!)
1 Like
That’s because the original discussion as far as I remember was around affordability in light of covid depressed revenues. The prevailing view expressed by Swiss Ramble and others was that we would most likely need to sell or borrow to fund new players, or have the owners inject cash. You disagreed with this assertion and somewhere along the line you threw in the argument that reducing amortization by extending contracts would be a way of achieving this.
The current and expected future cash flows are the drivers behind affordability, not changes to Amortization. Although the latter can impact on the former, it isn’t going to make much of a difference here and would be marginal at best because we already carry relatively little debt.
Amortization levels may be an issue for FFP reasons which I don’t know much about, but again, given these are assessed over a multi year periods and we usually make a profit each year, I don’t understand how this is a solution for anything here either.
3 Likes
Inserts stats on head fake success rate and and downwind fart % compared to young french kid who was sold this summer for 20 million
You know nothing
4 Likes
I remember Alisson being linked with Madrid as well. It’s a new norm now. #Mbappe2022ison
I was completely misunderstood and mocked on those misunderstandings.
I looked at what we could do from 3 viewpoints, cash, amortisation and wages.
Amortisation matters because it impacts profit and loss and my point was that FSG would not allow the amortisation figure to dramatically increase, creating a loss, so I discussed how that figure could be brought down, things that have mostly now happened as they made sense on several levels, one of which I went into at the time being how contract extensions affect amortisation.
I also pointed out how cash is separate and how a large outgoing cash requirement (around £50m per year) ended in the last years financial accounts and another one (also around £50m) ended the year before. That, separately from my points about how amortisation wouldn’t be allowed to increase but could be brought down to make room for incomings, means an outgoing cash commitment has come to an end and can be replaced by another for a similar amount without any issue.
Jacques Snow in for 2 dragons and a hoard of Dothraki then?
I never really thought a creative/attacking midfielder type was what we would want or sign, and that was when I thought Elliott was purely a wing option. Now Elliott isn’t a wing option though it means we really need to strengthen in attack even more in my eyes. Salah, Mane, Firmino, Jota are obviously all fine, Gordon is a promising prospect on the wing for cup games etc. may even get off the bench a few times in the league. But Minamino (despite still having some promise), Origi (despite his cult hero status) and Ox aren’t really a group of support options that I like. At very least I’d want Origi upgraded, possibly Minamino or Ox (as in, stop using Ox as a forward option, I already feel he’s been replaced in midfield).
Our PnL and balance sheet statements would only affect our position under FFP. My understanding is that we were never really at risk of falling foul of that?
The reduction in amortisation would not impact our cash position in any way except that if because of lower amortization we have a higher profit going forward we would have a higher tax outlay.
1 Like
FSG care about whether we operate at a profit or loss, they keep us under a tight reign on these things. If everything else is in line they still wouldn’t let massive business to happen that would dramatically increase the amortisation “cost” and lead to the club making a loss.
Come on guys, more rumors, less accounting 
8 Likes
Why would a business, especially a privately owned one care about a paper loss?
Most cash flow positive businesses would run paper losses for eternity if they could manage it and get past financial regulations. A paper loss essentially offers a way to delay tax outlays which are substantial cash outflows.
3 Likes