• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Definitely not an out of car window Transfer Thread

AjaxDeSuperYids said:
Joking aside I am trying to understand that if we cannot spend it, then how this differs to the chelsea situation where it seems they intend to spend about a billion in no time at all and apparently this doesn't breach ffp.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1541305051976695808

seems like we can spend a lot - as we are in good financial health and much lower wages - the new rules do not penalise debt (which chelsea has too). also there is a transition in implementation, gets harder over three years. which makes sense to spend more this year i guess and what cfc is trying to do.
 
So just in time for us to potentially get taken over by someone who would want to invest big money.
 
metalgear said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1541305051976695808

seems like we can spend a lot - as we are in good financial health and much lower wages - the new rules do not penalise debt (which chelsea has too). also there is a transition in implementation, gets harder over three years. which makes sense to spend more this year i guess and what cfc is trying to do.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah I know we have a lot of wriggle room due to how thrifty we have been over the years but chelsea have been anything but that yet they are spending an absolutely unreal amount of money, apparently allowed due to the takeover/investment.

So my question is do we get the same leeway on that £1bn for 25% that has been mooted?
 
AjaxDeSuperYids said:
Oh yeah I know we have a lot of wriggle room due to how thrifty we have been over the years but chelsea have been anything but that yet they are spending an absolutely unreal amount of money, apparently allowed due to the takeover/investment.

So my question is do we get the same leeway on that £1bn for 25% that has been mooted?
Click to expand...
Would only get leeway if we were to invest in the squad, which we are not going to do.
 
I just realized that Chelsea got Badiashile. Fuuuck. He's the one we should be after and not Bastoni. I'm so bummed. He'll be a top CB.
 
Yiddo said:
Sounds like its 225k a week in wages give or take.
Click to expand...

Jeez for 8 and a half years as well, they'd better hope he's good or they'll be stuck with him for ages. Think some of their other signings are also on 7/8 year contracts.
 
P.D. said:
Jeez for 8 and a half years as well, they'd better hope he's good or they'll be stuck with him for ages. Think some of their other signings are also on 7/8 year contracts.
Click to expand...
Apparently it works out at over £100m for the 8.5 years.
 
Kinda want us to go for Zaha if Son is out of form. Could be a good rotation option especially if his contract expires in the summer.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I’m fudged if I know
When I flagged it earlier in the week finney was all over it saying it was allowed and he is a finance guy so I didn’t argue

the owners borrowed a load to invest in the club. I don’t know what security is against a the loan but apparently it count be against the club

it all doesn’t add up but the football rarely does
Click to expand...
No, I only said that the stipulations on the sale were that £1.25b had to be injected into the club and also that they are signing players on very long contracts to spread the amortisation over a longer period. I have no idea where they are on their FFP numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back