🇧🇪 Romelu Lukaku

[Eligius 121]

What the f!!!!

Do u have any clue at all. Qpr loaned these guys so that if they make it to PL next season, they can call them back. And please check again about whom ALL, qpr have loaned out. It is remy, park, bosingwa, cesar, granero, tarrabt, derry etx

LOL, u think a deal could not naterialize for all these players. That is one lazy ass board then. LOL.

Why wpuld they risk loaning them out cos

A. The players dint want to play in the championship

B. Not loaning them would mean permanently losong them.

C. By loaning they would get a chamce of having these players backif rhey get PL.

So please get your facts right.

If chelsea gp to championship, and if hazard says that he does not want to play in championship then we would have to loan/sell him out.

Remy is gone this summer.

Park is old. You really think someone going to pay a transfer fee for Park? Also, park is not a starter even though he was captain.

Bosingwa is old. You really think someone going to pay a transfer fee for him?

JC lost his starting role...

Granero sucked

And the Milan cam was always going to leave them....

You don't seem to know the QPR board that gave ridiculous high wages to their players? Of course they are one terrible board, with the amount of money that was put into the club and being relegated....

None of these guys are coming back to QPR, they were loaned out because the board couldn't finalized deals properly for them.

Look at their transfer history. The only decent money they got back was Samba, who went back to his original team for a lower price than what he was purchased.

[didierforever 7,349]

Remy is gone this summer.

Park is old. You really think someone going to pay a transfer fee for Park? Also, park is not a starter even though he was captain.

Bosingwa is old. You really think someone going to pay a transfer fee for him?

JC lost his starting role...

Granero sucked

And the Milan cam was always going to leave them....

You don't seem to know the QPR board that gave ridiculous high wages to their players? Of course they are one terrible board, with the amount of money that was put into the club and being relegated....

None of these guys are coming back to QPR, they were loaned out because the board couldn't finalized deals properly for them.

Look at their transfer history. The only decent money they got back was Samba, who went back to his original team for a lower price than what he was purchased.

Hahahaha LOL.

Just can't stop laughing at they could not finalise a deal for any of them. By the way they could finalise a deal for taraabt to get loaned for fulham, call him back and then loan him to milan but could not get a transfer for him or any of the aforementioned players. :lol:

Granero has RM on his cv. He can probably play for a team like cardiff who have medel playong as a DM, yet you are saying that no club in the world wanted any of these players.

Plus let me get this straight. U r saying that if qpr get PL next season, none of these players will play for it???

[Eligius 121]

Hahahaha LOL.

Just can't stop laughing at they could not finalise a deal for any of them. By the way they could finalise a deal for taraabt to get loaned for fulham, call him back and then loan him to milan but could not get a transfer for him or any of the aforementioned players. :lol:

Granero has RM on his cv. He can probably play for a team like cardiff who have medel playong as a DM, yet you are saying that no club in the world wanted any of these players.

Plus let me get this straight. U r saying that if qpr get PL next season, none of these players will play for it???

DO you know how much their wages are?

Why do you think they went to QPR?

Fernando Torres has a pretty good CV, you dont see us making any deals for him do you? Kaka had a pretty good cv and he left on a free transfer.....

Loans aren't difficult. Look at us, we loan all our youngsters out with ease.

Remy is not. Park is not. JC is not. Granero and tarrabat maybe, but probably not.

Take away Samba transfer fee and see what their net is.

I enjoy how you come up with random transfer fee numbers...

[didierforever 7,349]

DO you know how much their wages are?

Why do you think they went to QPR?

Fernando Torres has a pretty good CV, you dont see us making any deals for him do you? Kaka had a pretty good cv and he left on a free transfer.....

Loans aren't difficult. Look at us, we loan all our youngsters out with ease.

Remy is not. Park is not. JC is not. Granero and tarrabat maybe, but probably not.

Take away Samba transfer fee and see what their net is.

I enjoy how you come up with random transfer fee numbers...

First thing first. I have not given any transfer fee number for any of these guys except for remy. So arr u sure its not just anither of your imagination.

If the wages of these players are so high, then how are the loan deals possible. A loan deal would be worse off for the finances of the club as they would have to pay some amount of the wages. And if NONE of these players are going to play for QPR again, then why would the board not just sell them for free. People like park, bosi, derry, JC are not getting any younger, are they? Even if they sell them for free, they would still be saving on their wages. Hence nothing yiu have said makes any sense whatsoever.

Now let us talk about torres since u so think we are not ABLE to sell torres cos of his wagea. Torres was a 50mil transfer which according to FfP is amortized over the course of his contract. Hence his trabsfer fee costs us 9mil a season (5.5 year contract). Lets say he earns 10mil a season. So for one season torrea costs us 19mil.

Now for the sake of argument say we sell him for 10mil, buy a striker for 30 mil, 5 year contract and say 6mil a year wages. Which would mean the new striker himself would cost us 6+6mil a season which is 12mil a season

Now suppose we had sold him last summer, his unamortozed transfer fee would be added to the books which would be 27mil. Subtracting the 10 mil we would get for transfer fee but adding the 12 mil more for a striker, we would be spending 29mil for a single striker compared to the 19mil we are spending on torres thos year.

And now lets consider if we sell torres this summer keeping all the above prices constant. Torres would cost us 18mil as unamortized value, 12mil for the new striker minus the 10mil transfer fee which overall comes to 20mil for one striker next season compared to the 19mil torres would cost. Which is an acceptable loss.

Get it!!!!! We could not afford to sell torres till this summer financially and speciallt cos of FFP. like I said before, get your facts right.

[Eligius 121]

First thing first. I have not given any transfer fee number for any of these guys except for remy. So arr u sure its not just anither of your imagination.

If the wages of these players are so high, then how are the loan deals possible. A loan deal would be worse off for the finances of the club as they would have to pay some amount of the wages. And if NONE of these players are going to play for QPR again, then why would the board not just sell them for free. People like park, bosi, derry, JC are not getting any younger, are they? Even if they sell them for free, they would still be saving on their wages. Hence nothing yiu have said makes any sense whatsoever.

Now let us talk about torres since u so think we are not ABLE to sell torres cos of his wagea. Torres was a 50mil transfer which according to FfP is amortized over the course of his contract. Hence his trabsfer fee costs us 9mil a season (5.5 year contract). Lets say he earns 10mil a season. So for one season torrea costs us 19mil.

Now for the sake of argument say we sell him for 10mil, buy a striker for 30 mil, 5 year contract and say 6mil a year wages. Which would mean the new striker himself would cost us 6+6mil a season which is 12mil a season

Now suppose we had sold him last summer, his unamortozed transfer fee would be added to the books which would be 27mil. Subtracting the 10 mil we would get for transfer fee but adding the 12 mil more for a striker, we would be spending 29mil for a single striker compared to the 19mil we are spending on torres thos year.

And now lets consider if we sell torres this summer keeping all the above prices constant. Torres would cost us 18mil as unamortized value, 12mil for the new striker minus the 10mil transfer fee which overall comes to 20mil for one striker next season compared to the 19mil torres would cost. Which is an acceptable loss.

Get it!!!!! We could not afford to sell torres till this summer financially and speciallt cos of FFP. like I said before, get your facts right.

And where do you come up with Remy transfer fee from, when he has a release clause in his contract. The same release clause he had in France.

Loans are possible because it is a short term commitment. Transfers are not. You can make a mistake loaning in a player like liverpool did with Moses and it wouldn't be a financial burden. Those players are on contract still, just like Malouda was on contract still and collecting checks from us. Did we cut him free? NO. Did we sell him? No.

I don't think you read, but neither JC and Park are starters for QPR and bosignwa i have no clue if he starts.

YEs, MR FFP expert. Apparently, we could not sell Torres, yet we were able to purchase Schurrle, MVG and Willian in the summer. We had a net loss for the past 2 years. We are able to have a million youngsters on payroll though.

We are getting no transfer fee for either Cole or Lampard and got nothing from Essien.

Obviously, you have no background in basic accounting.

[didierforever 7,349]

And where do you come up with Remy transfer fee from, when he has a release clause in his contract. The same release clause he had in France.

Loans are possible because it is a short term commitment. Transfers are not. You can make a mistake loaning in a player like liverpool did with Moses and it wouldn't be a financial burden. Those players are on contract still, just like Malouda was on contract still and collecting checks from us. Did we cut him free? NO. Did we sell him? No.

I don't think you read, but neither JC and Park are starters for QPR and bosignwa i have no clue if he starts.

YEs, MR FFP expert. Apparently, we could not sell Torres, yet we were able to purchase Schurrle, MVG and Willian in the summer. We had a net loss for the past 2 years. We are able to have a million youngsters on payroll though.

We are getting no transfer fee for either Cole or Lampard and got nothing from Essien.

Obviously, you have no background in basic accounting.

Hahahahaha. Dude u really are a piece of work. Do u have any idea about FFP and how it works.

Here read this and get the basic idea of how FFP works and how a deal like essien helps us. By the way, rhe youth players abd the academy is not included in the ffp so we can have a trillion players on our pay role and not be affected plus we dint make a loss for 2 ywars, infact we made a profit of 1.4mil in 2011-12.

Here is the article please read it

http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/1/24/5342030/michael-essien-to-ac-milan-the-financial-impact-of-the-transfer

And since u seem utterly clueless about almost everythin, I won't bother giving a reply anynore.

[Eligius 121]

Hahahahaha. Dude u really are a piece of work. Do u have any idea about FFP and how it works.

Here read this and get the basic idea of how FFP works and how a deal like essien helps us. By the way, rhe youth players abd the academy is not included in the ffp so we can have a trillion players on our pay role and not be affected plus we dint make a loss for 2 ywars, infact we made a profit of 1.4mil in 2011-12.

Here is the article please read it

http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/1/24/5342030/michael-essien-to-ac-milan-the-financial-impact-of-the-transfer

And since u seem utterly clueless about almost everythin, I won't bother giving a reply anynore.

Yes, MR. FFP expert.

So, by your logic the most reasonable thing to do is sell him with 1 year left in his contract since his unamortized value will be 9m + 9m in wages.

2013: 27m Unamort + 9m wages-10m transfer fee= (26)m

2014: 18m unamort + 9m wages-10m transfer fee= (17)m

2015: 9m unamort +9m wages -10m transfer fee= (8)m

Also, you forget one thing. We are still paying another year of wages for Torres, potentially losing the title because of inefficiencies up front (means less money), losing a year that another payer can be adapted into Chelsea system and be our future n9, etc.

So, your telling me that marin, lukaku, piazon, etc are not including into FFP consideration?

[Eligius 121]

Actually, I just realized you did it wrong.

In 2013: 27m-9m-10m= 8m loss

In 2014: 18m -9m-10m= 1m gain

However, if we did it in 2013, we would have a net gain of 18m (9m +9m) in 2014 and another net gain of 18m in 2015.

[The only place to be 11,313]

The reason remy was sent out on loan was cos people don't want to play in the championship.

No the reason he was sent out on loan is because he earns about £70,000 p/w and QPR play in the Championship. Their finances are a mess so they needed to remove at least some of his wages from their bill, as well as getting a fee from Newcastle for the loan.

Qpr loaned these guys so that if they make it to PL next season, they can call them back.

Not true. It's highly likely that even if QPR got promoted these guys would either be loaned out again or sold because QPR are massively in debt. They would probably look to go a more frugal route to achieve survival rather than repeat the mistakes of before.

Plus let me get this straight. U r saying that if qpr get PL next season, none of these players will play for it???

Highly likely. As for Granero he probably could play for Cardiff, but Cardiff couldn't afford him. QPR DOUBLED his wages when he joined them so moving him on is very difficult.

[didierforever 7,349]

Yes, MR. FFP expert.

So, by your logic the most reasonable thing to do is sell him with 1 year left in his contract since his unamortized value will be 9m + 9m in wages.

2013: 27m Unamort + 9m wages-10m transfer fee= (26)m

2014: 18m unamort + 9m wages-10m transfer fee= (17)m

2015: 9m unamort +9m wages -10m transfer fee= (8)m

Also, you forget one thing. We are still paying another year of wages for Torres, potentially losing the title because of inefficiencies up front (means less money), losing a year that another payer can be adapted into Chelsea system and be our future n9, etc.

So, your telling me that marin, lukaku, piazon, etc are not including into FFP consideration?

dude seriously again!!!!

I just explained the dynamics with torres. It is unacceptable to spend 30mil for one position and get a loss of 10mil on that. Also I just explained that if we sell torres this season how much sense it would make.

As for by not selling torres we lost out on a PL and other title argument, a club is not run like a fifa game. Jose made it clear that our objective was top 4 and not the title. If we do get the title then its perfect but that is not what we were fighting for. Plus jose and the board thought torres was good enough for that which considering our situation right now, was a good decision. Again, please don't treat it like fifa.

When I said youth, how did u get to marin? How is he yiuth or academy related? He was bought last season as a squad player and his transfer was a disaster. Piazon is an investment. Every club will have some players who they think is good enough to nake the next step. Where are u getting at with these things? How is it related to lukaku and /or even qpr/remy?

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

Actually, I just realized you did it wrong.

In 2013: 27m-9m-10m= 8m loss

In 2014: 18m -9m-10m= 1m gain

However, if we did it in 2013, we would have a net gain of 18m (9m +9m) in 2014 and another net gain of 18m in 2015.

Your math is wrong. Whenever we sell Torres and replace him, this is how it works:

Add: Torres transfer fee (10M maybe even less)

Add: Torres wages for the year (9M)

Deduct: Torres unamortized value (approx. 10M for each year remaining on contract)

Deduct: New striker amortized transfer fee (30M for 5 years, 6M/yr)

Deduct: New striker annual wages (6M)

Last summer: 10M + 9M - 30M - 6M - 6M = 20M loss

This summer: 10M + 9M - 20M - 6M - 6M = 13M loss

Next summer: 10M + 9M - 10M - 6M - 6M = 3M loss

Of course, if we can't even get 10M for Torres, then the losses get even bigger. The only real gain is the wages, because he's on considerably higher wages than 90% of the players that could possibly replace him.

[LukakutoStamford 779]

Is this the Loic Remy thread, the FFP thread, or the secondary striking options thread?

[Eligius 121]

Your math is wrong. Whenever we sell Torres and replace him, this is how it works:

Add: Torres transfer fee (10M maybe even less)

Add: Torres wages for the year (9M)

Deduct: Torres unamortized value (approx. 10M for each year remaining on contract)

Deduct: New striker amortized transfer fee (30M for 5 years, 6M/yr)

Deduct: New striker annual wages (6M)

Last summer: 10M + 9M - 30M - 6M - 6M = 20M loss

This summer: 10M + 9M - 20M - 6M - 6M = 13M loss

Next summer: 10M + 9M - 10M - 6M - 6M = 3M loss

Of course, if we can't even get 10M for Torres, then the losses get even bigger. The only real gain is the wages, because he's on considerably higher wages than 90% of the players that could possibly replace him.

Not really. My math is right, I just didn't include adding in a new striker into the equation.

Also, if we did go by the new striker variable, than as you mentioned with your numbers, we would have a 20m loss last season and a gain of 7m the next 2 seasons.....

Rather than having a 13m loss, and only a gain of 7 m for the last season.

[Eligius 121]

dude seriously again!!!!

I just explained the dynamics with torres. It is unacceptable to spend 30mil for one position and get a loss of 10mil on that. Also I just explained that if we sell torres this season how much sense it would make.

As for by not selling torres we lost out on a PL and other title argument, a club is not run like a fifa game. Jose made it clear that our objective was top 4 and not the title. If we do get the title then its perfect but that is not what we were fighting for. Plus jose and the board thought torres was good enough for that which considering our situation right now, was a good decision. Again, please don't treat it like fifa.

When I said youth, how did u get to marin? How is he yiuth or academy related? He was bought last season as a squad player and his transfer was a disaster. Piazon is an investment. Every club will have some players who they think is good enough to nake the next step. Where are u getting at with these things? How is it related to lukaku and /or even qpr/remy?

Jose says a lot of things. Selling Torres for a difference of 7m is what? A huge Loss, when we would recover it back the following season as a gain. We purchased Willian, Schurrle and MVG. Sold Essien for nothing and will probably release both Cole and Lampard.

Your basically saying the best alternative was to sell when his unamortized value is at its lowest point.

So, you think keeping Torres, instead of purchasing Costa at a 30m price to save 7m was what the board was thinking on why we didn't sell him?

When I say a million youngsters on payroll, when did I say youth academy when we have a million loanees that are on the books.

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

Not really. My math is right, I just didn't include adding in a new striker into the equation.

Also, if we did go by the new striker variable, than as you mentioned with your numbers, we would have a 20m loss last season and a gain of 7m the next 2 seasons.....

Rather than having a 13m loss, and only a gain of 7 m for the last season.

Not sure how you're getting gains? Unless we get a huge transfer for Torres, it's almost impossible to actually make a gain.

[Eligius 121]

No the reason he was sent out on loan is because he earns about £70,000 p/w and QPR play in the Championship. Their finances are a mess so they needed to remove at least some of his wages from their bill, as well as getting a fee from Newcastle for the loan.

Not true. It's highly likely that even if QPR got promoted these guys would either be loaned out again or sold because QPR are massively in debt. They would probably look to go a more frugal route to achieve survival rather than repeat the mistakes of before.

Highly likely. As for Granero he probably could play for Cardiff, but Cardiff couldn't afford him. QPR DOUBLED his wages when he joined them so moving him on is very difficult.

Exactly. QPR board made a complete mess for themselves with blind transfee fees and huge wages..

[Eligius 121]

Not sure how you're getting gains? Unless we get a huge transfer for Torres, it's almost impossible to actually make a gain.

The gain would be the amount we would have to pay if he was still on the books....

10m unamortized value + 9m in wages -12m=7m for both 2014 and 2015.

If we sold him this upcoming summer we would have a loss of 13m as you mentioned and only a gain of 7m for the final contract year.

So, essentially, as you learn in basic accounting, everything balances out.

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

The gain would be the amount we would have to pay if he was still on the books....

10m unamortized value + 9m in wages -12m=7m for both 2014 and 2015.

So, essentially, as you learn in basic accounting, everything balances out.

What you fail to understand is that his transfer fee cannot be amortized if he's being sold. The ENTIRE unamortized transfer fee has to be recorded as a loss in the year he's sold. You can't sell him this year and record 10M loss and this year and then another 10M next year. Whenever he's sold, that's when the entire unamortized transfer fee has to be recorded as a loss.

I can understand what you're trying to say, that he's costing us 19M/yr and the new striker will cost 12m/yr. But it doesn't work that way in basic accounting. If he's being sold, then the entire unamortized transfer fee has to be recorded as a loss in that same year. We'll be better off financially if he's off the books in the future, but the year he's sold in, we'd be forced to record a loss from his sale.

[Eligius 121]

What you fail to understand is that his transfer fee cannot be amortized if he's being sold. The ENTIRE unamortized transfer fee has to be recorded as a loss in the year he's sold. You can't sell him this year and record 10M loss and this year and then another 10M next year. Whenever he's sold, that's when the entire unamortized transfer fee has to be recorded as a loss.

I can understand what you're trying to say, that he's costing us 19M/yr and the new striker will cost 12m/yr. But it doesn't work that way in basic accounting. If he's being sold, then the entire unamortized transfer fee has to be recorded as a loss in that same year. We'll be better off financially if he's off the books in the future, but the year he's sold in, we'd be forced to record a loss from his sale.

What do I fail to understand?

Umm, we already took the entire unamortized amount into consideration into the calculation. Which as you pointed out was 30m. Hence, 30m-10-9m+6+6= 20m loss

Also, I dont think you understand the 10m is the gain we would of paid for the unamoritzed amount had we kept Torres on a yearly basis + 9m in wages=19m

Subtract that from the proposed new striker which is 12m. Equals a net of 7m gain per year....

Also, I said to him basically, what your saying is that we should sell him in his final year of his contract since his unamortized value would be at it lowest.

The numbers would be like this.

2013: 20m loss

2014: 7m gain

2015: 7m gain

vs Keep Torres for another season

2014: 13m loss

2015: 7m gain.

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

What do I fail to understand?

Umm, we already took the entire unamortized amount into consideration into the calculation. Which as you pointed out was 30m. Hence, 30m-10-9m+6+6= 20m loss

Also, I dont think you understand the 10m is the gain we would of paid for the unamoritzed amount had we kept Torres on a yearly basis + 9m in wages=19m

Subtract that from the proposed new striker which is 12m. Equals a net of 7m gain per year....

Also, I said to him basically, what your saying is that we should sell him in his final year of his contract since his unamortized value would be at it lowest.

I don't understand what you mean here? You're comparing two alternatives, while I'm talking specifically from an accounting perspective.

I agree, we'd be better off without Torres and with a striker who costs less, that's obvious, not even worth arguing, that's simple arithmetic (19m/year vs 12m/year). But in accounting it doesn't work like that. What I'm saying is like you mentioned that we have to look at his entire unamortized value when calculating the loss in the year he's sold.