Demba Ba

[Madmax 9,219]

I know but I was counting the wages there also. A better choice of word would then have been saving £5m (actually over £6m according to Jake Cohen there) but the point still stands.

Yeah, to the untrained eye of a casual fan that's selling at a loss but we've done well on this deal imo. His wages are were a real bother for a 3rd choice option.

[The Skipper 20,593]

Yeah, to the untrained eye of a casual fan that's selling at a loss but we've done well on this deal imo. His wages are were a real bother for a 3rd choice option.

Torres' wage (for his role) is even worse.

[Madmax 9,219]

Torres' wage (for his role) is even worse.

I'm past the point of even thinking about his output. It takes me a while to stop foaming at the mouth afterwards.

[Jype 6,398]

Torres' wage (for his role) is even worse.

Torres costs £18.5m a year for the club, considering wages and the amortised fee. Just let that sink in for a moment.

[Special Juan 27,512]

He served a purpose did Dembafoot, can't say his departure has reduced me to tears, time for Lukaku/another player to fill that void.

[Madmax 9,219]

Torres costs £18.5m a year for the club, considering wages and the amortised fee. Just let that sink in for a moment.

5th highest in Europe (excluding PSG players), I believe

[didierforever 7,349]

we dint "save" on BA's wages. he would have been loaned/sold anyways.

in FFP terms we just break even (make a slight profit of 750k).

probbaly the only "bad" business that our club has done in this window. however u look at it, 6mil euros is very low for a goal scorer like BA. all i can thik is that BA wanted to go to besiktas for some reason. sure thing is that we would not have been short on offers for him from PL clubs and we would have gotten quite a lot more.

[Tomo 21,733]

He won't be forgotten in English football, his name will be chanted by home fans in every stadium bar Anfield in England for years to come.

[Behemoth 266]

Thank you Demba. Good luck at Besiktas!

[Term-X 7,891]

It could come back to bite us if we sold him to another PL club, considering the great spell of form he had for Newcastle. It's worth selling him for less to avoid seeing him at the Bridge, would rather Liverpool had the likes of Lambert than Ba for example.

[Madmax 9,219]

we dint "save" on BA's wages.

Of course we did. You should read this :

How Selling Clubs Account for their Income

The other important amortisation issue is the accounting procedure when a player is sold. On this topic I defer to the Swiss Ramble who uses the ex-Manchester City player Robinho as an example:

“[H]e was bought for £32.5 million in September 2008 on a four-year contract, so annual amortisation was £8.1 million. He was sold after two years, so cumulative amortisation was £16.2 million, leaving a value of £16.3m in the books. Sale price to Milan is reported as £18 million, so City will report a profit on sale of £1.7 million in the 2010/11 accounts. Therefore, City will show an annual profit improvement of £18.1 million after this deal: £8.3 million lower wages + £8.1 million lower amortisation + £1.7 million profit on sale.”

This demonstrates how clubs write-off the transfer value of a player over the life-time of their contract and also illuminates that because Robinho was worth £16.3m two years into his four year deal, Manchester City actually made an accounting profit on his transfer of £1.7m. Fans would see the sale of a player for £18m bought two years previously for £32.5m as bad business. The club in their accounts will class it as a £18.1m profit improvement.

[didierforever 7,349]

Of course we did. You should read this :

http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/1/24/5335580/juan-mata-transfer-manchester-united-chelsea-finances

this one makes more sense. i mean why would the "profit" include the salary and the amortisation fee. i mean specially the latter. the profit by selling already takes into account the amortisation fee.

[edetarod 2,155]

thank you for stopping Liverpool winning the league

[Madmax 9,219]

http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/1/24/5335580/juan-mata-transfer-manchester-united-chelsea-finances

this one makes more sense. i mean why would the "profit" include the salary and the amortisation fee. i mean specially the latter. the profit by selling already takes into account the amortisation fee.

I don't understand what you are saying...

The little paragraph I quoted above explains how both - the wages as well as the transfer fee are accounted for by the selling club. It explains why we did indeed 'save' on Ba's wage hit.

[didierforever 7,349]

I don't understand what you are saying...

The little paragraph I quoted above explains how both - the wages as well as the transfer fee are accounted for by the selling club. It explains why we did indeed 'save' on Ba's wage hit and why our accounts will actually show a £6m profit for the next 2 years.

did u read the article of wagnh?

also, the ACTUAL profit we made is just 750k. i know what u r trying to say, and hence the "save" i used was meant to be the money we actually saved, not the FFP-wise money.

[Madmax 9,219]

did u read the article of wagnh?

also, the ACTUAL profit we made is just 750k. i know what u r trying to say, and hence the "save" i used was meant to be the money we actually saved, not the FFP-wise money.

Actually, the 750k profit *is* a FFP profit.

[didierforever 7,349]

Actually, the 750k profit *is* a FFP profit.

now even i am confused.

the articles from WAGNH says we made a certain profit on mata taking into account his amortized value and his salary that we paid for that particular year. which makes sense, since mata spent half a season here.

as for BA, he had 4mil of value left, and he is sold for 4.75. which makes his profit as 750k. that is BA's account for us this season. why would his wage be included in the profit?

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

now even i am confused.

the articles from WAGNH says we made a certain profit on mata taking into account his amortized value and his salary that we paid for that particular year. which makes sense, since mata spent half a season here.

as for BA, he had 4mil of value left, and he is sold for 4.75. which makes his profit as 750k. that is BA's account for us this season. why would his wage be included in the profit?

Wages is an expense. We reduced our expenses. That is not the same as profit. The profit is in fact 750k. But the lower wage bill makes a huge difference and has the same impact as profit in FFP terms because we can spend only as much as we make. So instead of being only able to spend 750k we can spend 750k + his salary which will still have a net impact of 0 in FFP terms.