The people that ‘enforce’ FFP will suddenly get new gifted villas and holidays.
6 Likes
Watch us get penalised instead of the oil clubs 
5 Likes
It’s only £40m on their books. I’m not sure if that’s enough to push them over the edge when it comes to FFP.
Show your workings please.
1 Like
The payment is divided by the length of the contract that’s how clubs get around ffp
1 Like
I understand how it works (not length of contractor by the way, how they pay the money and how they amortise the money are not the same thing). I’m interested in how Jules got to his figure.
Not sure seems to me over the contract it would be something like 15mil for each of the seven years
Yea that’s amortisation. Not how they pay the money out. Anyway I’ll just wait for @Jules to show us how he got there.
1 Like
Will UEFA put us on a watchlist when we signed Zinchenko and Jesus lol
Exactly.
Yeah I’m actually interested to see the workings out as well just to help me understand it because it’s quite confusing
No. Can you provide details of how you got to your figure of 40m or not?
Wouldn’t it be the total cost of the transfer divided over the length of the contract?
And then take the annual figure and multiply it by 3 given (I think) FFP losses are taken into account over a 3 year period.
So maybe that’s roughly £35-45m on the books
It depends on what we are talking about. Which is why I’d like to see the details.
Saved me typing it out, thanks 
Exactly.
Boehly bought cheap and the debts were written off so that’s why he’s been splashing the cash.
There’s no other club I despise more than spurs but Chelsea are pretty close and their owners are on a par with spurs.
1 Like
Lol you can’t explain it that’s fine.
I did the same calculation that @SRCJJ did. If that’s wrong, then explain why without being a douche.
Like i said, it depends on what we are talking about.
The incoming UEFA rules we’ve seen quoted this morning are related to % of spend over income.
Chelsea are committed to 70m so far. We don’t know the breakdown. It could be three years, it could be 7 (much more likely to be 3 or 4). So they have a cost of 70m + wages, let’s say 5m conservatively. So let’s say 4 years 70/4=17.5 a season +5m wages for 22.5 or 67.5 over a three year period. Could be more, could be less.
On the accounting side they will write off the 70m/7 years (maybe 8 depending on how their accounting period runs) so 10m a year amortisation.
If and when the clauses get triggered the sums change.
Spreading the cost through amortisation is simply an accounting trick to make the profits look nice. If the info around about the new UEFA rules is accurate that isn’t relevant anymore.
Also, let’s not forget this is one transfer of many for this lot and they likely still have money owed all over the shop for pre Todd business.