Chuba Akpom

[TeaCider]

The dream before the end of the season is to see him sat at a table, with a big grin, pen in hand.

"Chuba Akpom signs new contract".

 

[SuperStu]

It’s a real predicament because we can’t afford to lose him for nothing and we can’t afford to not go for it next season.

Can't we? How much did we sign him for? His book value can't be all that high.

If we could afford Assombalonga and Fletcher leaving for nothing after the dosh spent on them I don't really see why we couldn't have another year of Chuba hopefully scoring 20+, and then shaking hands at the end of it.

Maybe he'd even fire us to promotion and then be happy to renew at that point.

I don't really see why we'd accept anything less than a completely silly offer. A £30-40m type of offer from some desperate bottom half prem team.

 

[BoroMart]

Can't we? How much did we sign him for? His book value can't be all that high.

If we could afford Assombalonga and Fletcher leaving for nothing after the dosh spent on them I don't really see why we couldn't have another year of Chuba hopefully scoring 20+, and then shaking hands at the end of it.

Maybe he'd even fire us to promotion and then be happy to renew at that point.

I don't really see why we'd accept anything less than a completely silly offer. A £30-40m type of offer from some desperate bottom half prem team.

We would have sold britt or fletcher in a heart beat, but there were no takers.

We can ‘afford’ but we need to bridge the quality gap to those relegated teams and that means making the most of ffp. If we sold him for 10m we could buy 4x 10mill players and stay within ffp that first year. We need further investment to bridge the gap and we need to show Carrick that we will give him what he needs.

Keeping him and failing to go up, with him leaving for free would be catastrophic

 

[SuperStu]

We would have sold britt or fletcher in a heart beat, but there were no takers.

Can't argue with that.

If we sold him for 10m we could buy 4x 10mill players and stay within ffp that first year.

Do we have 4x 10m to spend? Would players at that price actually make much of a difference? No guarantees is there. As someone else said earlier in the thread what if you pick up 4 like Saville, Flint, etc.

 

[indeedido]

Its a massive 'IF' of course, but should we get promoted how do we feel Akpom and Gyokeres would fair together up front?

Spot on Gord, if we go up then sign Gyokeres and keep Akpom then there are the goals and ability to keep us up right there.
Hugely realistic and real sense.

 

[SuperStu]

Spot on Gord, if we go up then sign Gyokeres and keep Akpom then there are the goals and ability to keep us up right there.
Hugely realistic and real sense.

I know others will scoff but I'd also love us to get Adama Traore back to compete with Forss for the right wing role

 

[BoroMart]

Can't argue with that.



Do we have 4x 10m to spend? Would players at that price actually make much of a difference? No guarantees is there. As someone else said earlier in the thread what if you pick up 4 like Saville, Flint, etc.

Of course there are no guarantees, other than failing to invest will see you slip downwards.

When you sell players the whole fee is immediately on ffp. When you sign a player for 10m that fee appears across the lifetime of a contract.

So selling Akpom for 10m would allow us from ffp to sign 4 players for 10m each on a four year contract, and stay within ffp. Of course you need to factor wages in too, but it’s broadly correct. Of course, if you don’t go up you might need to sell in year 2 to stay within ffp.

We were reported to try and spend about 10m on that cf in the summer and again on archer in January. So we are already about 10m within ffp selling Akpom would give us huge ffp headroom.

There’s two ways to play ffp, push to the boundary every year or do an invest-and-save cycle. We seem to do the later. The investment in britt etc will finally be off our ffp in next year calculation so we invest big again. I’m excited for it

 

[Redwurzel]

If Gyorkeres is certain to be bought by a Premier League Club, why didn't they last summer or January? Gyorkeres was fav to be top Championship striker this season unlike Chuba. Gyorkeres is very good but he was last Summer.

 

[DonTheKing]

Yes, it'll be difficult for the club to say no to 10mill for him. On a positive, we will be in a superb position from FFP as we already had 10m wiggle room this year, it'll be 20mill for a rebuild.

10 mill? You'd want at least 30 for him surely. The money spaffed on ***** these days.

 

[BoroMart]

If Gyorkeres is certain to be bought by a Premier League Club, why didn't they last summer or January? Gyorkeres was fav to be top Championship striker this season unlike Chuba. Gyorkeres is very good but he was last Summer.

Did gyokeres recently sign a contract extension at cov?

 

[SuperStu]

So selling Akpom for 10m would allow us from ffp to sign 4 players for 10m each on a four year contract, and stay within ffp.

Doesn't that only work if we know for sure we can sell another player for 10m in each of those seasons?

We were reported to try and spend about 10m on that cf in the summer and again on archer in January. So we are already about 10m within ffp selling Akpom would give us huge ffp headroom.

That just demonstrates the problem though doesn't it. Even with £10m to spend its tough to get deals done.

If we think Chuba can get us two goes at the playoffs (this season and next) then that must be worth £10m.

 

[BoroMart]

Doesn't that only work if we know for sure we can sell another player for 10m in each of those seasons?



That just demonstrates the problem though doesn't it. Even with £10m to spend its tough to get deals done.

If we think Chuba can get us two goes at the playoffs (this season and next) then that must be worth £10m.

Yes,if you spent that money you’d then likely need to sell one a season, but it’s more complicated as players drop off the ffp window. It’s complex to budget. Like I said you can either stay to a safe budget or you do a 4 year heavy invest cycle then three years downsizing if it fails. Gibson tends to do the cyclical thing.

Agreed getting those deals over the line can be tough. I’d suspect after the last 5 months of Carrick and his contacts in the game, we might have a more successful time in the market. Layers want to play attacking and successful football and improve as players. It’s tick, tick, tick for Carrick so far on that.

I’m certainly not against keeping Chuba, but it is a gamble, great if it pays off

 

[Kowalski]

Of course there are no guarantees, other than failing to invest will see you slip downwards.

When you sell players the whole fee is immediately on ffp. When you sign a player for 10m that fee appears across the lifetime of a contract.

So selling Akpom for 10m would allow us from ffp to sign 4 players for 10m each on a four year contract, and stay within ffp. Of course you need to factor wages in too, but it’s broadly correct. Of course, if you don’t go up you might need to sell in year 2 to stay within ffp.

We were reported to try and spend about 10m on that cf in the summer and again on archer in January. So we are already about 10m within ffp selling Akpom would give us huge ffp headroom.

There’s two ways to play ffp, push to the boundary every year or do an invest-and-save cycle. We seem to do the later. The investment in britt etc will finally be off our ffp in next year calculation so we invest big again. I’m excited for it

The write off on Britt's value will have fully been accounted for when it happened. Indeedio will be better at explaining it

 

[BoroMart]

The write off on Britt's value will have fully been accounted for when it happened. Indeedio will be better at explaining it

Britt was on a 4 year contract. From an ffp perspective his transfer fee was amortised across the length of the contract, seasons 2017/18 through 20/21. The ffp calc for each of those years will include 3.75m transfer fee and his wages, approx 2m per year.

So year 20/21 included approx 5.75m of Britt Assombalonga costs.

Ffp is a three year calculation. So at the end of this season our ffp calculation will use our submissions for year 22/23, 21/22 AND 20/21 thus it still includes 5.75m of Britt costs for year 20/21.

This is the however the final year where the failure of the monk era hurts our ffp, at long last the shackles of Britt (and fletcher, circa 2.75m) will finally be off the ffp calculations and next season we start with a clean slate from that monk era and likely more ffp headroom for
Investment.

Maybe we can get archer permanent to play alongside Chuba and watch them tear it up.

 

[Kowalski]

Britt was on a 4 year contract. From an ffp perspective his transfer fee was amortised across the length of the contract, seasons 2017/18 through 20/21. The ffp calc for each of those years will include 3.75m transfer fee and his wages, approx 2m per year.

So year 20/21 included approx 5.75m of Britt Assombalonga costs.

Ffp is a three year calculation. So at the end of this season our ffp calculation will use our submissions for year 22/23, 21/22 AND 20/21 thus it still includes 5.75m of Britt costs for year 20/21.

This is the however the final year where the failure of the monk era hurts our ffp, at long last the shackles of Britt (and fletcher, circa 2.75m) will finally be off the ffp calculations and next season we start with a clean slate from that monk era and likely more ffp headroom for
Investment.

Maybe we can get archer permanent to play alongside Chuba and watch them tear it up.

Thanks for explaining, we should be fairly comfortable with FFP given the last couple of years trading.

On Cubba, I hope we can tie him down to a new contract if possible.

 

[BoroMart]

Thanks for explaining, we should be fairly comfortable with FFP given the last couple of years trading.

On Cubba, I hope we can tie him down to a new contract if possible.

I’d like to see Chuba offered a year extension with a good promotion bonus and a promise to sell next summer if we don’t go up, like we agreed with Tav. This is the first time in his career he’s really felt wanted, so maybe he’ll be up for that

 

[indeedido]

BoroMart's principles are right.
Covid however changed the calculations for 2020, 2021 and 2022.
The FFP is indeed a 3 year rolling period.
But this 2022-23 season's 3 year sum will be Adjusted Earnings Before Tax for 2022-23 + 2021-22 + (2020-21+ 2019-20)/2,
OR (2022-23 + 2021-22 + 2020-21 + 2019-20)/4.
This is taken direct from the EFL FFP rules.

Assombolonga was £15m on a 4 year contract, amortised across 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21, at £3.75m per season (plus wages).
Sadly then the great gallah IS still a consideration in this season's FFP calculation!
Gibson had us FFP compliant in 19-20, 20-21, 21-22 despite the huge losses. 22-23 will see us in very good light given the profit from players sales that will boost 22-23 Adjusted Earnings Before Tax.
Season 23-24 FFP measure will be the sum of 23-24, 22-23 and 21-22 and will not be a remote FFP problem.

The Club accounts contain Profit Before Tax, which is just the base to get to Adjusted Earnings Before Tax used for FFP calculations.
All academy spend, Community spend, Womens football spend are allowances added back to PBT. Players wages for those U21 before Jan 1st of the season are also allowances added back unless they have played 10 league matches, or are loan players.
Depreciation on Tangible Assets and Amortisation of Non Player Intangible Assets are also allowances added back.
Covid losses (Max £5m 19-20, £5m 20-21, £2.5m 21-22), are also allowances if detailed.
Profit on revalued Fixed Assets (realised through disposal or not) are also allowances to get to the final Adjusted Earnings figures.

The max allowable loss for a club that has been in the Championship for 3 years is £39m over that 3 year calculation, provided the owners either fund this through equity injection of £24m, OR provide funds (like Group Undertakings) that they COMMIT to turn to equity if required.
Any Club can lose an aggregate £15m across those 3 seasons without any such owner guarantee. By my rough calculations I believe Gibson has MFC FFP compliant in 3 years to 2022, within that £15m figure.

The Group Undertakings that Gibson O'Neill provide MFC, enable it to continue as a Going Concern because they shore up the real losses that MFC make. They are not needed in order to be FFP compliant, because clubs are permitted to lose money ongoing. But those Undertakings are vital for the Club to continue trading/playing. No undertakings, no MFC.

The permitted losses in the PL are much bigger £35m per season rather than £13m, but the principles are the same.
A promoted/relegated team adopts the allowances for the years they spent in each league for the 3 year calculation.

 

[Bruce]

By my rough calculations I believe Gibson has MFC FFP compliant in 3 years to 2022, within that £15m figure.

Although the club will never be self-sufficient while in the Championship, it seems clear that Gibson has been working to get us in a state where the losses are relatively sustainable until such time as he is confident enough to finance a promotion push. He is also, presumably, setting us up to be able to withstand a promotion - relegation - promotion cycle if needed.

Talk about selling Akpom "freeing up" 4 times the amount we sell him for is missing the point. Gibson is not going to sanction spending £40m if we're not promoted by selling Akpom for £10m. FFP is not a magic money multiplier, it's simply a way of accounting for how much a club is allowed to lose each year without being sanctioned.

The big plus for us right now is that we don't need to sell Akpom. If, for argument's sake, he doesn't sign a new contract and leaves for nothing at the end of 23-24 then the cost to us is simply his wages and not receiving a fee. If he scores another 30 goals and gets us promoted, that is worth a lot more than any fee he might have bought in.

I suspect that we may look to generate some income by selling Jones and couple of the fringe players but at this point we don't actually need to.

 

[indeedido]

Although the club will never be self-sufficient while in the Championship, it seems clear that Gibson has been working to get us in a state where the losses are relatively sustainable until such time as he is confident enough to finance a promotion push. He is also, presumably, setting us up to be able to withstand a promotion - relegation - promotion cycle if needed.

Talk about selling Akpom "freeing up" 4 times the amount we sell him for is missing the point. Gibson is not going to sanction spending £40m if we're not promoted by selling Akpom for £10m. FFP is not a magic money multiplier, it's simply a way of accounting for how much a club is allowed to lose each year without being sanctioned.

The big plus for us right now is that we don't need to sell Akpom. If, for argument's sake, he doesn't sign a new contract and leaves for nothing at the end of 23-24 then the cost to us is simply his wages and not receiving a fee. If he scores another 30 goals and gets us promoted, that is worth a lot more than any fee he might have bought in.

I suspect that we may look to generate some income by selling Jones and couple of the fringe players but at this point we don't actually need to.

Mart is right in that a £10m sale of a player with no book value (as with Akpom now) covers the amortisation of 4 x £10m new signings on 4 year contracts now exc wages.
Buy well and those signings should help us sail this league. If not then you have another round of amortisation to cover, or sell to offset remaining amortisation.
Pure spending can be dangerous, but investing wisely can be affordable, transformational and highly profitable.
It is always a balance of spending and investment; circumstances and risk attitude determine where you settle.
I’d offer Akpom a new deal because I believe his sale fee with a year left won’t be enough to replace him, or provide the team with enough boost.
Do you sign Archer, Ramsey, or other loans and have high expenditure pursuing promotion/ staying up, or do you invest in players who will do the same job, get better and become more valuable assets?
Balance between loan fees and wages with no asset value, versus amortisation and wages but potential profit on player sales.
It still comes down to picking the right players at the right time for the right package of fees and wages.
Gyokeres for £15m last summer would have been part of my choice. Right player, right price, right time and absolutely within this years FFP.

 

[Kowalski]

BoroMart's principles are right.
Covid however changed the calculations for 2020, 2021 and 2022.
The FFP is indeed a 3 year rolling period.
But this 2022-23 season's 3 year sum will be Adjusted Earnings Before Tax for 2022-23 + 2021-22 + (2020-21+ 2019-20)/2,
OR (2022-23 + 2021-22 + 2020-21 + 2019-20)/4.
This is taken direct from the EFL FFP rules.

Assombolonga was £15m on a 4 year contract, amortised across 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21, at £3.75m per season (plus wages).
Sadly then the great gallah IS still a consideration in this season's FFP calculation!
Gibson had us FFP compliant in 19-20, 20-21, 21-22 despite the huge losses. 22-23 will see us in very good light given the profit from players sales that will boost 22-23 Adjusted Earnings Before Tax.
Season 23-24 FFP measure will be the sum of 23-24, 22-23 and 21-22 and will not be a remote FFP problem.

The Club accounts contain Profit Before Tax, which is just the base to get to Adjusted Earnings Before Tax used for FFP calculations.
All academy spend, Community spend, Womens football spend are allowances added back to PBT. Players wages for those U21 before Jan 1st of the season are also allowances added back unless they have played 10 league matches, or are loan players.
Depreciation on Tangible Assets and Amortisation of Non Player Intangible Assets are also allowances added back.
Covid losses (Max £5m 19-20, £5m 20-21, £2.5m 21-22), are also allowances if detailed.
Profit on revalued Fixed Assets (realised through disposal or not) are also allowances to get to the final Adjusted Earnings figures.

The max allowable loss for a club that has been in the Championship for 3 years is £39m over that 3 year calculation, provided the owners either fund this through equity injection of £24m, OR provide funds (like Group Undertakings) that they COMMIT to turn to equity if required.
Any Club can lose an aggregate £15m across those 3 seasons without any such owner guarantee. By my rough calculations I believe Gibson has MFC FFP compliant in 3 years to 2022, within that £15m figure.

The Group Undertakings that Gibson O'Neill provide MFC, enable it to continue as a Going Concern because they shore up the real losses that MFC make. They are not needed in order to be FFP compliant, because clubs are permitted to lose money ongoing. But those Undertakings are vital for the Club to continue trading/playing. No undertakings, no MFC.

The permitted losses in the PL are much bigger £35m per season rather than £13m, but the principles are the same.
A promoted/relegated team adopts the allowances for the years they spent in each league for the 3 year calculation.

Thanks indeedido. With academy spend being outside FFP it shows the importance a decent academy.