Moises Caicedo | Chelsea agree £115M fee | signed for Chelsea

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sure. Good luck with that.

I was actually hoping they would wake up because I don’t know that I want Lavia.

What’s really funny is gonna be the look on peoples faces if we actually sell Kepa, Gallagher, and Chalobah and Chelsea shows a net profit from this window with how they have it structured.
You're not selling Kepa.
 
Dont think the FA can really veto that surely? As long as the deal is done paperwork wise Chelsea could parachute him in to the stadium if they wanted to.

Love this. Coupled with on-screen Whitney Houston singing " and I... will always love youu.. huu..., will always love youu..."
 
He's 100% getting wheeled out and paraded round SB tomorrow isn't he?

:lol: great bit of shithousery by Chelsea.
In a Chelsea branded one of these.
190505115720-05b-thai-king-coronation-0505-custom-54.jpg
 
Why do they keep offering such long term contracts? I’m seeing 2031 being quoted?
 
Transfer market is completely fecked, especially for Prem players. Caicedo is a good player with solid potential, but for 115mm pounds? Absolutely insane. Masterclass from Brighton in getting that much.
 
Why do they keep offering such long term contracts? I’m seeing 2031 being quoted?

Accounting magic, perhaps. Maybe it's an argument for players, huge guaranteed total wage package involved.
I reckon it's probably because they will do a lot of selling.
The group owning Chelsea already bought a French team and is looking to do the same elsewhere. I think the idea is maybe to loan aggressively so that every player is in the shop's window so to speak and doesn't depreciate.
 
Insane spending by Chelsea. Where's FFP?
Purchase prices are spread over the length of the contract. Money from selling players shows as a lump sum. Remember the inter Barca business. The long contracts help them out in the short term
 
Accounting magic, perhaps. Maybe it's an argument for players, huge guaranteed total wage package involved.
I reckon it's probably because they will do a lot of selling.
The group owning Chelsea already bought a French team and is looking to do the same elsewhere. I think the idea is maybe to loan aggressively so that every player is in the shop's window so to speak and doesn't depreciate.
The accounting can only be for five years from now on.
 
I'd probably take a Desmond right now.
Yeah it wouldn’t be a terrible result for us either. You’ll score though. We’ve been all over the place defensively during pre-season.
 
I gave you the reasons they wouldn't sell & he wouldn't' come.

As for "midfield point", what thread are we in?
Don't know why you are worked up, I was just asking politely about Osimhen since you talked about Kane. Anyway, carry on.
 
I’m a bit surprised that Chelsea have managed to continue the level of spending as last summer and still no one is really batting an eye lid.
 
I’m a bit surprised that Chelsea have managed to continue the level of spending as last summer and still no one is really batting an eye lid.
They sell well, and buy 2 million young players each year to sell them for profit.
 
The thing all about all these stupid transfer fees, apart from the impact it has on teams ability to sign players, is the impact on the clubs bottom line. If players cost twice as much, clubs aren't making as much money. Guess who that cost gets passed onto?
 
I thought they'd put a stop to these mega long contracts deals which are simply aimed at bypassing FFP?
 
I thought they'd put a stop to these mega long contracts deals which are simply aimed at bypassing FFP?

I think you can still offer them but for FFP purposes you can't spread the amortisation over 5 years.
That doesn't exclude some creative accounting for other purposes than FFP.
But I think the Boehly group might approach contractual control of players in a more US sports way.
 
For FFP, 5 years and over counts as 5 years. You can give someone a 30 year contract if you wanted to.
Whats the point then, surely thats just taking risk for the sake of it? Was it the only way to get the player signed up, or the hope is that wage inflation is so crazy that in four or five years you are benefitting from having them on much lower wages and if they wan't more they have to agree to a sale? Seems an odd strategy to me. I know the Caiceido deal does have some oddities in the background, so unless it's due to that I don't get why you would be continuing with such long contracts?
 
I wouldn't be surprised there's a lot of wonky details in the payment structure of those long contracts. Something like Barca deferred wages / back loaded wages that were mentioned about de Jong. Or some of the baseball contracts where players can sometimes get yearly payments for a decade or more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.