Why are you looking at it from a this year buys vs this years sales perspective. While you are right about the amortisation of buys vs full value of sales idea but what about the amortisation of previous year transfers. Plus like it has been explained the full value of sales only works for a couple of players like Mount & Gallagher but for all the people they signed it’s only what’s remaining on the books. I am unsure how this is sustainable without finding a Mount & Gallagher year after year.
I am not looking at it from a "one year perspective" at all. That is what I've been trying to clarify all along.
In 2023/24
Total profit already: 222 m (see post #1390 for details).
In 2022/23
Total buys: 611m, amortised over 5 years = 122m
Total sales: 68m
Total loss on FFP per year = 54m per year loss
In 2021/22
Total buys: 118m, amortised over 5 years = 24m per year
Total sales: 148m
Total gain on FFP = 124m one-time profit
Do you see where this is going? My one incorrect assumption is that I have assumed all sales were fully amortised. However, they need to be weighted relative to the number of "book-years" remaining, but that incorrect simplicity aside, I hope you see how cleverly Chelsea have beaten the FFP and their three-year cycle of accounting.
They could go on to buy another few players after Caicedo and Lavia and still be okay, FFP-wise. In two years time, all the purchases of 2021 will be taken off the books anyway. And they will keep selling academy players. No wonder they have uncountable young players.
