fbloke said:£50m limit will be the amortised value.
Otherwise it makes no sense for FFP calcs as we would, if the players sign 5 year deals, have £10m outlay for FFP.
Also, as UEFA have alrady allowed us to 'disallow' incentive payments for players in calcs then they could not stop us from saying to a club that we pay £5m year one and if he plays 1 minute of football in years 1 and 2 a final payment of £45m is paid in year 3.
tolmie's hairdoo said:Big Dave Watson said:tolmie's hairdoo said:My personal opinion is that him moving to Chelsea would be a great surprise.
The dots don't seem to join?
He supposedly has great affection for Arsenal, so to undo all that goodwill by moving to a main rival in the city, would be a ballsy move for someone like him.
There are plenty of examples down the years of players not giving a toss, Ashley Cole, springs to mind, but Arsenal only allowed Fabregas to leave because of his desire to go 'home'.
He can compete and get wedged at various clubs. If London is the crucial factor, then Arsenal are missing an open goal and City can do nothing, anyways.
For the record, and perhaps a little example of some journos over-egging it.
The reports state Fabregas is the replacement for Frank Lampard, in light of his announcement yesterday that he was leaving.
That can't be true, as Chelsea still offered Lampard terms to stay, and the timeline is out of whack.
Fabregas arrived back in London last weekend.
The timing could have been just right though? Chelsea talk to Fabregas and get agreement in principle, Chelsea then offer Lampard terms which he finds unacceptable and rejects, Lampard signs for NY, Chelsea look to conclude Fabregas deal. Just a thought.
Lampard has had those terms on the table for weeks.
The same claims are Chelsea laid on a private jet, which is simply not true. It was laid on by sponsors for an advert he was filming.
fbloke said:tolmie's hairdoo said:I'm no cynic said:There's talk of Richards going to Hull for £8m but I think Oldham get a chunk of that fee. Barry is out of contract so we get nothing, likewise with Lescott. And trying to find a buyer for Sinclair is wishful thinking. There may be a chance of a few million (but not enough) for Garcia if he wants a change, and there may be a loan fee for Rodwell but I can't see anything else in the offing unless we use Nastasic in a part exchange deal for Benatia. Selling Kolarov would be madness (in my opinion) and we would only be left with having to splash out again for his replacement. I don't think Cole would be a good signing for us. If he doesn't fit in for Chelsea anymore, then that's a warning in itself.
Oldham get 20 per cent on Richards.
We paid Oldham off for about £750k a couple of seasons ago.
tolmie's hairdoo said:NipHolmes said:tolmie's hairdoo said:Not really, bud.
Rodwell never plays, Milner hardly plays and Kolarov could be the key to getting Benatia for £10m less than Roma are holding out for.
Those three bring in £25m.
Fernando is already filling any void in midfield.
Kolarov and £15m would be enough for Benatia.
Which means we have only spent £27m of our £49m cap.
We'd still have around £30m to spend on Fabregas.
Sagna - free
Benatia - £15m plus Kolarov
Fernando - £12m
Fabregas - £30m
That puts us about £8m over the cap.
But that's before further sales of players such as Richards, Sinclair and maybe £2.5m we get for Barry if he joins Everton.
It would be tight, but a back-up goalkeeper and a left back (Ashley Cole on a free, perhaps?) would see us squeak?
We don't need much.
Cant'see us getting Cole, doesn't want to move to a rival premier league club, allegedly. Can see him going to MLS even though he is STILL the best LB in the league imo. Woudl have him at City in a heartbeat, 3 year deal, 2 years with option to trigger a third. English, defensively solid, good going forward although he does so less nowadays. But the fact is our left side is our weak point for three years now. Cole solves that.
Match his current Chelsea wages and I think you will find he would come running!!
I think he would be an incredible signing with a big-game mentality. Give him two years with an option for NYCFC.
We have freed-up millions on the wage bill with the departures of Barry and Lescott, so we will still keep the wages cap on an even keel.
fbloke said:tolmie's hairdoo said:I'm no cynic said:There's talk of Richards going to Hull for £8m but I think Oldham get a chunk of that fee. Barry is out of contract so we get nothing, likewise with Lescott. And trying to find a buyer for Sinclair is wishful thinking. There may be a chance of a few million (but not enough) for Garcia if he wants a change, and there may be a loan fee for Rodwell but I can't see anything else in the offing unless we use Nastasic in a part exchange deal for Benatia. Selling Kolarov would be madness (in my opinion) and we would only be left with having to splash out again for his replacement. I don't think Cole would be a good signing for us. If he doesn't fit in for Chelsea anymore, then that's a warning in itself.
Oldham get 20 per cent on Richards.
We paid Oldham off for about £750k a couple of seasons ago.
tolmie's hairdoo said:fbloke said:£50m limit will be the amortised value.
Otherwise it makes no sense for FFP calcs as we would, if the players sign 5 year deals, have £10m outlay for FFP.
Also, as UEFA have alrady allowed us to 'disallow' incentive payments for players in calcs then they could not stop us from saying to a club that we pay £5m year one and if he plays 1 minute of football in years 1 and 2 a final payment of £45m is paid in year 3.
This is what could happen.
We could pay a significant loan facility payment this season, and settle the balance next term, with it coming off the price tag.
Makes no difference, we get around the cap.
tolmie's hairdoo said:fbloke said:tolmie's hairdoo said:Oldham get 20 per cent on Richards.
We paid Oldham off for about £750k a couple of seasons ago.
Lucky Oldham!!!
jimbopm said:My personal opinion is that him moving to Chelsea would be a great surprise.
The dots don't seem to join?
He supposedly has great affection for Arsenal, so to undo all that goodwill by moving to a main rival in the city, would be a ballsy move for someone like him.
There are plenty of examples down the years of players not giving a toss, Ashley Cole, springs to mind, but Arsenal only allowed Fabregas to leave because of his desire to go 'home'.
He can compete and get wedged at various clubs. If London is the crucial factor, then Arsenal are missing an open goal and City can do nothing, anyways.
For the record, and perhaps a little example of some journos over-egging it.
The reports state Fabregas is the replacement for Frank Lampard, in light of his announcement yesterday that he was leaving.
That can't be true, as Chelsea still offered Lampard terms to stay, and the timeline is out of whack.
Fabregas arrived back in London last weekend.
Tolm, given City's recent history (to be exacerbated by Sagna too) i'd imagine there'd be plenty of Arsenal fans, maybe even a majority, who would prefer it if Fabregas signed for Chelsea above us?
Davs 19 said:fbloke said:tolmie's hairdoo said:Oldham get 20 per cent on Richards.
We paid Oldham off for about £750k a couple of seasons ago.
I thought we made an offer but they turned it down ? Could well be wrong though.....
NipHolmes said:Davs 19 said:fbloke said:We paid Oldham off for about £750k a couple of seasons ago.
I thought we made an offer but they turned it down ? Could well be wrong though.....
Pretty sure Oldham have NOT been paid. Sjk008/Ste the resident Oldham fan is always pining on about how Oldham need the cash and how he hopes he gets sold for 10m.