No. It was the way the tweet suggested. I'm not 100% sure, but I think sales can be added immediately to accounts as income, while transfer outlays can be amortised over the course of the incoming players contracts.
So doing it the way it was done looks better on the financial books I think, for both parties.
So if I recall Cancelo signed a 6 year deal when he signed, so that amortised over 6 years is 10m a year.
So we got 34m for Danilo, minus the 10m we spend that year for Cancelo, and it's a 24m profit on the books.
I think...