Welcome Joao Cancelo

Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by SebastianBlue, 7 Aug 2019.

  1. SebastianBlue

    SebastianBlue

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    30,626
    Location:
    Still at Maine Road in my mind.
    What you are saying makes sense, but only if the Cancelo and Danilo deals where not related, which they were. One does not happen without the other.

    Meaning it is perfectly fair and proper to account for them on a net basis (a combined transaction).
     
  2. ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue

    Joined:
    10 Jan 2009
    Messages:
    9,314
    Still no. Sorry. You didn’t study maths at Uni, did you?! ;-)
     
    Cozmo Bozo likes this.
  3. City Rich

    City Rich

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2009
    Messages:
    56
    You treat them separately:

    Going back to previous quote:

    Taking Danilo’s book value into account

    (27m amortised over 2 years of a 5 year contract).

    His book value was about £17m.

    We’ve sold him for 34 so made about 17m on him.

    Cancelo’s fee is 60m so that’s 12m a year amortisation.

    This means this year we’ll make a net 5m in our p&l 17m profit on the sale of Danilo less the 12m amortisation on Cancelo.

    For years 2-5 of cancelo’s contract we’ll see a 12m hit to our p&l.
     
    hello, waspish, KS55 and 4 others like this.

    ADVERTISEMENT

  4. Cozmo Bozo

    Cozmo Bozo

    Joined:
    25 Apr 2009
    Messages:
    59
    Uni?!? More like elementary school.

    If you account a €37m profit against the sale of Danilo, then the acquisition of Cancelo is a €65m expense, as outlined in the public statement by Juventus. Only the difference is €28m, not the fee for Cancelo.

    Our accountants might be good, but they're not magicians.
     
  5. WallyA

    WallyA

    Joined:
    22 Dec 2016
    Messages:
    1,863
    If we play 3 atb and Walker plays RCB and Cancelo as RWB, then I think that kind of suits the 2 academy fullbacks.

    Alpha I think is a more defensive fullback (can cover Walker in cups and such) and Frimpong is an ultra attacking fullback (can cover Cancelo).
     
  6. ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue

    Joined:
    10 Jan 2009
    Messages:
    9,314
    Juventus
    Revenues £60M (Sale of Cancelo)
    Expenses £37M (Purchase of Danilo)

    City
    Revenues £37M (Sale of Danilo)
    Expenses £60M (Purchase of Cancelo)

    Q1) How much did Cancelo cost City?

    Q2) What was the net cost of the two transactions to City?

    Q3) Which team is ruining football?

    I’m answering Q1, you are focused on Q2, and the fans (and certain executives) of the other teams in Europe are focused on Q3!!!
     
    wagonman likes this.
  7. Alan Harper's Tash

    Alan Harper's Tash

    Joined:
    12 Dec 2010
    Messages:
    3,036
    We've done a player exchange plus cash. Juventus have submitted how it was broken down to their shareholders.

    The fee is "inflated" to help them with their FFP issues.

    Ultimately, we've spent £26m plus Danilo on Cancelo. Danilo's worth has been "inflated" for Juve to put it on their books as €65m.

    It doesn't matter to City how much Danilo was worth. We spent £26m and offset a player we didn't have room in our squad for, to buy Cancelo.
     
    SebastianBlue likes this.
  8. Dribble

    Dribble

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    6,386
    Location:
    Somewhere Over The Rainbow....
    To be fair, the details of the deal were first reported on Sky immediately after the announcement he'd signed. Sky & the BBC must be getting briefed from the same source.
     
  9. ChicagoBlue

    ChicagoBlue

    Joined:
    10 Jan 2009
    Messages:
    9,314
    OK, let’s finish this once and for all.

    How much did your last car cost?
    How much was your trade-in worth?

    OK, now, how much was the invoice for the last car you bought?
    What was your net cost?

    We can do this all day, but Cancelo cost £60M and our books will reflect that when we amortize him for FFP, just as Juve will add the sale of Cancelo and the amortization of Danilo in Juve’s books.

    Beyond this, I can’t help you. Be well.
     
  10. SebastianBlue

    SebastianBlue

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    30,626
    Location:
    Still at Maine Road in my mind.
    I did, actually, double first in economics and statistics (with some data analytics mixed in, which is my current profession). ;-)

    We’re talking about two different things: accounting for purposes of intrinsic value (public; my and @Stoned Rose statements) and the book value (private; what you and I have expounded on previously).

    As I said before, for intrinsic value, it is perfectly fair and proper to account on a net basis. We aren’t keeping account for either club, or answering a case of FFP compliance to UEFA, so there’s no reason for either of us to attempt to parse the exact book figures for a transaction we have no detailed knowledge of. We couldn’t if want to do so.

    By the way, amortisation of assets, such as cars, can be factored in for purposes of holdings, so I am not quite sure why you are using that as an example in your post below.

    Are you mistaking me for someone else, as you have quoted my same post twice?
     
    Last edited: 8 Aug 2019

Share This Page