Patson Daka

[st albans fox]

51 minutes ago, jamfox said:

New manager , new tactics, new League

The guy was scoring for fun at a lower level before he came to us, he's also undeniably blessed with electric pace, I say give him a chance in the championship..

 

 

In which case we need to charge him up before  games ……

[LCFCJohn]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

We lose 15m off our positive ffp column if we sell via amortisation of his original purchase 

 

so we’d need to sell for a very decent amount to make it a worthwhile deal to do - in patson’s case we may be better off with a loan where the loan fee pretty much covers the £5m amortisation being written off this season.  Taking his wages off the books is the bonus 

 

 selling players within two years of buying them is rarely financially sensible - hence leeds loaning many of theirs out 

Not doubting what you’re saying but for those of us…less versed on football finances, can you explain this a bit further? I have never heard of this and just was under the impression that once a player is sold, any costs towards them would then stop (unless subsiding wages of course).

[sacreblueits442]

6 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

Not doubting what you’re saying but for those of us…less versed on football finances, can you explain this a bit further? I have never heard of this and just was under the impression that once a player is sold, any costs towards them would then stop (unless subsiding wages of course).

...once you sell the player, then you apply the monies received against the outstanding un-amortised amount and bring that down to zero!!!

The paradox is that on the balance sheet, the players' value shows as the initial transfer fee less the yearly amortized agreed amounts, which would then have a balance less than the original fee paid. The player's value may within that period have escalated, Fofana, Maguire, Maddison etc where their current value far exceeds the value on our books.

[ian__marshall]

17 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

We lose 15m off our positive ffp column if we sell via amortisation of his original purchase 

 

so we’d need to sell for a very decent amount to make it a worthwhile deal to do - in patson’s case we may be better off with a loan where the loan fee pretty much covers the £5m amortisation being written off this season.  Taking his wages off the books is the bonus 

 

 selling players within two years of buying them is rarely financially sensible - hence leeds loaning many of theirs out 

I presume that's based upon the buyer paying the full fee up front and not in installments over the period of his remaining contract with us. If its the latter would that not mean that the net cost of ownership leaves us with a smaller loss in each of the financial years spanning his contract? Also would it not effectively prove to be cost neutral when you factor in the removal of his salary from the wage bill? 

[Wymsey]

There's no better chance for him now to rediscover his form than now, especially with Vardy at the very latter stage of his career.

[Jon the Hat]

21 hours ago, ian__marshall said:

I presume that's based upon the buyer paying the full fee up front and not in installments over the period of his remaining contract with us. If its the latter would that not mean that the net cost of ownership leaves us with a smaller loss in each of the financial years spanning his contract? Also would it not effectively prove to be cost neutral when you factor in the removal of his salary from the wage bill? 

You’re confusing cash (ie when we pay the instalments) with asset value and amortisation which is essentially the purchase price / contract length.  23m over 5 years = 4.6m per year cost.  Sell after 2 years and his write off cost is 13.8m, so you need more than that to avoid a loss in the year.  

[ian__marshall]

52 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

You’re confusing cash (ie when we pay the instalments) with asset value and amortisation which is essentially the purchase price / contract length.  23m over 5 years = 4.6m per year cost.  Sell after 2 years and his write off cost is 13.8m, so you need more than that to avoid a loss in the year.  

My interpretation of St Albans post was that if the remaining amortised value for Daka is circa £15m spread over the next 3 year's, then even if we received the full £15m this season it creates a problem as whilst the balance sheet will look healthy this FY we'll still have circa £5m going out in FYs 24/25, and 25/26, hence why a loan might be more beneficial as the loan fee covers the majority of the amortised cost during each FY. Likewise if the buyer pays in 3 installments over the next 3 year's those holes in the balance sheet should be plugged (albeit if we received a fee of £10m, we'd effectively show a loss of circa £1.66m in each of those years). Of course if we shift his wages off the wage bill that is a saving in itself which should offset some of the projected future losses. 

 

I'm not accountant so might have completely misunderstood, but that was take on the situation. 

[Ric Flair]

1 hour ago, ian__marshall said:

My interpretation of St Albans post was that if the remaining amortised value for Daka is circa £15m spread over the next 3 year's, then even if we received the full £15m this season it creates a problem as whilst the balance sheet will look healthy this FY we'll still have circa £5m going out in FYs 24/25, and 25/26, hence why a loan might be more beneficial as the loan fee covers the majority of the amortised cost during each FY. Likewise if the buyer pays in 3 installments over the next 3 year's those holes in the balance sheet should be plugged (albeit if we received a fee of £10m, we'd effectively show a loss of circa £1.66m in each of those years). Of course if we shift his wages off the wage bill that is a saving in itself which should offset some of the projected future losses. 

 

I'm not accountant so might have completely misunderstood, but that was take on the situation. 

Certainly very different to the way companies I've worked for would account for assets but I think that's pretty much the gist of it.

 

Although I always thought whatever the selling price, if there's still an amount to amortise on the balance sheet is netted off against it and either the gain or loss is then booked in year. Otherwise you are still holding assets on the balance sheet you no longer own in any way or form. 

[CUJimmy]

5 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Certainly very different to the way companies I've worked for would account for assets but I think that's pretty much the gist of it.

 

Although I always thought whatever the selling price, if there's still an amount to amortise on the balance sheet is netted off against it and either the gain or loss is then booked in year. Otherwise you are still holding assets on the balance sheet you no longer own in any way or form. 

I guess the point is that due to Bosman players have zero value at the end of their contract.  So a player signed for £25m on a 5 year contract has his value reduced by £5m a year which is an ffp cost.  Derby tried to argue that after 4 years the player would still have a value, say £20m so only incurred an annual cost for ffp purposes of just over a million.  The FA didn’t buy this one which contributed to their problems a few years ago.

 

 This is my understanding based on what my daughter told me - she was studying football business at the time and Derby was one of the case studies they looked at.

[Bptiger]

He has done nothing while he’s been here , the bloke has no ball control, just can’t believe we signed him 

[Simoken]

13 hours ago, Wymsey said:

There's no better chance for him now to rediscover his form than now, especially with Vardy at the very latter stage of his career.

rediscover? he never discovered it for LCFC

[An Sionnach]

5 minutes ago, Bptiger said:

He has done nothing while he’s been here , the bloke has no ball control, just can’t believe we signed him 

According to some , who shall be nameless , he was going to be one of the PL's leading strikers. Patson is not bad by any means but I doubt whether he is going to get the goals we need. I hope to be pleasantly surprised mind you.

[justfoxes]

3 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

According to some , who shall be nameless , he was going to be one of the PL's leading strikers. Patson is not bad by any means but I doubt whether he is going to get the goals we need. I hope to be pleasantly surprised mind you.

In this league can see him only improve not just his goal to game ratio but under the impact of Maresca can also see him improve his ball control & improve his confidence which was sapped out of him and others by Brendan Bodgers, you can see already on videos how the team spirit has greatly improved under Maresca the lads actually look like they’re enjoying themselves now rather than just going through the motions and I really hope you’re pleasantly surprised with Daka as he will definitely be a major improvement as if we let this lad go he will be the player we all wished we’d have kept !

[ian__marshall]

42 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Certainly very different to the way companies I've worked for would account for assets but I think that's pretty much the gist of it.

 

Although I always thought whatever the selling price, if there's still an amount to amortise on the balance sheet is netted off against it and either the gain or loss is then booked in year. Otherwise you are still holding assets on the balance sheet you no longer own in any way or form. 

Would certainly make sense. I think I misunderstood Albans post. I guess they were suggesting that by loaning for a year we effectively reduce the net loss as the loan fee in theory covers the amortisation for 1 year, so the remaining 2 year amortisation value would be £10m. Assuming we received a fee in a year of £8m with a book value of £10m that's a loss of £2m versus accepting £10m now with a book value of £15m. However, presumably that only benefits the club if a) a club is willing to pay a £5m loan fee to cover the amortisation cost in this year's accounts, and b) the loaning club take on his full wage for the year otherwise you're still having to recognise a loss this year. 

Edited 29 July 2023 by ian__marshall

[Nick]

2 hours ago, Bptiger said:

He has done nothing while he’s been here , the bloke has no ball control, just can’t believe we signed him 

Have a word @Finnegan he’s clearly not seen the stats.

[Ric Flair]

Roma have agreed a deal with West Ham for Scamacca.

[Safestandingfox]

45 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Roma have agreed a deal with West Ham for Scamacca.

Can see him doing very well there, believe I read he was playing injured last season as well

[Claridge]

On 28/07/2023 at 04:33, jamfox said:

New manager , new tactics, new League

The guy was scoring for fun at a lower level before he came to us, he's also undeniably blessed with electric pace, I say give him a chance in the championship..

 

 

He doesn’t have electric pace at all. Quickish, but poor anticipation makes him seem slower

[Tommy Fresh]

5 minutes ago, Claridge said:

He doesn’t have electric pace at all. Quickish, but poor anticipation makes him seem slower

Regardless of the level of the league you don't score as many as he did in Austria without having half decent anticipation.

[Lambert09]

his overall ball control and hold up play is lacking but I do think there’s a player in there. 

 

I think he might be in a similar rut as Nacho was when brendan arrived, it took a bit of success on the pitch before he could start to thrive.

 

He’s simply a poacher and there’s room for that but without a second striker he’s always going to look a little shakey. 

 

I find it utterly bizarre we’ve seen him out wide in recent times, that’s pub team levels of square peg in a round hole. 

[Haywood_6]

I've lost faith in Daka. Sell him if we can. Signing him just hasn't worked out. Had one good game against Spartak Moscow and that's about it. Has far more weaknesses than he does strengths. He can't come deep, can't receive the ball in tight situations, he can't link the play, he's not very strong or physical, not particuarly good in the air either. He's half decent at running in behind and poaching the occasional goal.. but he doesn't do it often enough. Plus the fact he's not going to get space in behind in the Championship either because most of the teams will sit back and put 11 men behind the ball against us.

[Royston.]

I do not rate Daka but he might come good in the championship 

[FrankieADZ]

half the stuff in here righting off Daka is just about the same stuff that Kel got a year or two back tbf

[whoareyaaa]

Keep and switch him with Vardy as Vardy can't play every game

[Lesta2014]

Could be our Matty fryatt of 08/09