[Football] Chelsea - Spending well beyond FFP limits or astute purchases maxing out within FFP?

[Mellotron]

 

[Beanstalk]

Pochettino must have been the worst option Chelsea could've hired right? Post the first few years at Spurs, he failed to really develop any top quality players, relying on the gems he unearthed at the start, and is notoriously bad in the transfer market - quick look at some of his biggest buys at Spurs: Ndombele, Davison Sanchez, Ryan Sessegnon and Vincent Jansen.

You look at some of the managers getting the most out of what they have across Europe currently (RDZ, Farioli, Michel, Amorim, etc.) and the only conclusion you can come to is that Poch was a) the wrong choice for the project, and b) a really boring obvious choice for a "big" struggling side.

 

[jessiejames]

Quite..is that not surely a key requirement of any coach/manager..getting the best out of your players? If not, you’re just a shopper.

Over rated manager.

 

[nwgull]

Chelsea aren't doing anything wrong.

The EPL is yet to sign up to the 5 year depreciation.
Chelsea aren't in any UEFA tournament so there rules don't take precedent.

In FFP terms Caicedo is costing Chelsea £14.5m a year.

Chelsea made £75m 'FFP profit' on Mount and other (name escapes me) double-barrelled surname fella alone.

Havertz was on the books as £20m and sold for £61m, so there's a further £40m 'FFP Profit' there.

You can do the same with all their signings.

It may well be a bit whiffy and when UEFA come into play they'll have to juggle a little, but that juggling will consist of 'sell academy and get a shirt sponsor'.

If it were just Caicedo and his extra amortisation, not to mention wages, that were the case I could understand how they might be within limits. However, the last set of reported accounts (for 21/22) show a loss of £121m, and that's with Chelsea finishing 3rd in the PL and also with a £123m profit on player sales included.

In 22-23 they spent 600m on players over the 2 transfer windows, so even with similar contract lengths that still adds £100m to the loss through contract amortisation, and presumably adds a significant number to the wage bill. They will have had a similar Champions League income but a signficantly reduced PL income after finishing 9 places lower. I genuinely can't see how they'll meet FFP limits for 22-23, nevermind the current season with Caicedo, Lavia, Palmer etc. added to the costs and with no Champions League money resulting in another 40-50m drop in income.

Sorry for such a late reply to your post!

 

[Papa Lazarou]

 

[ozzygull]

I found this article on the BBC heart warming

Chelsea stats show they've had an awful 2023 in the Premier League

BBC Sport looks at Chelsea's 2023 statistics after a horror year for the Blues in the Premier League.

www.bbc.co.uk

Especially this graph

 

[Springal]

Still beat us twice

 

[bhafc99]

Mauricio Pochettino eyes top striker as Chelsea look to transfer market again​

"Chelsea brought in 14 players last summer, offset by 15 first-team players leaving permanently or on loan. But they have continued to struggle for goals and will consider buying a top striker, with Brentford’s Ivan Toney and Napoli’s Victor Osimhen high on their wishlist. Chelsea have also been scouting the Sporting Lisbon striker Viktor Gyökeres."

Mauricio Pochettino eyes top striker as Chelsea look to transfer market again

Chelsea squad may need to be trimmed to accommodate new signings in January, while Mauricio Pochettino’s position remains secure despite his team’s listless form

www.theguardian.com

 

[Eeyore]

Mauricio Pochettino eyes top striker as Chelsea look to transfer market again​

"Chelsea brought in 14 players last summer, offset by 15 first-team players leaving permanently or on loan. But they have continued to struggle for goals and will consider buying a top striker, with Brentford’s Ivan Toney and Napoli’s Victor Osimhen high on their wishlist. Chelsea have also been scouting the Sporting Lisbon striker Viktor Gyökeres."

Mauricio Pochettino eyes top striker as Chelsea look to transfer market again

Chelsea squad may need to be trimmed to accommodate new signings in January, while Mauricio Pochettino’s position remains secure despite his team’s listless form

www.theguardian.com

I highly doubt that.

Actually, he's ex-Brighton.

Plausible.

 

[Stat Brother]

If it were just Caicedo and his extra amortisation, not to mention wages, that were the case I could understand how they might be within limits. However, the last set of reported accounts (for 21/22) show a loss of £121m, and that's with Chelsea finishing 3rd in the PL and also with a £123m profit on player sales included.

In 22-23 they spent 600m on players over the 2 transfer windows, so even with similar contract lengths that still adds £100m to the loss through contract amortisation, and presumably adds a significant number to the wage bill. They will have had a similar Champions League income but a signficantly reduced PL income after finishing 9 places lower. I genuinely can't see how they'll meet FFP limits for 22-23, nevermind the current season with Caicedo, Lavia, Palmer etc. added to the costs and with no Champions League money resulting in another 40-50m drop in income.

Sorry for such a late reply to your post!

But selling Connor Gallagher for 100% instant profit and all their troubles fade away...



...for now!!!

 

[nwgull]

But selling Connor Gallagher for 100% instant profit and all their troubles fade away...



...for now!!!

Would that be enough? As per my previous post, they made a 121m loss in 21-22, and that included 123m profit from player sales.

They’re allowed a 105m loss over a 3 year period. I know that the FFP loss discounts certain stuff like infrastructure, academy and Covid costs, but it’s hard to see how theyre not going to exceed that when 22-23 accounts come out and the loss is added to the previous two years’ losses of 264m.

 

[Stat Brother]

Would that be enough? As per my previous post, they made a 121m loss in 21-22, and that included 123m profit from player sales.

Their allowed a 105m loss over a 3 year period. I know that the FFP loss discounts certain stuff like infrastructure, academy and Covid costs, but it’s hard to see how theyre not going to exceed that when 22-23 accounts come out when added to the previous two years cumulative losses of 264m.

i don't know but it would be a massive chunk off the debt, in one go.
Which in turn will be added to the Havertz & Callum H-O cash.

If IF they do scrape through this time, but keep on the same trajectory, the problem will be Gallagher being pretty much their last profitable asset.

Then they will be in the shite, as there's no more cans to kick down the road.

 

[nwgull]

i don't know but it would be a massive chunk off the debt, in one go.
Which in turn will be added to the Havertz & Callum H-O cash.

If IF they do scrape through this time, but keep on the same trajectory, the problem will be Gallagher being pretty much their last profitable asset.

Then they will be in the shite, as there's no more cans to kick down the road.

That'll help them for this season - although they're not going to sell him in January, are they? - but I cannot see how they're going to be able to take the 22-23 accounts and put them together with the two previous seasons and come up with an FFP loss that is less than £105m over the 3 years.

They sold a few players in 22-23, including Billy Gilmour (BILLY GILMOUR!), but total transfer income was only about 50m. That's not going to plug the gap, surely?

 

[WhingForPresident]

That'll help them for this season - although they're not going to sell him in January, are they? - but I cannot see how they're going to be able to take the 22-23 accounts and put them together with the two previous seasons and come up with an FFP loss that is less than £105m over the 3 years.

They sold a few players in 22-23, including Billy Gilmour (BILLY GILMOUR!), but total transfer income was only about 50m. That's not going to plug the gap, surely?

There's always Colwill...

 

[A1X]

I found this article on the BBC heart warming

Chelsea stats show they've had an awful 2023 in the Premier League

BBC Sport looks at Chelsea's 2023 statistics after a horror year for the Blues in the Premier League.

www.bbc.co.uk

Especially this graph

View attachment 171081

Why are Newcastle showing as better than us despite our bar being bigger?

 

[nwgull]

There's always Colwill...

I certainly wouldn't be against it, but them selling Colwill isn't going to help them square their 22-23 accounts with FFP limits either!

 

[Bombardier]

That'll help them for this season - although they're not going to sell him in January, are they? - but I cannot see how they're going to be able to take the 22-23 accounts and put them together with the two previous seasons and come up with an FFP loss that is less than £105m over the 3 years.

They sold a few players in 22-23, including Billy Gilmour (BILLY GILMOUR!), but total transfer income was only about 50m. That's not going to plug the gap, surely?

You are indeed correct. It's highly likely they have over cooked it. Not making Europe this season could be the nail in the coffin. There is no way they are not going to exceed that when the 22/23 accounts come out. And you are correct the loss is added to the previous two years’ losses of 264m.

I hope the implode!

 

[CHAPPERS]

Chelsea transfer strategy hit after Premier League agrees amortisation cap

Chelsea’s transfer strategy has been undermined after Premier League shareholders agreed to cap amortisation at five years

www.theguardian.com

Chelsea’s transfer strategy is at risk of being undermined with Premier League shareholders set to discuss capping amortisation at five years.

Contract amortisation – an accounting practice of gradually writing off the initial cost of a player over the course of their contract – will be on the agenda when clubs meet on Tuesday and there is a push for the Premier League to fall in line with Uefa on the issue.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Chelsea transfer strategy hit after Premier League agrees amortisation cap

Chelsea’s transfer strategy has been undermined after Premier League shareholders agreed to cap amortisation at five years

www.theguardian.com

Oh dear, what a shame.

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

They'll be a fire sale at The Bridge in Jan and in the Summer, they're absolutely screwed. The players being sold will be those on the shorter contracts and in five years they'll have a squad of unenthusiastic players with two years to run on their contracts, sitting on the bench taking big salaries; they're doomed I tell thee!