Not entirely correct, it is depreciation as the player is an asset. However, I doubt they'll use the straight line method for players or even use depreciation on players in the first place.I think the way they do it is if you buy a player for 40m on a five year contract his value reduces every year by 8 m. ie after two years he is valued at 24m on the books. Even though he may have improved so much someone has bid 60m for him.
Confusing but that’s the way it works. Amortisation is what it’s called.
What do they value Harry Kane at ....Nothing according to that system. If we sold him for 200m it would show as all profit.
Projections for the lot were something like £400m a year.Just goes to show how much money we will or do have. Once these other events kick in and we get a naming rights ect our income will be insane for a club with our wagebill ect.
If you tally up the figures then it doesnt take a genius to know that we have a fortune incoming.
Tv money
Matchday income ( people are getting to whl very early and spending alot of money per person)
Prizemoney (4th place, 85m cl money)
Merchandise (club shop heaving)
Naming rights (audi this summer 25m Per season)
Shirt sponsor
Other events (rugby, nfl, concerts, e sports,)
Im not sure about what most of these fetch per annum but even after say a 50m repayment per season on the loan we should have a mountain leftover.
Amortisation takes into account wages so that once a player is sold at say £24m, his 3 years of wages that are left on his contract are also rolled up into the final figure 'off the books' so that you get an amortised figure of say £39m (assuming something like £15m in wages over remaining 3 years) which shows up on the books as an overall 'profit improvement'.Not entirely correct, it is depreciation as the player is an asset. However, I doubt they'll use the straight line method for players or even use depreciation on players in the first place.