31 May 2018 18:12:59
I still see some posters asking what our transfer budget is?

Please understand one thing, if a player for instance cost £60m then the club will not pay over the whole £60m in one go. The transfer fee get worked over repayments.

So in order for a club to know whether they can afford a player it will be the transfer fee over x amount of time to the club the player was purchased from plus the wages etc paid to the player over his contract.

Just because we sold Coutinho for a tremendous amount does not mean that Barcelona have paid all his transfer fee over to us in one payment. It will be paid over x amount of time.

So please, forget about budgets and transfer fees for players. If you see us signing a new GK at £100m then please understand that the club is not going to pay over £100m at once. It does not work that way. If that is the way transfers worked then just about every club will be bankrupt.

1.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 18:30:39
Not being pedantic but I think some transfers may get paid for all in one go, in fact that may have happened durring the deal that sold Torres and brought Carroll to us. Could be wrong but I don't think it's as cut and dried as you think in every case.

2.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 19:07:55
Most transfers are paid off over a period of time nowadays. I think because of our mess with vvd we paid all upfront. The ffp is 3 year rolling so it's changed how most teams pay for transfers. That being said 2 straight seasons qualifying for CL should allow us greater funds and I think with a few players leaving this summer our wage bill will allow us to offer better contracts to compete with our rivals. I hope we can get some good deals from players we no longer want.

3.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 18:41:08
OMG johnny, there are isolated incidents, but these incidents of full payment are extremely rare.

If Liverpool had paid up every transfer fee in full since FSG arrived the club would have been owned by the banks by now.

Again, forget about budgets and transfer fees.

4.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 18:44:53
VVD was paid in one go, well certainly £70m to Southampton, due to us mucking around earlier in the year. We also paid the agent fee and his signing on fee in one go too.

We only have received, conversely, around €24m of the Coutinho fee so far (I think, Ed002 said yesterday in a thread and I think I have the figures right) .

{Ed002's Note - Correct, and don’t forget the additional £19M paid in respect ov the VVD transfer.}

5.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 19:29:48
The paid the full amount for VVD in one go.

6.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 19:37:40
Think Ed002 alluded to us increasing borrowings the other day so we shouldn't just assume that our CL 'success' is funding a huge spree.

7.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 19:22:20
Payment for player fees over periods of time has been long in existence. Evidence of this was when Portsmouth were caught out for owing long overdue payments on player purchases all those years back.

Anyone that thinks transfer fees as a norm gets paid in full are clearly living in La La Land. Can you go buy 5 new cars and pay cash upfront for all of them in one sum then also maintain them every month?

This is why the Ed's refuse to discuss money lol.

8.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 19:45:52
Each transfer is different. Read when 002 posts. For example, Southampton have received something Iike 70m for V Dijk whereas we have received only 24m so far for Coutinho.

9.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 19:47:18
Not the point Maxlfc, your statement - paragraph 2 specifically - made it sound as if it doesn't happen but we know it does e. g. VVD (which I wasn't aware of) .

10.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 19:57:51
Isolated incidents which are very rare.

I think I explained myself perfectly in my original post that if transfer fees were based on paying the full amount upfront, then most clubs = bankrupt.

Whether we paid in full for VVD or not, it was LFC's own doinmg due to the fact that we illegally approached the player but still wanted him afterwards.

If LFC would have paid money upfront for each and every transfer made going back since when then LFC would not exist today. I am not an accountant but do not have to explain such facts to you Johnny. So again I will repeat myself, forget about budgets and transfer fees being paid upfront. Simple.

11.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 20:04:34
Max you say let's forget about transfer budgets and fees and then go on to talk about them yourself thus causing a debate. So do you want us to forget about them or talk about them. I'm confused.

12.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 20:56:33
Actually I AM an accountant - for my sins - so didn't really need the concept of asset amortisation/ depreciation explaining. Assets in this case being players and their contracts of course. The point was that some fees ARE paid in one lump, however rarely, and even where they aren't they probably all differ wildly in payment terms, little of which we mere supporters are actually party to.

{Ed002's Note - There are rules governing what can and whatever cannot be done.}

13.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 21:14:23
"The point was that some fees ARE paid in one lump"

The exception rather than the rule.

My point is and it is a massive issue is that some people see 7 new players arriving in one window and are under the impression that the fees are paid in full for each player when they see the media reporting £15m for the first player, £30m for the second player, £25m for the third player, £70m for the 4th player etc equaling to £250m paid upfront in one lump sum for all purchases in that window.

LFC would simply not be able to afford such expenditure and anyone who thinks LFC can is simply the reason why the Ed's do not discuss money. End of.

14.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 21:38:59
Rubbish max. It's all down to the selling team how they want paying mate.

15.) 31 May 2018
31 May 2018 22:19:35
This is a great thread 👍.