Something is wrong IMO as you considered the price of Arthur but disregarded Pjanic's sale price
Arthur may be "worth" 80m but the amount we pay is actually 10m since Pjanic will be sold for 70m.
Im no expert at this but I guess it means something..
Also is it total cost divided by total years?
If it is it may increase costs but allow us to stretch the fair play thing for the summer or am I wrong?
Arthur may be "worth" 80m but the amount we pay is actually 10m since Pjanic will be sold for 70m.
Im no expert at this but I guess it means something..
Also is it total cost divided by total years?
If it is it may increase costs but allow us to stretch the fair play thing for the summer or am I wrong?
cash flow and balance sheet are two different financial reports. the 10m you're talking about is part of the cash flow, but in the balance sheet (and income statement for that matter), arthur will cost 80m, and his yearly amortization will be based on this number.
it's yearly gross wages + yearly amortization (which is activated value divided by the contract length in years).
it's the pjanic plusvalenza that allows us to better comply with the ffp. if his book value is 17,5m and his sale price is 70m, that's 52,5m capital gain, which helps the club to balance the books hit by corona (and predictable shitty cl revenue). the increased cost might be an issue for the coming seasons.
let's suppose the rumors are accurate, and arthur would cost ~23-24m per seasons. that would make him our 4th most expensive player behind cr, de ligt and higuain, slightly above pre-extension dybala.
