FC. the profit is immediate and the whole 8 mill or so counts positively towards ffp , while the cost of buying him is spread over the term of his contract (I think).

It's the way of the club now. Unfortunately is exploiting retarded footballers who all believe they are the mutts nuts. Good for us, bad for them. Imagine if Rodwell or Parker had stayed in their respective clubs and developed naturally rather than move to a CL club who don't use them.

On the small gains, it will help long term, if we make 4.5 mil off Atsu, that pays for Fabregas's wages for the year. Not a bad trade. If we get 10 players over the next 5 years and make that kind of profit On each of the we are dancing. There will be some we lose on and some we gain massively on and of course there will be one or two who will truly make it into the first team, and some who will supplement the squad. It's certainly lower risk method of player acquisition than £50 mil for he who shall temain.

I think you have to see it from the young players side too. They move from a relatively low profile club to one of the biggest in Europe ,so immediately their profile is raised. They train with Chelsea then go on loan, so they should be better players and end up either in the squad at Chelsea at a better club. Its win/win for them usually, though obviously not all will benefit.

He cant ever qualify as homegrown as he is already 22.

That's why it's an odd signing to me, if we sell him for £8m we have made around £4.5m profit, hardly seems worth the effort does it?

 

 

FC. the profit is immediate and the whole 8 mill or so counts positively towards ffp , while the cost of buying him is spread over the term of his contract (I think).

 

Indeed, and we also buy these players in bulk.  That profit does add up.  We wouldn't be taking this approach if it wasn't in our favour, and we've already seen some big hits with KDB, Lukaku, Courtois etc.  Very occasionally we'll end up signing a future world class talent (like Courtois), the rest of the time we're basically a youth player agency.

Indeed, and we also buy these players in bulk. That profit does add up. We wouldn't be taking this approach if it wasn't in our favour, and we've already seen some big hits with KDB, Lukaku, Courtois etc. Very occasionally we'll end up signing a future world class talent (like Courtois), the rest of the time we're basically a youth player agency.

I think until we get a expanded Bridge or a new stadium this is the approach we will be using for the time being.

It's easy money.

I understand the hows and whys of buying/loaning/selling these types of players but I don't like that we do it/have to do it.

I'm very much against FFP as it has created these types of situations and it's already become another stick to beat us with.

A club like Chelsea with our limited match day revenue are in a no one situation and are always betrayed as enemies of football by governing bodies and the media to what we can to stay competitive.

No club should have to stockpile players to make minimal financial gains to be allowed to compete financially (especially when the money is already there).

I understand the hows and whys of buying/loaning/selling these types of players but I don't like that we do it/have to do it.

I'm very much against FFP as it has created these types of situations and it's already become another stick to beat us with.

A club like Chelsea with our limited match day revenue are in a no one situation and are always betrayed as enemies of football by governing bodies and the media to what we can to stay competitive.

No club should have to stockpile players to make minimal financial gains to be allowed to compete financially (especially when the money is already there).

Agreed.

It's stupid but they have left us with no choice.

Hopefully the Bridge can be expanded soon or else this will continue.

I think you have to see it from the young players side too. They move from a relatively low profile club to one of the biggest in Europe ,so immediately their profile is raised. They train with Chelsea then go on loan, so they should be better players and end up either in the squad at Chelsea at a better club. Its win/win for them usually, though obviously not all will benefit.

 

Tell that the mass of players we have had through recently that havent made the grade. The crutial piece of development young players need is the break from U21 to first team football. It is shown time and time again players who get this opportunity progress. The loan system IMO only works sporadically and when the clubs share a similar ethos and have a close working relationship. Less Lukaku i can only think of Mancienne and Jack Cork who have been anywhere near our U21 team in the past 10 years who play in a top tier league. Cork had to drop down to L1 and Manicenne has since dropped down to the CH since playing the sum total of 50 times in 3 years in Germany.

The problem we will have is when Fifa/Uefa put a limit on how many players you can loan out. We'll be buggered then.

You were responding to someone without quoting them and yet you expect me to see some hidden link. Your judgement of how I read seems to be just as foul as your judgement of players.

People who 'complain' about Oscar are equally idiotic and like I said, to make such a definitive judgement at this stage is ridiculous.

Well thanks for that piece of wisdom. A) I didn't say I was judging him solely on a world cup. Although ypu didn't seem to mind the comment directly above mine, praising him at the world cup?

B) he's just shy of his 23rd birthday, if he had the potential to play for us, I think he would be showing more end product than he us now.

C) to suggest my opinion was 'unwise' was very condescending.

It will do him a World of good to be loaned to a good Premiership side,hope he gets game time and a look in our first team in the near future.

Well thanks for that piece of wisdom. A) I didn't say I was judging him solely on a world cup. Although ypu didn't seem to mind the comment directly above mine, praising him at the world cup?

B) he's just shy of his 23rd birthday, if he had the potential to play for us, I think he would be showing more end product than he us now.

C) to suggest my opinion was 'unwise' was very condescending.

Well I'm reading the forum via tapatalk and your comment was at the top.

His age is largely irrelevant due to his lack of experience. At 23 you could have said the same thing about Drogba. His end product can drastically change with experience. He is only now getting adequate experience but as I've said, it is too early to make a definitive judgement.

My comment about such an opinion being unwise had no ill sentiment attached. It was merely a reflection of my reasoning given above. But of course you can choose to take it however you please.

Well I'm reading the forum via tapatalk and your comment was at the top.

His age is largely irrelevant due to his lack of experience. At 23 you could have said the same thing about Drogba. His end product can drastically change with experience. He is only now getting adequate experience but as I've said, it is too early to make a definitive judgement.

My comment about such an opinion being unwise had no ill sentiment attached. It was merely a reflection of my reasoning given above. But of course you can choose to take it however you please.

Fair enough, it did come across as condescending, happy to draw a line under it.

With regards atsu, I think he will go on to be decent player, but bearing in mind he isn't homegrown, I don't think he will ever be good enough to warrant a place in the squad.

I think salah is comfortably a better player than atsu, and even he has looked out of his depth at times.

I don't think he will be first choice for Everton, but he showed last season he can play anywhere in midfield, so he will hopefully get decent minutes, and we make a tidy profit.

Edited August 14, 201411 yr by big blue

I think Atsu is comparable to Salah. He's quick, strong and a good dribbler, but he's a bit short. I think it's a good loan for him and Chelsea. We'll get to see how he does in a good side in a top league. If he does well, we can bring him in or sell him at a tidy profit. If he's not up to it, we'll know and can cut our losses. It's better than him treading water at Vitesse or Middlseborough or somewhere. It's 50/50 for me, he could be as good as Raheem Sterling or as poor as Marko Marin. I just hope he gets a chance to prove himself at Everton.

I actually thought he was Ghanas best player,was extremely fast and direct, young and still developing, this not good enough for Chelsea, have a word with yourselves, lets see how he goes in Toffees land!!!!!!!!

Damn it.  Made the mistake of getting really excited about this lad from seeing him play at the work cup.  Thought another couple of years of development, by time he hits his 20's could be a really good player - and now I find out he is already 22.  Got to stop getting my hopes up for theses young'uns. 

 

Will definitely be interesting to see how he does against Premier League opposition though.  He didn't look out of place at all at the World Cup.

A prime example of a player bought solely for their resale value and nothing else.

A prime example of a player bought solely for their resale value and nothing else.

 

Says Who, please enlighten me...

>Imagine if we could spin off Torres to Vitesse to get him off Chelsea's books? >We'd all be for it!

No, we wouldn't!

Really? Care to elaborate or are you simply going to disagree without an argument.

The problem we will have is when Fifa/Uefa put a limit on how many players you can loan out. We'll be buggered then.

If it were just Chelsea then there is no question in my mind that they would have already changed the rules but in this process we are junior players in both how long we have been players in this type of market and also the number of players sent out on loan. Several clubs, Europe wide, couldn't operate without this type of income stream

The difference between us and the likes of Porto is when they buy the players it is financed, to a large degree, through third party investors. These third party investors gamble of the players transfer worth increasing whereas the club make money through loaning the player and of course the final transfer fee. Minimal investment by the club, the odd failure but when looked as a whole a very lucrative method of generating funds for the club

Porto, very much operate at a lower level. What I mean by that is they buy in young players in the main from South American & Africa for minimal fees send them out on loan and then sale then. There are other benefits in that it easier to gain a work permit and as such junior African players for instance quickly graduate to full internationals and through playing for their country will qualify to be granted a permit in other countries where its harder to get one

In effect Porto are a high street employment agency Chelsea because we have additional financial muscle operate at a higher level.

Atsu really is a good example for after Porto brought him as a 17 year old he went out on loan for a season returned and bang sold on and now qualifies for a permit in England through him being a regular international with Ghana a country ranked in the top 70 by FIFA

Edited August 15, 201411 yr by terraloon

 

^ Atsu scored an 85th minute winner for Ghana (making it 3-2) against Togo in their African Cup of Nations qualifier last night.

Really? Care to elaborate or are you simply going to disagree without an argument.

This is not the place for an argument, that's two forums up on the left :-)

Gets the start today for Everton against Krasnodar.

And he was awful. Poor decision making and his passing is laughable. 

I honestly thought at the time when we bought him that he was bought to try and make a profit on. Never going to make it in to our team.