1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

It's an accounting amortization rule. Anything sold above a player's "book value" is considered a profit. Since academy players have no book value (we didn't purchase them) anything we collect on them is considered profit. 

- Sterling was purchased for £50m in 2022 on a 5 year deal. His remaining book value is £30m. If the club sell him for £40m, the club have earned a £10m profit for that fiscal year. 

- If Gallagher is sold for £50m, the club have earned a profit of £50m for that fiscal year. 

Thanks, but I got that part. Thats standard accounting rules, I got the impression SydneyBlue meant that in the example of Sterling above - if we sold him for 15 million now, we’d make a 5 million profit towards FFP/PSR as the amortization cost for this year is just 10 million. I’ve worked in accounting for 20 years and never heard of that practice, then again I’ve never been very good at my job so who knows

Edited June 5, 20242 yr by AndyDowsleftflank

I could actually see Conor staying if Maresca wants him to despite these rumours.

Before anyone says "yeah but they weren't keeping him for Poch" Maresca will present an actual tactical plan for him whereas I'd imagine Poch would have given a load of waffle which would have in a roundabout way have basically said "I need him because he runs around a lot and covers my structural flaws".

37 minutes ago, Argo said:

I could actually see Conor staying if Maresca wants him to despite these rumours.

Before anyone says "yeah but they weren't keeping him for Poch" Maresca will present an actual tactical plan for him whereas I'd imagine Poch would have given a load of waffle which would have in a roundabout way have basically said "I need him because he runs around a lot and covers my structural flaws".

I was a big fan of Gallagher and Enzo running aimlessly in midfield for 75% of the season...

Gallagher as a #8 to push forward and help with the overlaps/underlaps in the final third would be beneficial under Maresca. 

Edited June 5, 20242 yr by Sconnie Blue

2 hours ago, Nibs said:

This thread is giving me a headache.

Back to Gallagher though, even those who don't rate him as highly as some of us - even they must admit it would be a really bad move to let him go. At present he is the only real candidate to skipper the side into next season.

  

I'm in that camp.

Don't rate him highly, and I hated the way Pochettino was utilising him for the majority of the season. But there isn't a more committed player and harder worker than Gallagher in the team. Especially when you see the type of antics coming from Jackson and Madueke, it makes you worry when you take a guy like Conor out of that dressing room who will give it everything. 

I don't want him to be a nailed on starter every game, but I don't want him sold either. 

11 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Actually, the opposite is true - as long as their sale value is higher than their book value for that period, we make a "profit" for the purposes of FFP/PSR. For example - say Mudryk's value is amortised at 10m/season, if we sell him for 15m this season we would have made 5m "profit" even though we lose ~50m in real money.

Economically, however, this means the floor price for a player is always their book value - Cole Palmer may well be able to command 100m+ in this summer's market, but any interested club would know that his book value is around 10m a season and so anything above that is Chelsea's profit, and that knowledge drags the price down a little bit. 

The long contracts work both ways, but there is a reason it was only done in exceptional circumstances before Clearlake.

This is what I meant. If we were to sell Enzo for instance we wouldn’t make a profit on him at the moment due to the vast sum still to be amortised.

It’s why I said after this window I expect us to be very quiet over the next 4 windows as there isn’t enough profit coming from most of our recent signings because they all hold very high book values due to the length of their contracts and the long amortisation periods.

Been said before but Gallagher wants his future sorted out before the euros begin so he does not have that on his mind.

Pressure is on Chelsea to come up with a new deal to suit him,or far more likely, a buyer the club and conor are happy with.

 

Rumour mill bringing that up today.

I hate the rumor mill.

11 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Been said before but Gallagher wants his future sorted out before the euros begin so he does not have that on his mind.

Pressure is on Chelsea to come up with a new deal to suit him,or far more likely, a buyer the club and conor are happy with.

 

Rumour mill bringing that up today.

The BBC or guardian or one of the endless insta posts I was scrolling said "after the euros"

 

Yep....I hate all the rumours, and yet I keep looking and searching!

27 minutes ago, Simplymo said:

Yep....I hate all the rumours, and yet I keep looking and searching!

Same, its like when you’re into that final third of a large bag of crisps - you’re sick of it yet can’t stop force-feeding yourself until its all gone

According to @liam_twomey, Chelsea do not necessarily need to sell Gallagher:

"They are already guaranteed £28million through the sale of Lewis Hall to Newcastle after his season on loan there, while the proceeds of Mason Mount’s £55m transfer to Manchester United last summer will go on this year’s accounts. They also banked between £11m and £14m from add-ons in clauses of loan and transfer deals last season."

2 hours ago, JM7 said:

According to @liam_twomey, Chelsea do not necessarily need to sell Gallagher:

"They are already guaranteed £28million through the sale of Lewis Hall to Newcastle after his season on loan there, while the proceeds of Mason Mount’s £55m transfer to Manchester United last summer will go on this year’s accounts. They also banked between £11m and £14m from add-ons in clauses of loan and transfer deals last season."

SKY Sports know dick. 

2 hours ago, JM7 said:

According to @liam_twomey, Chelsea do not necessarily need to sell Gallagher:

"They are already guaranteed £28million through the sale of Lewis Hall to Newcastle after his season on loan there, while the proceeds of Mason Mount’s £55m transfer to Manchester United last summer will go on this year’s accounts. They also banked between £11m and £14m from add-ons in clauses of loan and transfer deals last season."

Maybe that's why we want to sell Trev for just 25 mill, will be enough to take us over that 105mill that was quoted we needed.

Remove the finances to this entire debate and ask is Connor Gallagher a player you would want at Chelsea FC... 

for me Yes. 100%. He is getting better and better and hasn't missed a game through injury this season when the supposed better players signed for huge money have struggled or not been fit enough to play or train. He is potentially going to play for England alongside Bellingham for England.

He should be a nailed-on starter in my first 11 next season alongside Caicedo. 

 

Just now, bluetrooper said:

Remove the finances to this entire debate and ask is Connor Gallagher a player you would want at Chelsea FC... 

for me Yes. 100%. He is getting better and better and hasn't missed a game through injury this season when the supposed better players signed for huge money have struggled or not been fit enough to play or train. He is potentially going to play for England alongside Bellingham for England.

He should be a nailed-on starter in my first 11 next season alongside Caicedo. 

 

I'm with you m8.

How come we're prepared to sell any player to spuds ,I thought that was a absolute sin , especially one that would defo improve them🤬

2 hours ago, hawkster said:

How come we're prepared to sell any player to spuds ,I thought that was a absolute sin , especially one that would defo improve them🤬

I would be surprised that a home grown Chelsea lad would want to go to Spurs.... I guess it means he can stay in London.

I want Conor to stay BUT..it’s interesting the rumoured clubs that are after him - Villa and Spurs. Not exactly elite. 
 

That said , the club should renew him. They need to not look at the financial side of things. 

This lad is a blue at heart. I would be gutted if we sold him. He has proven his value to the squad, proven his loyalty and work his ass off, what more can he do!? 

Should lock this thread until something actually reliable is released. 

23 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

SKY Sports know dick. 

 

14 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

 

Oh, and Dortmund. Its £35m or go fck yourselves, and yes we accept all major credit cards.....after July 1st 

Edited June 7, 20242 yr by WhiteWall

I like connor - but the likes of Real Madrid, Man City, Bayern, PSG are not after him....and that tells a story.

Happy for him to hang around as a utility player - one to come in when needed and plug a gap. But he is not a player that I think we should be building a team around. 

Levels.

10 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

I like connor - but the likes of Real Madrid, Man City, Bayern, PSG are not after him....and that tells a story.

Happy for him to hang around as a utility player - one to come in when needed and plug a gap. But he is not a player that I think we should be building a team around. 

Levels.

The bigger issue now is really the finances. With Chelsea not having to sell by June 30th, any sale now starts to look more like financial prudence in light of him having just one year left and the likelihood of running his contract down. If they got something like £50m from Villa, i could wear that, as i don't think they are going to offer a new contract, we stand to lose that totally if we don't trade now, and I've quite a soft spot for Villa actually.

21 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

I like connor - but the likes of Real Madrid, Man City, Bayern, PSG are not after him....and that tells a story.

Happy for him to hang around as a utility player - one to come in when needed and plug a gap. But he is not a player that I think we should be building a team around. 

Levels.

Why not keep him in the squad and as a utility player?  Every game you have a starting XI and 5 subs. Every season you have injuries. Conor brings a decent attitude to games and an enthusiasm to the squad. Sometimes you just need that.
 

I don't really understand the new owners deal with wages. I know that they would prefer a wage cap in the league. They would also prefer a European Super League, with no relegation, but that's another issue. But the idea is that the new owners won't be offering these huge salaries to players. Is that right? Their plan is longer contracts with lower wages. What is our current wage bill looking like? Who are our top earners? Has to be a 100 million dollar men. This whole area with our new owners is murky.

5 minutes ago, TheCeleryKing said:

Why not keep him in the squad and as a utility player?  Every game you have a starting XI and 5 subs. Every season you have injuries. Conor brings a decent attitude to games and an enthusiasm to the squad. Sometimes you just need that.
 

I don't really understand the new owners deal with wages. I know that they would prefer a wage cap in the league. They would also prefer a European Super League, with no relegation, but that's another issue. But the idea is that the new owners won't be offering these huge salaries to players. Is that right? Their plan is longer contracts with lower wages. What is our current wage bill looking like? Who are our top earners? Has to be a 100 million dollar men. This whole area with our new owners is murky.

yep - agree

But does Connor - and at a wage that fits a utility player.