Juventus/Barcelona Pjanic/Arthur

IDFD

Moderator
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
5,416
Age
33
Not sure how much of this most of you will have read in to but one of the stranger transfers this summer.

Juventus have bought Arthur for £80m.
Barcelona have bought Pjanic for £70m.

Basically swapping players with Juve getting the younger player for £10m but it allows both teams to book £60m profit on the transaction.

Have a look at this twitter feed.


Given that Barcelona surely wouldn't usually pay £70m for a 30 yr old Pjanic. Is this transfer a fancy way around FFP rules?
 

Mr C

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
3,886
I guess it's a profit on the player, if they bought the player cheaper than selling. But it's still a debit on the new purchase isn't it. Just wipes each other out. There must be a reason for it though
 

SuperRash

Moderator
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
3,993
Age
32
Why the fudge are they selling Arthur? Unless the player has specifically said I want out it is baffling for me. Granted I don’t watch a hell of a lot of Spanish football or know the going’s on but thought he was rated as THE next big thing? Weird.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
11,385
Not sure how interested FFP are in terms of transfer fee being manipulated but yeah these both seem to be way over the top fees.

Pjanic + 10m for Arthur is probably a pretty fair deal given the age of the players involved but the bit they've done before that stinks of cooking the books.

Saw this on twitter the other days seems a pretty mad deal all around.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
11,385
Looks like this is all going through players will move after conclusion of the CL in August.

I know UEFA are relaxing FFP due to covid 19 for next seasons numbers but surely they'll be looking into this deal as there's no way these clubs can legitimately say these are fair market rates they've inflated both transfers to cook the books in terms of FFP.

I wonder if UEFA will have the stones to go at them and say they can't book the transfer values in their accounts.

I reckon Juve are getting much the better end of the deal on this one not really sure why Barca want to take Pjanic.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
11,385
Defo sounds like some sort of tax/dodgy business going on from Barca's perspective.
It's all to do with balancing the books from an FFP point of view Barca have a massive problem with the wage bill because of the way FFP accounting works this frees up a lot of money on the books to cover the wages without the gate receipts they rely on being in place.

Same story with Juventus gets them out of a hole with FFP and the way the tax system works in Italy they'll actually be paying less to Arthur than they were to Pjanic as new contracts for players coming from outside Italy pay a reduced level of income tax. Salary wise both players earn about the same money but Juventus will be reducing their tax liability on that contracts by about 50%.

This income tax is why the Italian clubs are hoovering up PL players because they can actually afford the wages now thanks to the new laws that came in 2 seasons ago. It's basically how Juventus could afford to buy Ronaldo from Madrid.
 
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
6
It's all to do with balancing the books from an FFP point of view Barca have a massive problem with the wage bill because of the way FFP accounting works this frees up a lot of money on the books to cover the wages without the gate receipts they rely on being in place.

Same story with Juventus gets them out of a hole with FFP and the way the tax system works in Italy they'll actually be paying less to Arthur than they were to Pjanic as new contracts for players coming from outside Italy pay a reduced level of income tax. Salary wise both players earn about the same money but Juventus will be reducing their tax liability on that contracts by about 50%.

This income tax is why the Italian clubs are hoovering up PL players because they can actually afford the wages now thanks to the new laws that came in 2 seasons ago. It's basically how Juventus could afford to buy Ronaldo from Madrid.
Ah thanks for putting some context behind my comment, I wasn't fully aware of the tax and salary in Italy. I guess similar deals between clubs might become more normalizedto get around FFP as well as the financial impacts they are currently facing due to Corona.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
11,385
Ah thanks for putting some context behind my comment, I wasn't fully aware of the tax and salary in Italy. I guess similar deals between clubs might become more normalizedto get around FFP as well as the financial impacts they are currently facing due to Corona.
I think UEFA might put a stop to it if it carries on as it's breaking the spirit of the FFP rules even if it isn't breaking the written rules.

Will probably only be a short term thing anyway while clubs get their heads around the Covid stuff.

The clubs in Europe have been much more savvy in terms of accounting to get around FFP it's why you see these long loan deals for players over multiple seasons. The prem clubs haven't really had to do that because they get so much TV money that FFP doesn't really become an issue for them.
 

Mr C

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
3,886
I don't understand the FFP on this really

If you are selling for say 70m and buying at 70m that equals out doesn't it? Or does FFP not allow for debits?

Doesn't the balance sheet just say 0

(in ths case it will be plus 10 for one and -10 for the other)
 

IDFD

Moderator
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
5,416
Age
33
I believe for FFP terms. The receiving money goes in as one lump sum. The spending money is spread out over the terms of the contract. So Barca are receiving £80m. But paying out £70m over 4 years. So it’ll show a plus 80m for this season and a -£17.5m

So a positive of £63.5m on a +£10m Transaction.

I could be wrong but that’s how I’ve read the thread.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
11,385
When you buy a player you account for the outgoing transfer fee over the length of his contract when you sell a player you book that income all in one go.

So buy a player for £100m on a 5 year deal every year he costs your £20m in terms of your FFP figure, if after 3 years that player signs a new 5 years contract the remaining £40m is then spread over the next 5 years so that player now only costs £8m a year. If you sell him after 3 years for £100m you would pay off the £40m you still owe then book the £100m as income so you'd be +£60m for that year.

So both clubs are boosting their "income figure for this year" then spreading that same figure over 5 years as an out going.
 

Login or Register

Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Register now
Top