West Ham have been financially clever this summer by maximising Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) by signing players on long contracts, two free agents and a season-long loan.
The Hammers have minimized their amortisation figure by using a variety of strategies to push the limits of new financial fair play rules enforced by the Premier League this season.
Summerville, Guilherme, Kilman and soon-to-be Wan Bissaka can be equally depreciated on West Ham books over a maximum of five years allowed.
Füllkrug will be written off financially over four years in amortisation terms.
Foderingham & Rodriguez were free agents and Todibo won’t count until next season for amortisation purposes.
Luis Guilherme: £19.5 million fee = £3.9m per year amortisation for 5 years
Max Kilman: £40 million fee = £8m per year amortisation for 5 years
Crysencio Summerville: £26 million fee = £5.2m per year amortisation for 5 years
Aaron Wan Bissaka £15m fee= £3m per year amortisation for 5 years
Niclas Füllkrug: £22 million fee = £5.5m per year amortisation for 4 years
This means West Ham will add £25.6m per year in amortisation for this summer’s signings for the next four years with the fifth year reducing to £20.1m
New PSR rules this season stipulate that Premier League clubs must spend a maximum of 85% of their revenue on players’ and coaches’ wages, amortisation annual total and agent fees.
I’ve been supporting the irons since 1975 and I am more excited by this season than almost any other. The manager needs to be given time to integrate the players and then we look good.
David,
Here’s hoping your 50th anniversary next summer is truly golden. ⚒️
I have been supporting West Ham since 1967 and I hope the near future is half as good as 1980.
Yes, good information but Sean you are posting this piecemeal. One article about profits (under PSR) for players that have been sold and here information on the amortization. Both interesting but you have to look at the picture as a whole. There’s also the issue of what amortization is already on the books for this and subsequent years. The other thing that does not gel is that in another article you talk about a 170 million spend. Four times 20.1 plus one year at 25.6 get nowhere near that number. Now, I know a lot of that is add ons but if they are triggered they will impact cash flow – and potentially will not be spread nice and evenly over several years. For example winning something, or qualification for Europe potentially could trigger a lot of expense in one year. With one article you have the club pushing the proverbial boat out, in the next the suggestion is that the financial impact is very manageable.
If you are looking at clever strategies attracting players from outside the PL (in most cases) who have much lower salaries than the likes of Danny Ings and say Harry Maguire is another way to get players in without wrecking the finances. But then again that is another element. You can’t really see the picture without all of the bits of the jigsaw.
Perhaps it is best to wait until the window closes and then draw all of the bits together?
….and they’re not done yet!
The image is wrong…no £50 notes and incredible you did not show £1 coins
I think it’s CAN spend, not MUST spend.
West Ham fans talking of us WINNING something. We must be doing something right or smoking something wrong. Go Tim and Lop😁