| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham 22:34 - Jun 2 with 3561 views | Pique |
Why is his release clause of £8 million (or whatever it turns out to be) considered to be such a potential stumbling block for Fulham or any other interested parties?
This is consistently mentioned (not just on TWTD) as something so prohibitive that it may put off suitors, but it's £8 million. In the Premier League. Your average Premier League club could spend that on a fourth choice left back, loan him out to the Championship and not even notice the money has gone. So why would it be such a major issue if they were trying to recruit a top level manager?
I don't get it. What am I missing? |  | | |  |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:39 - Jun 2 with 3033 views | Chris_ITFC |
The fourth choice left-back who gets loaned out to the Championship most likely has a resale value, and a higher one at that.
Plus doesn’t come with a £10m-per-year contract demand.
But yes, I take your point. If you think he’s “the one”, he’d pay that £8m back in spades… |  |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:43 - Jun 2 with 2999 views | Pique |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:39 - Jun 2 by Chris_ITFC |
The fourth choice left-back who gets loaned out to the Championship most likely has a resale value, and a higher one at that.
Plus doesn’t come with a £10m-per-year contract demand.
But yes, I take your point. If you think he’s “the one”, he’d pay that £8m back in spades… |
I am being slightly facetious with the fourth choice left back example, and you're right - that left back is an investment for the future, whereas compensation for McKenna is just outlay.
But still, £8 million is surely peanuts in the grand scheme of things. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:45 - Jun 2 with 2978 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
If they need to sack him after 4 months, thats £8m written off, along with a severance package of a similar amount probably. |  |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:46 - Jun 2 with 2964 views | Chris_ITFC |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:43 - Jun 2 by Pique |
I am being slightly facetious with the fourth choice left back example, and you're right - that left back is an investment for the future, whereas compensation for McKenna is just outlay.
But still, £8 million is surely peanuts in the grand scheme of things. |
Yes, I do agree - I’d argue £8m on McKenna is a perfectly sound investment.
But if he’s on a shortlist of 2 or 3, the first differentiator is going to be “this one is out of work” and “that McKenna guy costs £8m and we could really do with a new fourth choice left back”.
Given what players cost, it’s mad that managers often don’t cost much at all, but maybe we’re ahead of the curve on that. It does make a difference, clearly. | |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:47 - Jun 2 with 2969 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
There are significant differences for the club’s finance :
- the compensation cannot be amortised over the length of the contract; it immediately impacts the current year’s accounts
- the manager isn’t an assets, so doesn’t have a positive value on the books
- there is no potential upside / profit in a future sale, as there is with a player |  | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:59 - Jun 2 with 2876 views | Pique |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:47 - Jun 2 by SuffolkPunchFC |
There are significant differences for the club’s finance :
- the compensation cannot be amortised over the length of the contract; it immediately impacts the current year’s accounts
- the manager isn’t an assets, so doesn’t have a positive value on the books
- there is no potential upside / profit in a future sale, as there is with a player |
Thanks. I didn't actually know that about your first point - can definitely see how that could be a disincentive.
I take your other two points too. The only counter I would suggest is that players don't always turn out to be assets that appreciate or hold their value. They could get injured, or suffer a loss of form, or run their contract down and leave for zilch (or significantly under their market value a year earlier).
I dunno. I still come back to a comparison between average player fees and the £8 million required for a manager like McKenna and wonder if it can really be such a blocker. Something to consider certainly (and probably a bit irritating), but any more than that? | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:20 - Jun 2 with 2743 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:59 - Jun 2 by Pique |
Thanks. I didn't actually know that about your first point - can definitely see how that could be a disincentive.
I take your other two points too. The only counter I would suggest is that players don't always turn out to be assets that appreciate or hold their value. They could get injured, or suffer a loss of form, or run their contract down and leave for zilch (or significantly under their market value a year earlier).
I dunno. I still come back to a comparison between average player fees and the £8 million required for a manager like McKenna and wonder if it can really be such a blocker. Something to consider certainly (and probably a bit irritating), but any more than that? |
The player is always an asset to some extent, even those that are not resold for a profit. And from a bookkeeping perspective, the value will be reduced each year of the contract. So a player bought for £8M on a 4 year contract can be sold for £6M after 2 years, and that is a positive £2M to that year’s accounts.
The injury risk is also likely well mitigated against with insurance.
None of this is applicable to a manager.
It’s all the subtle details of how club’s accounts and financial compliance is measured.
Last year Fulham had £194.5M revenue with £166.5M staff costs - exactly on the new 85% ratio. £8M for manager contract buyout would have pushed them to 90%, moving compliance from Green to Amber, requiring a reduction in the following year or two. That £8 paid out to bring a manager would probably equate to not being able the buy a £20M player on £65k/wk - to a decent signing.
Edited : to adjust the numbers, as I'd overegged the player equivalence. [Post edited 3 Jun 17:24]
| | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:31 - Jun 2 with 2677 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:59 - Jun 2 by Pique |
Thanks. I didn't actually know that about your first point - can definitely see how that could be a disincentive.
I take your other two points too. The only counter I would suggest is that players don't always turn out to be assets that appreciate or hold their value. They could get injured, or suffer a loss of form, or run their contract down and leave for zilch (or significantly under their market value a year earlier).
I dunno. I still come back to a comparison between average player fees and the £8 million required for a manager like McKenna and wonder if it can really be such a blocker. Something to consider certainly (and probably a bit irritating), but any more than that? |
Potter - Chelsea paid £21.5m to Brighton.
Maresca - Chelsea paid Leicester £10m.
Frank - Spurs paid £10m to Brentford.
Amorim - United paid c.£10m.
Villas Boas - Chelsea paid £13m.
Not the best of track records. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:52 - Jun 2 with 2592 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:31 - Jun 2 by Marshalls_Mullet |
Potter - Chelsea paid £21.5m to Brighton.
Maresca - Chelsea paid Leicester £10m.
Frank - Spurs paid £10m to Brentford.
Amorim - United paid c.£10m.
Villas Boas - Chelsea paid £13m.
Not the best of track records. |
Those figures will likely include backroom staff, assistants, coaches etc where as I think the £8m is just Mckenna, so you can (assuming he takes as least Pert with him) add a bit more to that, perhaps a couple of mill or more which just adds to the difficulties but ultimately your guy is your guy, pay it and swallow it if it doesn't work out |  |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:58 - Jun 2 with 2582 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:52 - Jun 2 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Those figures will likely include backroom staff, assistants, coaches etc where as I think the £8m is just Mckenna, so you can (assuming he takes as least Pert with him) add a bit more to that, perhaps a couple of mill or more which just adds to the difficulties but ultimately your guy is your guy, pay it and swallow it if it doesn't work out |
But also look at the turnovers for those clubs involved - spurs will be the lowest at £565M, nearly 3 times Fulham. That level of contract buyout by Fulham would have a seriously negative impact on their accounts and funds for players. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 03:34 - Jun 3 with 2366 views | WeWereZombies |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:52 - Jun 2 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Those figures will likely include backroom staff, assistants, coaches etc where as I think the £8m is just Mckenna, so you can (assuming he takes as least Pert with him) add a bit more to that, perhaps a couple of mill or more which just adds to the difficulties but ultimately your guy is your guy, pay it and swallow it if it doesn't work out |
I wonder if there is a scenario where if McKenna goes to Fulham he has to take Ashton with him... |  |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 06:00 - Jun 3 with 2201 views | FelixBlue4 |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 22:45 - Jun 2 by Marshalls_Mullet |
If they need to sack him after 4 months, thats £8m written off, along with a severance package of a similar amount probably. |
Great point that explains it but if they need to sack him after 4 months I would argue they didn’t due their homework. People often see a manager doing well but it needs to be a fit or the club, what the club and manager want need to align and I think this is where to many clubs go wrong. Both parties need to be transparent during the hiring stage, at the moment I still think KMc has a lot to offer the club and the club to him. I think he could be here another 4-5 years before we would have to look at if we are still on the same journey. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 06:28 - Jun 3 with 2082 views | Kieran_Knows |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:52 - Jun 2 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Those figures will likely include backroom staff, assistants, coaches etc where as I think the £8m is just Mckenna, so you can (assuming he takes as least Pert with him) add a bit more to that, perhaps a couple of mill or more which just adds to the difficulties but ultimately your guy is your guy, pay it and swallow it if it doesn't work out |
It’ll definitely be more than just Pert, suspect at least 5-6 will follow him. |  |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 07:38 - Jun 3 with 1736 views | cressi |
A different era maybe but Bobby Robson got payed more than the players and said the most important member of the football side of things was the manager he was right.look at Manchester United since Ferguson left and how long did Liverpool wait to win the title under Klopp. As you say pay 20 million for a squad filler the main man ie the manager has to be the right man he can determine your future. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 07:59 - Jun 3 with 1644 views | Churchman |
Surely, £8m is loose change to Fulham? Sofa money. They are the 26th richest club in the world according to Forbes. Double the size of Ipswich Town. They are stable, well funded, great facilities, based in London. Their crowds are irrelevant given how little numbers contribute to revenue at their level.
The training facility is in Motspur Park and there’s plenty of good schools to choose from and good places to live around there or slightly further out.
It’s a cracking opportunity for McKenna if they come in for him which at this stage of his career he’d surely jump at. |  | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 08:05 - Jun 3 with 1623 views | Pique |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 23:20 - Jun 2 by SuffolkPunchFC |
The player is always an asset to some extent, even those that are not resold for a profit. And from a bookkeeping perspective, the value will be reduced each year of the contract. So a player bought for £8M on a 4 year contract can be sold for £6M after 2 years, and that is a positive £2M to that year’s accounts.
The injury risk is also likely well mitigated against with insurance.
None of this is applicable to a manager.
It’s all the subtle details of how club’s accounts and financial compliance is measured.
Last year Fulham had £194.5M revenue with £166.5M staff costs - exactly on the new 85% ratio. £8M for manager contract buyout would have pushed them to 90%, moving compliance from Green to Amber, requiring a reduction in the following year or two. That £8 paid out to bring a manager would probably equate to not being able the buy a £20M player on £65k/wk - to a decent signing.
Edited : to adjust the numbers, as I'd overegged the player equivalence. [Post edited 3 Jun 17:24]
|
Some really good responses in this thread (including this one). I've certainly learnt a bit.
I think what I've taken away, broadly speaking, is that compensation of £8 million is more of an inhibitor than I thought, and that if you have two candidates of equal merit it may well tip the scales against clubs wanting to appoint McKenna. So a smart move from Ashton and Gamechanger.
On the other hand, if a rich Premier League club (which includes the likes of Fulham) really, really wants McKenna it probably won't stop them. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 08:05 - Jun 3 with 1620 views | BlueRaider |
There's a difference between a manager and a player, players never tend to be sacked after six months of poor results, but managers will be | |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 08:19 - Jun 3 with 1519 views | jas0999 |
It’s less of a problem for Fulham, but I guess the issue is, some really good managers are available who are out of work and won’t cost £8M. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 08:46 - Jun 3 with 1377 views | boysof1981 |
£8 million compensation is sod all to a club of Fulham, add a few million to take the rest of KM backroom staff still isn’t much to them, however they can save that on someone like Thomas Frank who has a far greater record and experience than KM.
Personally think they’ll go for someone else, think our first season in PL was poor, and we although we got promotion this season it wasn’t a great season in regards to performances | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 08:53 - Jun 3 with 1345 views | Churchman |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 08:46 - Jun 3 by boysof1981 |
£8 million compensation is sod all to a club of Fulham, add a few million to take the rest of KM backroom staff still isn’t much to them, however they can save that on someone like Thomas Frank who has a far greater record and experience than KM.
Personally think they’ll go for someone else, think our first season in PL was poor, and we although we got promotion this season it wasn’t a great season in regards to performances |
You might be right. In the impatient world of Premier League football they may want to go for a ‘ready made’ like Frank. I guess it depends if prospective employers view the failure of two season’s ago as a small budget club’s failure or his.
What’ll be will be. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 09:55 - Jun 3 with 1132 views | WeWereZombies |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 08:46 - Jun 3 by boysof1981 |
£8 million compensation is sod all to a club of Fulham, add a few million to take the rest of KM backroom staff still isn’t much to them, however they can save that on someone like Thomas Frank who has a far greater record and experience than KM.
Personally think they’ll go for someone else, think our first season in PL was poor, and we although we got promotion this season it wasn’t a great season in regards to performances |
I'm slightly amazed that Glassner is hardly mentioned as a good fit for Fulham, knows the league and has successfully gotten through the hard yards of becoming a Premier League manager of a team that doesn't get relegated. Maybe he has shown too much of a spirit of independence from a board that wants to involve itself in the signings, squad selection and selling on of players though. See also Maresca. | |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 10:45 - Jun 3 with 1003 views | itfc48 |
Talksport reporting he’s interested. I think McKenna will know it’s a poisoned chalice and feel it might be his agent trying to force our hand on an improved contracted given he’s only got 2 years left. | | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 10:52 - Jun 3 with 964 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 09:55 - Jun 3 by WeWereZombies |
I'm slightly amazed that Glassner is hardly mentioned as a good fit for Fulham, knows the league and has successfully gotten through the hard yards of becoming a Premier League manager of a team that doesn't get relegated. Maybe he has shown too much of a spirit of independence from a board that wants to involve itself in the signings, squad selection and selling on of players though. See also Maresca. |
Think Glasner has his sights set higher, was frustrated at Palace and Fulham arent exactly looking at being abused more ambitious than staying in the Premier league.
Maresca is supposed to be going to City | |
| |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 11:00 - Jun 3 with 905 views | BseaBlue |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 10:45 - Jun 3 by itfc48 |
Talksport reporting he’s interested. I think McKenna will know it’s a poisoned chalice and feel it might be his agent trying to force our hand on an improved contracted given he’s only got 2 years left. |
Just had a look on their website:
https://talksport.com/football
Can't imagine that comes out if he wasn't genuinely considering it. |  | | |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 11:02 - Jun 3 with 896 views | TRUE_BLUE123 |
| Something I don't understand about McKenna possibly going to Fulham on 11:00 - Jun 3 by BseaBlue |
Just had a look on their website:
https://talksport.com/football
Can't imagine that comes out if he wasn't genuinely considering it. |
I'm sure he is genuinely considering it. He would be silly not to.
I'm sure he is also considering staying. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
