This is not new news and was very well documented at the time but for those who missed it:
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian...
"That commitment to sound financial management was followed, not breached", Henry asserted, in the 35m Liverpool paid Newcastle United for Andy Carroll, a fee that astonished English football.
Henry said the 35m made financial sense because Liverpool were only paying to Newcastle what they were to receive from Chelsea by selling Torres, whom they allowed to leave because he had become too evidently unhappy at Anfield.
"The fee for Torres was dependent on what Newcastle asked for Carroll," Henry said, explaining that Liverpool wanted Carroll, plus 15m, to replace Torres. Together with the 6m sale of Ryan Babel to Hoffenheim, that effectively financed Liverpools 22.8m signing of Luis Suarez, meaning the club bought two strikers
but net, spent almost nothing. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said.
"Those prices could have been 35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and 20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost."http://www.forsport.ro/international/big-interview-with-john-w-henry~1968693.htmlAs intricate as it may have been, £35 Million was great business for Newcastle.
"Intricate"? - No. Great business for Newcastle? - Yes... but no-one said it wasn't.
The deal was simple really; if you look at it the correct way - we wanted x plus £15m for Torres. The fee paid for Carroll was immaterial. It's not as if we went armed with £50m looking for Carroll: we went looking for £15m
'profit' on the deal for Torres and got it.
Strangely enough; if we'd done the same with Carroll to West Ham and Dempsey to here: we would have signed Dempsey but I digress...
Think of it another way - (
Figures used - for illustration only):
* On 29 January 2011 our books were showing a
£15m loss. (i.e. Suarez fee less transfers out.)
* On 1 February 2011 our books were showing as balanced
£0.00.* No club money [profits; merchandising; sponsorship; ticket sales] was used to buy Andy Carroll.
* Our books have never shown a loss over this. Andy Carroll cost this club nothing. Suarez cost this club nothing.
* Carroll cost the club
nothing on the books; as such...
nothing is exactly what will be written off.
That said, writing off a 35 million investment hurt the club at the start of the season...
... Part of the problem we had was the investment that Kenny/Comolli made was effectively written off by Werner and Henry.
Carroll was part of that write off...
... Writing off 35 million of it then, regardless of the circumstances, was one of the worst.
Any money (give or take a few quid) realised from the sale(s) of Andy Carroll (and Luis Suarez) will show as profit on the books. As such there will be no "write-off" : quite the contrary if the truth be told. And that is thanks, in no small part to the deal which saw Torres sold for x plus £15m.
See I told you it was simple.