[ 此帖被张罗比在2014-12-14 00:27修改 ]作者: kosiverlar 时间: 2014-12-14 01:33
His Chelsea contract is due to expire in the summer of 2016 when the AC Milan loan expires.
来源BBC。跟破车合同2016年到期，同时跟米兰租借合同到期。
At the same time the club have, it is understood, not agreed to pay Torres a severance package. It had been thought the 30-year-old was holding out for a payment on the 175,000-a-week contract he has with Chelsea but because his move to Milan is for two seasons, no pay-off has been forthcoming.
来源每日电讯。大意：破车不同意付解约金。所以原来以为麻子要坚持合同175K的周薪，现在因为租借，不需要付遣散费了。
Torres"s deal with Milan ends in June 2016, which coincides with the expiry of his current Chelsea contract.
来源每日邮报。大意：租借到米兰知道跟破车合同结束。
言辞激烈，不好不好，改掉。
[ 此帖被kosiverlar在2014-12-14 02:21修改 ]作者: yukiya 时间: 2014-12-14 01:53 引用69楼 @kosiverlar 发表的:
His Chelsea contract is due to expire in the summer of 2016 when the AC Milan loan expires.
来源BBC。跟破车合同2016年到期，同时跟米兰租借合同到期。
At the same time the club have, it is understood, not agreed to pay Torres a severance package. It had been thought the 30-year-old was holding out for a payment on the 175,000-a-week contract he has with Chelsea but because his move to Milan is for two seasons, no pay-off has been forthcoming.
来源镜报。大意：破车不同意付解约金。所以原来以为麻子要坚持合同175K的周薪，现在因为租借，不需要付遣散费了。
Torres"s deal with Milan ends in June 2016, which coincides with the expiry of his current Chelsea contract.
来源每日邮报。大意：租借到米兰知道跟破车合同结束。
我就不明白，都这样了，还有人把麻子想的那么好。他跟破车的合同依旧是有效的，破车依旧需要支付他那么多周薪。跟米兰的租借条款属于该合同的子合同，米兰付玩310，破车必须补足剩下的，知道满足跟破车的合同为止。否则，破车面临的是违约。大部分人都搞错了所谓的no fee，这个一方面是米兰跟破车租借不需要支付任何费用，另一方面是因为是租借，合同继续履行，不需要支付解约所要支付的遣散费（解约金）。直接支付解约金会对破车财政造成负担，所以当有人愿意承担1/3的薪资时，破车肯定乐意租借，因为这比破车支付解约金或者100%的工资都要好！
现在为什么不想让他回来？？就是因为回来就到了原点，支付100%薪水或者解约！降薪？没签新合同，凭什么降薪！
首先310是税后，英超都说税前。所以不可能是所谓三分之一。
现在只是说，后期没有一篇报道（新浪脑补的不算）说车子贴工资了。
比如纳尼的工资，报道里就明明白白说曼联贴的，作为罗霍交易的一部分。
究竟租借合同怎样，细节不知道，目前没有更详细
总之他现在愿意去哪里就去哪里。别回来碍事就行。
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/aug/29/chelsea-fernando-torres-milan-jose-mourinho
卫报当时说的。
will leave England after seven seasons in the Premier League and sign a two-year deal at San Siro after agreeing a compromise over his wage demands. He was initially reluctant to lower his ￡175,000-a-week salary.
他最初不愿意降低他的薪水，在对工资要求妥协后签了协议。
However, they will take some comfort from saving upwards of ￡15m in wages over the two years that were remaining on his contract. It is understood he will depart without a pay-off to replace Mario Balotelli at San Siro.
车子两年可以省1500万英镑。他离开去代替巴洛特利时没拿补偿费。作者: kosiverlar 时间: 2014-12-14 02:20 引用70楼 @yukiya 发表的:
首先310是税后，英超都说税前。所以不可能是所谓三分之一。
He currently earns about 8million each season and while Milan have agreed to cover 5.7million of that amount, there remains a 2.3million-a-year short fall.
It means they’ll have splashed out 4.6million on Torres – just for him to play for somebody else.
http://metro.co.uk/2014/08/29/chelsea-agree-to-pay-fernando-torres-4-6m-for-him-to-play-for-ac-milan-4849766/
这个应该是之前说付了4.6m的出处，米兰cover了5.7m，所以破车要补足两年4.6m。
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2014/08/30/15m-reasons-why-fernando-torres-moved-from-chelsea-to-milan-on-loan/
这个是一个福布斯专栏作者写的，麻子年薪15m美刀，对得上9m棒子。
If Chelsea had simply released Torres the club would have had to book a loss of $30M in this financial year based on the value of the transfer fee remaining to be amortized from January 2011. The original fee paid by Chelsea to Liverpool of $83M was to be amortized over Torres’ 5 and a half year contract. That means that going into the 2014/15 financial year $53M had been written off by Chelsea but $30M remained.
点出来这么操作是为了账面好看，当然，我不是学financial的，搞不懂。。。
He currently earns about 8million each season and while Milan have agreed to cover 5.7million of that amount, there remains a 2.3million-a-year short fall.
It means they’ll have splashed out 4.6million on Torres – just for him to play for somebody else.
http://metro.co.uk/2014/08/29/chelsea-agree-to-pay-fernando-torres-4-6m-for-him-to-play-for-ac-milan-4849766/
这个应该是之前说付了4.6m的出处，米兰cover了5.7m，所以破车要补足两年4.6m。
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbymcmahon/2014/08/30/15m-reasons-why-fernando-torres-moved-from-chelsea-to-milan-on-loan/
这个是一个福布斯专栏作者写的，麻子年薪15m美刀，对得上9m棒子。
If Chelsea had simply released Torres the club would have had to book a loss of $30M in this financial year based on the value of the transfer fee remaining to be amortized from January 2011. The original fee paid by Chelsea to Liverpool of $83M was to be amortized over Torres’ 5 and a half year contract. That means that going into the 2014/15 financial year $53M had been written off by Chelsea but $30M remained.
点出来这么操作是为了账面好看，当然，我不是学financial的，搞不懂。。。
