Colos Short and Curlies

The reality of that theory is that he didn't cost that much so we should have more money to improve other areas. It should be a win-win scenario. Yet people have moaned about our training facilities for years, yet when some of the money is used to improve this area people moan again. The powers that be can't win whatever they do until the monley of the £35m is off their backs one way or the other

£43million of that comes form the Bassong and AC sales in the past 12 months and also includes a relegation where you wouldn't expect anything other than a net profit from transfers in a year. I understand that we have £35m burning a hole in every one of the fans profits, and I also get why the majority of fans fall asleep at the first mention of football finance. However people need to grasp that football is a business (unless you are City or Chelsea) and at some point the books need to be balanced. We've blinked first in may respects in adressing the hole in our budget, and like in F1 with the first pit stops we won't know until later in the game whether we've done the right thing for the long term or shot our load too soon

Seen this in so many places, what's the problem with trying to spend and getting good players like Ferdinand, Shearer, Tino, Bellamy, Robert, Woodgate, Coloccini ? If Carr can find good players from cheap players just think what he could get spending a few quid. I know we also spend decent wedge on other players that summer, But iirc the Cole sale allowed us to bring in Gillespie and Ferdinand for zero net spend. Does that make the sale of Cole unambitious? To be fair at the time it seemed that way yes lol but we also paid for the most expensive defender at the time Warren Barton, David Ginola and Shaka hislop at the same time as we bought Les Ferdinand. Funny looking back how the most gifted player there was the cheapest. Same fee as we had agreed for John Salako wasn't it?

Seen this in so many places, what's the problem with trying to spend and getting good players like Ferdinand, Shearer, Tino, Bellamy, Robert, Woodgate, Coloccini ? If Carr can find good players from cheap players just think what he could get spending a few quid. Exactly right. The last 2 years have been proof that we can speculate to accumulate and we can do it very well. I've seen nothing to suggest we're massively paying over the odds in any area in that time. Apparently as soon as you spend more than £6m in a transfer fee you automatically pay unsustainable wages and the player flops or is seriously injured. Just imagine the pressure on the poor bloke if we do spend £6m plus on anyone. We're just an overly demanding bunch of fans

Seen this in so many places, what's the problem with trying to spend and getting good players like Ferdinand, Shearer, Tino, Bellamy, Robert, Woodgate, Coloccini ? If Carr can find good players from cheap players just think what he could get spending a few quid. I know we also spend decent wedge on other players that summer, But iirc the Cole sale allowed us to bring in Gillespie and Ferdinand for zero net spend. Does that make the sale of Cole unambitious?

We probably will actually - The AC35 will show up as trading profit in the accounts to June 2011 (the sale is 100% profit btw). I would be horrified if all of this was wiped out in the 2011/12 accounts due to the way ammoritsation takes transfer fees in accounts (not going to send everyone off to sleep again!). There's only really 2 measures to guage the AC sale (1) Cashflow over the 2011 and 2012 accounts (this will show where the money has gone) (2) League position in 2012 compared to 2011 (showing how effectively (1) was carried out)

Pardew said the money would be reinvested out of the Carroll sale ,he was told by Llambias and thats the crux of the current debate that that promise was made and so far very little net spend of that money. I agree that "promise" was a mistake, but I think expecting that it actually meant we would spend £35m on transfer fees is taking it far too literally. It was also made in a pressure situation by a manager trying to defend a very unpopular sale. you're missing the point. spending none of it and then giving a list of excuses to the local press including a f***ing water pipe is a pretty clear indication of what these lot are about, and you're still not seeing it. How am I missing the point? You mean I'm not coming to the same conclusion as you. the conclusion i'm coming to is that they haven't spent any of it, i fail to see how you'd be too far away from that? I don't know exactly how much they've spent, I agree it is probably quite a small proportion. But that doesn't outrage me as much as it does some people, because I never thought it would all go on transfers in the first place. What concerns me is whether we are adding decent players to the squad, which I think we are. They have "spent" around £25 million of the Carroll money. Personally, I'll judge the spending on what I see on the pitch after August. Currently they've spent £300k in my book. Are you joking? Please tell me you are... We simply haven't "spent" £25 million. Most of it appears to be sitting in the bank on the off chance that we don't sell the players we've just "bought". Which is just as f***ing bad. They've used money from the £35 million to pay Tiote's wages for the next two seasons... The money is as good as spent. And that's where the "where is the rest of the income going?" question comes into it. The phrase "smoke and mirrors" is a very appropriate one. To see where the rest of the income is going, and has gone in previous seasons, look at the club's accounts. The previous income was paying for things this new, extra income is now paying for. Yes, and resulting in regular losses and increase in debt. I don't see how this is hard to grasp, if you're paying out more money than you earn and your earnings increase, you don't go spending all of the extra. Haven't people on here said we're breaking even or will break even in the very near future? With 2 or 3 high earners leaving in the next year they can't be far away from having no excuses left. All future tense though - we're not quite there yet

Completely agree, and I also find it amusing that in any walk of business the aim is to do things cheaper, leaner and more efficinently. Except in football that is. Unless we are spending the AC35 plus then the club is penny pinching, if we make a net profit in a transfer window we are penny pinching. If Sunderland spend £6m on Gardner and we spend £4m on Cabaye, they are showing ambition, we are not. Its daft. Getting a younger cheaper player in to do the same job (or better) than what was there before can only make good footballing and financial sense. Of course there is the variable of 'will they be as good', but on paper at least this summer has seen us look to inject youth, pace and creativity whilst not over spending. If I managed to do that in my job I'd be getting a great bonus, not stick in the press

Doubt it. Even if that figure is correct, most of it will be tied up in what he owns in Sports Direct, his brands like Kangol and his ownership of the club. Money wise, he's hardly looking in the whoopsie ailse in ASDA, but cash would be a small part of his wealth His holding in Sports Direct is worth about £1.1 billion based on the current market capitalisation. Add in the fact that he has already lifted nearly £1 billion in cash when it floated (some of which is funding us) so you'd have to think he'd be worth something like £2 billion. As you say how much of that is still in cash is open to speculation. He bought back a chunk of SD shares didn't he?

Doubt it. Even if that figure is correct, most of it will be tied up in what he owns in Sports Direct, his brands like Kangol and his ownership of the club. Money wise, he's hardly looking in the whoopsie ailse in ASDA, but cash would be a small part of his wealth

Are you saying he's not? Or maybe he's questioning the masculinity of the rest of our players! He's no God, he's a Titan

what is capital gains tax then ? Has this really becoming a discussion on tax in football? Player trading does not trigger any capital gain, it is a revenue transaction. The selling club would pay corporation tax on any profit on a sale (based on the players accounting/ammortised value). A loss could also be made, reducing the tax liability. Not sure on whether player sales are outside of VAT scope or not, but if not then the ultimate purchaser would pay the VAT. Clubs will be VAT registered so would claim back any VAT paid so it is only a cashflow implication, ultimately any VAT flowing from football tansactions is picked up by the fans on ticket sales etc. VAT is charged on UK sales ie Carroll to Liverpool. Its different with sales and purchases outside the Uk. So where you could claim the VAT you paid on the profit/sale of Carroll against purchases of other players they have to come from the UK. Otherwise you can`t claim it against. Ever filed a VAT return? Yes why, I have a business turning over 500k plus a year ? Why not follow up your question with some information if your an accountant and I have worded my post incorrectly ? Well if we have sold Carroll for £35m, we will have also charged Liverpool 20% VAT which we hand over to HMRC and Liverpool claim back (assuming VAT registered etc etc) There's no question of 'charging' this against purchases etc, we would be a vessel for getting the VAT to HMRC in this transaction and nothing else

what is capital gains tax then ? Has this really becoming a discussion on tax in football? Player trading does not trigger any capital gain, it is a revenue transaction. The selling club would pay corporation tax on any profit on a sale (based on the players accounting/ammortised value). A loss could also be made, reducing the tax liability. Not sure on whether player sales are outside of VAT scope or not, but if not then the ultimate purchaser would pay the VAT. Clubs will be VAT registered so would claim back any VAT paid so it is only a cashflow implication, ultimately any VAT flowing from football tansactions is picked up by the fans on ticket sales etc. VAT is charged on UK sales ie Carroll to Liverpool. Its different with sales and purchases outside the Uk. So where you could claim the VAT you paid on the profit/sale of Carroll against purchases of other players they have to come from the UK. Otherwise you can`t claim it against. Ever filed a VAT return?

what is capital gains tax then ? Has this really becoming a discussion on tax in football? Player trading does not trigger any capital gain, it is a revenue transaction. The selling club would pay corporation tax on any profit on a sale (based on the players accounting/ammortised value). A loss could also be made, reducing the tax liability. Not sure on whether player sales are outside of VAT scope or not, but if not then the ultimate purchaser would pay the VAT. Clubs will be VAT registered so would claim back any VAT paid so it is only a cashflow implication, ultimately any VAT flowing from football tansactions is picked up by the fans on ticket sales etc.

Has to be Benzema. Unless there is a striker called None out there somewhere

Suspended

Liverpool Away first game City Away last game Thats my prediction anyway

I remembe back at Christmas 96 I got the long sleeved home shirt and wanted a name on the back. Thinking we were going to be paying per letter and number I was all set for 7 Lee, when it was £5 all in I thought fuck that and got 18 Gillespie.

I know what you mean, [b[i just don't see why everything positive has to have a massive caveat tagged onto the end.[/b] Ba is a good signing, he's better than all our other strikers. Let's judge the other business on its own merits. it doesn't, but it absolutely must be judged with reference to selling a player for 35m and then promising to invest that money into the squad publicly ian, i'm sorry like but it fucking does The thing is, we could easily go and spend £35m this summer, we could aeasily spend £15m on a striker. I'm sure West Ham would bite our hands off at £15m for Carlton Cole. Its not the amount of money that is spent, its how it is spent. And if £35m goes into a number of £5-10m players, Ba's signing on fee (and likely higher wages than AC was on), Tiote's contract and hopefully Enriques contract thenits money well spent. We could even keep some of it for Jan, or even next summer. It's not a race, and as long as it doesn'g go into MA's pocket no-one should really be complaining that it hasn't gone into the club

People who aren't happy with him - if he had come direct from Germany would you be any happier as he would be an unknown and further proof to our new scouting teams powers? Edit, it was a £7m deal to Stoke that fell down wasn't it? So about the same as Gameiro then

What does it matter who's in for him? It's by no-means a sign of how good a player is. So he's not good enough for 19 other Premier League sides, but he's so important to us? I worry about our club if we're that reliant on a 29 year old who's probably had his indian summer. Similar to when Neil Redfearn got about 10 goals for Barnsley in the Premier League, or when Hutchison got a similar number for Sunderland when they had one of their good seasons before he disappeared from the face of the earth. I'll always have fond memories for Nolan for what he did to the club, but if we're going to finish top 6 anytime soon, it's not going to be if we're so heavily reliant on the likes of Nolan. How do you know he's not good enough for 19 other Premier League sides like? Tiote's good enough for the majority of the PL, but I don't see them all lining up to sign him. It doesn't mean owt man - I don't need Bolton or Stoke to tell me that i want to keep Nolan. I know it. Except he isn't Redfearn, or Hutchinson. He's Kevin Nolan. His own man, his own player. There's nothing to say how many PL goals he'd get next term. I don't see Tiote signing for a championship team either tbf. Bellamy? He'd walk into half of the teams in the PL, yet signed for Cardiff last summer. Citeh restricted who he could sign for though. Pretty sure he would have gone to Spurs if Citeh had allowed it

I don't actually know the answer, but how many of Nolans goals cam pre and post Pardew's appointment? Said it earlier, but if we're going to be looking a more passing based game with a smaller frontman, Nolan gets marginalised in his effectiveness

My personal taked on Nolan is that as an impact player from the bench he would be pretty limited. He's never going to change the pattern of a game, so you're relying on him being in the right place at the right time. Couple that with an apparent switch in style to a smaller front man and more fluent passing, he becomes more and more marginalised. On this, I'm not too sad to see him leave. However, we do need to beef out the squad somewhat - I cold see us giving Ireland another loan if Big Eck doesn't fancy him.

If you are challenging for 6th you are a bad season from a top 4 team away from CL football. Everton have managed it, Spurs managed it, We managed it. Villa almost got there a few years ago as well Without City money its nigh on impossible to go into a season thinking you have a good shout of breaking the top 4, but fairly recent history shows that itsnot impossible for a team to gate crash in any given year. Liverpool and Spurs will be hoping for that next year and we should be working to get to that position as well as quickly as possible

The beauty of that front 3 (exc the main striker) is that all players would be happy switching throughout games into any of the three positions and would also give flexibility between a 4-4-2, a 4-2-2-1-1 and a 4-2-3-1 without needing to change personnel mid game. Mind Gervinho would also provide most of that too