quayside

Don't disagree with your structural point. But imo if we had a proper goal scorer up front such as Ba (as he was) or Remy the whole thing racks up a notch. So chances become goals and half chances become chances - if you see what I mean

Aye, more than likely. Moussa's agent will be like a fly round s*** atm scraping around the barrel for moves before the Euros Would be surprised if we sign Shelvey and one of our current midfielders doesn't leave and Moussa is probably the most "marketable" tbh. Given our recent hit rate getting a striker in who knows where the net is has to be a priority surely....

Looks like 47k of shares bought at an inflated price too? The £6 million trade was what is called an uncrossing trade. I am not an expert on this but as I understand it an uncrossing trade is an adjusting trade that is put through at the end of the day to balance the trading book up, it isn't a trade where someone actually pays money for the shares. The £47k trade could be at that price (£4.58) because it was a big buy and it took some time to complete the transaction, so the order to buy could have been placed earlier today or even yesterday when the price was higher.

Perhaps more than anyone other than Kevin Keegan this man represented an era we'll never see again. Not because he was world class or had all the crap that goes with players that think they are. But because of his total dedication to our cause. We loved him and he loved us. RIP and thank you.

The trouble is we all know if this incident had involved Vincent Kompany, Koscielny or Smalling it would not be given. And despite Mourinho's persecution complex it wouldn't be given if John Terry does it either. And if those players are playing at their home ground Steven Fletcher probably gets booked for diving

There's all sorts of problems with our defending, we look like we could concede any time the ball is anywhere near our penalty area - but I can't even remember the last time I enjoyed one of our games as much as that.

Me too - heart warming stuff it is too....

Yup, probably just met the Palermo oldtype. I certainly met the Majorca oldtype in a bar a few years back. He was born and bred on the island but Toon mad and proudly wearing the black and white with "Josep 9" on the back.

Opening myself up for derision but anyway Just got back from a holiday in Sicily. At Palermo airport there was a bloke sitting near me talking fairly loudly on his mobile. My knowledge of Italian is sketchy to say the least especially when it is spoken at breakneck speed. However the words "St James Park" and "Newcastle" were mentioned frequently. He caught a plane to Stansted. I would say he was probably in his 40s . I have tried a few internet searches to see if I can find a picture of anyone connected with Palermo FC who looks like him but I haven't really got much to go on tbh Maybe an agent or perhaps we are having a pre season friendly against Palermo? Or possibly I found myself in the presence of Newcastle's one die hard fan who is based in Palermo.....

And even Amdy Faye managed to do that.....

He has been blatantly waiting for Derby to sack him so he gets financial compensation for early contract termination - plus if we (or anyone) want him he won't cost a penny. What a sorry mess this game has become....

Gone from £4m overdraft to £34m in credit therefore what Anderson said is correct.

I think that's absolutely correct. Also the accounting policy does say that any impairment must be based on a "measureable net realiseable value" which basically means they have to come up up with some sort of logical method of valuation to satisfy the auditors! Obviously a sale/disposal of a player after the balance sheet date (these accounts do relate to a period of time that finished more than 9 months ago) would provide concrete evidence. I'd be interested to know if there were any players values written down for other reasons and how it was calculated though.

Aye, I guess so. There are reasons why things like amortisaion/depreciation are charged in accounts. Mostly it is to do with reflecting the fact that when you buy an asset (a player) it is intended that you get value for the player over the duration of a number of years. If you hit the accounting profit with the full value in one go then it is a distortion of the transaction that has taken place. I fully understand why people don't like it and it always gets a fair amount of air time on here. I suppose the key thing to look at is cash flow which has far less subjectivity, it shows we had £34 million in the bank as at 30th June 2014.

The accounting policy on amortisation in note 1(f)(1) gives some scope for impairment if "it is clear that a player is no longer expected to remain an active member of the playing squad". Any impairment must be based on "a measureable net realiseable value". Hope that helps!

In round numbers as far as I can see the 3 things that have reduced the profit from the expected levels are: Increase in wages £16 million Increase in amortisation £6 million Increase in "other operating charges" £6 million The wages increase is a surprise but without knowing who is earning what its hard to pinpoint, a bonus system is a possibility as someone earlier said. The amortisation is also a surprise as at first glance the gross cost of the squad of players has gone down from £88 million to £83 million from 2013 to 2014. Although that isn't a totally foolproof guide it does suggest there may have been some sort of impairment provision put through. No idea what "other operating charges" consists of.

Indeed. If he puts that ridiculous statement in the Telegraph he is going to look like an utter prick.

I can't see any way that he will get the gig. The only ambition Ashley has is to stay in Premiership and even he can see there is a huge risk that Carver could fail to achieve that.

The only info we have as of now is a reported profit figure, we don't know how that splits between operating profit and ultimate bottom line. As you know impairment of any asset comes off the bottom line at some point. It will become clearer when the full accounts are published.

The only thing is (and sorry to muddy the waters further) the taxation system has its own rules for allowable amortisation/depreciation. It's called Capital Allowances and there are specific rules on how and how much you can reduce your taxable profit by when it comes to writing down assets.

Yes thats correct, and cash in the bank doesn't lie - if you get my drift. Yeah, so income-minus-costs still makes profit, even if you stash the cash in the bank? So we would need other ways to manage the profit down. Your confusing accounting profit with real profit. Cash revenue - cash costs = cash left to invest This you can't play with to the same extent. But there are a few ways. 10 year season tickets gives us more cash upfront than expected. Buying players in full cash but selling players and taking installments would have a negative impact. So you need both to get a good understanding of the full picture. The difference between cash profit and accounting profit is that cash profit is the difference between what comes in and what goes out. Whereas there are different methods of recognising both income and costs in getting to an accounting profit.

Yes thats correct, and cash in the bank doesn't lie - if you get my drift. Yeah, so income-minus-costs still makes profit, even if you stash the cash in the bank? So we would need other ways to manage the profit down. Yes, for example as has been mentioned you can mess around with asset valuations to alter your reported profit. You could decide that certain players aren't worth the value they are recorded at in the balance sheet, and stick through an extra charge for amortisation - and that will reduce your profit. You would have to come up with a plausible reason. Albert Luque is a player who I remember being given this particular treatment, although in his case there was concrete evidence that he was overvalued as (apart from being fairly crap) he was sold for a fraction of his carrying value after the balance sheet date.

Profit yes, cash on its own no. I imagine there will be some write down in player value (Ben Arfa, MYM, Santon perhaps) along with some 'consultancy costs' in relation to various club/business development ideas and some training ground improvements. Wouldn't surprise me to see costs in relation to obtaining hosting rights for the Rugby World Cup games in there as well. Of course this will all be neatly wrapped up in admin or professional fees 25m though It's a huge chunk of money. It may take a bit of searching but the answer will be buried somewhere in the notes to the published accounts. Or hopefully there could be a huge chunk of "cash at bank" which means the profit's been massaged but the cash is still there. Us accountants prefer the word 'managed' to massaged! Speak for yourself As long as its not 'fudged' eh?! Oh yes

Yes thats correct, and cash in the bank doesn't lie - if you get my drift.

Profit yes, cash on its own no. I imagine there will be some write down in player value (Ben Arfa, MYM, Santon perhaps) along with some 'consultancy costs' in relation to various club/business development ideas and some training ground improvements. Wouldn't surprise me to see costs in relation to obtaining hosting rights for the Rugby World Cup games in there as well. Of course this will all be neatly wrapped up in admin or professional fees 25m though It's a huge chunk of money. It may take a bit of searching but the answer will be buried somewhere in the notes to the published accounts. Or hopefully there could be a huge chunk of "cash at bank" which means the profit's been massaged but the cash is still there. Us accountants prefer the word 'managed' to massaged! Speak for yourself