fredbob Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 At first we had "he's not even paid off the fucking debt", now we're getting "well its his own fault for not checking" you couldnt make it up. Who wants to go for "every clubs in debt"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edd Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 so he's not paid the debt off he's just made us indebted to him instead. 'great bloke' 2.2m loss, so basically breaking even, take into account not paying debt repayments and we're looking at a tidy profit. Admit it. You didn't understand a word. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 There will inevitably be some discussion on here at some point about amortisation of players’ contracts and whether it should really count as a cost. In my opinion it should because if you ignore it you don’t reflect the money paid out for players. In other words if you ignore it you are basically saying we got Owen, Duff, Martins, Collo etc for nothing. Would not any money spent/received on player transfers be included in the operating expenses (whether it be for transfers in the current year or for delayed payments for transfers in previous years) ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 so he's not paid the debt off he's just made us indebted to him instead. 'great bloke' 2.2m loss, so basically breaking even, take into account not paying debt repayments and we're looking at a tidy profit. Eh? We knew about the debt and I don't think it makes a jot of difference. The only important thing is the repayments were reduced/stopped. As for that tidy profit, can you explain that a bit more. I'm confused as to how we are looking at any sort of profit here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 so he's not paid the debt off he's just made us indebted to him instead. 'great bloke' 2.2m loss, so basically breaking even, take into account not paying debt repayments and we're looking at a tidy profit. Admit it. You didn't understand a word. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 This is why he put so much money into recruiting a top team for finding talent on the cheap and who can blame him. It is why all our players were said to be available for the right price with talented and cheaper, younger players to be brought in as replacements. It's a tough one to pull off while keeping the team competitive but with the recruitment team he put together he seemed to believe in it working out. It was definitely more of a long term strategy, which he himself admitted to from the outset. Can't imagine Keegan would have been to thrilled at the prospect though. Spot on. If we do manage so stay up and keep on bringing these youngsters in along with shipping some of the deadwood, high earners out (Butt, Viduka, Duff, Smith, Cacapa, Geremi, etc), the future does start looking a little better. I think it would also encourage Ashley to invest more into the first team as he'd have more capital to play with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'm not sure you should include amortisation TBH. Unless you are going to include any increase in a players value too. Not that I claim to be an expert in accountancy mind so I bow to your superior knowledge. Either way it shows how much s*** the club was in and how much trouble we'd now be in without someone paying off the debts and stumping up the cash to guarantee it's future. I still expect plenty of people to be in denial mind When looking at buying up small business, our development team (where i work) dont talk to accountants to analyse the underlying strength of a prospective business. Quayside is just following the rules (quite right too). You should always talk to the accountant my man I would always argue that you should look at what type of amortisation it is before deciding if its a valid cost. The amortisation of non bought goodwill or some such should always be ignored for example. The increase in values of a player is highly subjective (just look at differeing views on here about someone like Oba) whereas what the player cost isn't at all subjective. In any case if the player leaves an increase in value is reflected as a profit on sale. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'd love to know what our wage bill is. The amount of players getting paid millions a year for doing f*** all is shocking. Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 This is why he put so much money into recruiting a top team for finding talent on the cheap and who can blame him. It is why all our players were said to be available for the right price with talented and cheaper, younger players to be brought in as replacements. It's a tough one to pull off while keeping the team competitive but with the recruitment team he put together he seemed to believe in it working out. It was definitely more of a long term strategy, which he himself admitted to from the outset. Can't imagine Keegan would have been to thrilled at the prospect though. True, which is presumably why he was actively and publicly looking for an injection of local investment so that beyond that solid structure we could occasionally splash out on Keegan style purchases. Sadly nobody seemed to want in (or indeed take the whole concern of his hands more recently). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 so he's not paid the debt off he's just made us indebted to him instead. 'great bloke' 2.2m loss, so basically breaking even, take into account not paying debt repayments and we're looking at a tidy profit. I'm sorry but that is possibly the worst post I think you have ever posted on here. Of course he was expecting payback for his loan, we all knew that from day one that if he was a sensible businessman, the money was only going to be given in an assumption that the £100m was going to be given back to him via an increased valuation of the club. And quaysides OP makes it clear that he has underwritten a £20m loss in the past year, hence giving that £20m a year he promised. With that in mind, it is clear that it is unrealistic to expect anyone coming in to do much difference unless they are genuine multi-billionaires who want some personal glory. All Ashley's faults must therefore by with regards to his handling of management affairs, as opposed lack of investment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slippery Sam Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 these accounts were up to 30th June 2008. So how much has gone into the club since then for season tickets etc? Obviously player wages will have gone out. Shame that these things are so far behind, meaning we don't have a really clear picture of the status quo during the current transfer window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 This is why he put so much money into recruiting a top team for finding talent on the cheap and who can blame him. It is why all our players were said to be available for the right price with talented and cheaper, younger players to be brought in as replacements. It's a tough one to pull off while keeping the team competitive but with the recruitment team he put together he seemed to believe in it working out. It was definitely more of a long term strategy, which he himself admitted to from the outset. Can't imagine Keegan would have been to thrilled at the prospect though. Spot on. If we do manage so stay up and keep on bringing these youngsters in along with shipping some of the deadwood, high earners out (Butt, Viduka, Duff, Smith, Cacapa, Geremi, etc), the future does start looking a little better. I think it would also encourage Ashley to invest more into the first team as he'd have more capital to play with. That's probably between 15 and 20 million in wages a year right there. :-[ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'd love to know what our wage bill is. The amount of players getting paid millions a year for doing f*** all is shocking. Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. You don't get anywhere as a football club by selling your best players and then bringing inferior ones in to replace them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'm not sure you should include amortisation TBH. Unless you are going to include any increase in a players value too. Not that I claim to be an expert in accountancy mind so I bow to your superior knowledge. Either way it shows how much s*** the club was in and how much trouble we'd now be in without someone paying off the debts and stumping up the cash to guarantee it's future. I still expect plenty of people to be in denial mind When looking at buying up small business, our development team (where i work) dont talk to accountants to analyse the underlying strength of a prospective business. Quayside is just following the rules (quite right too). You should always talk to the accountant my man Well, quite! Ashley clearly didnt. However, investors frequently use profit measures and valuation ratios that exclude amortisation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'd love to know what our wage bill is. The amount of players getting paid millions a year for doing f*** all is shocking. Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. You don't get anywhere as a football club by selling your best players and then bringing inferior ones in to replace them. Cheaper doesn't mean inferior. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 so he's not paid the debt off he's just made us indebted to him instead. 'great bloke' 2.2m loss, so basically breaking even, take into account not paying debt repayments and we're looking at a tidy profit. Worst post of 2009 already sewn up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 17.8m of the loss is made up of a charge to the balance sheet for the depreciation of intangible assets remember. This amortisation thingy.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 17.8m of the loss is made up of a charge to the balance sheet for the depreciation of intangible assets remember. This amortisation thingy.... I always knew that Chris Mort was trouble. Sorry I'll get me coat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I just hope we can stay up and make it through to the summer. I'm all for Ashley's initial plan tbh. When you look at the sums of money being paid up to the likes of Butt, Smith, Viduka, Owen, Duff and even Barton it is absolutely sickening. Not one of them has been anywhere near close to being our best performer this season. Get them all out. Our stars have been Jonas who was free and whose wages must be pretty reasonable considering where we got him from. Bassong cost nothing and is earning peanuts. Guthrie cost pretty much nothing and his wages must be pretty low too. It's a very difficult strategy to pull off but it's not impossible and if we commit to it it's the best way to go. In fact I think we need it now more than ever. We have some of the worst players in this league earning top money at Newcastle and it's infuriating to see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'd love to know what our wage bill is. The amount of players getting paid millions a year for doing f*** all is shocking. Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. You don't get anywhere as a football club by selling your best players and then bringing inferior ones in to replace them. And havent these "top players" conclusively proved that they arent worth it. Top 4 wages, top 15 perfromances.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'd love to know what our wage bill is. The amount of players getting paid millions a year for doing f*** all is shocking. Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. You don't get anywhere as a football club by selling your best players and then bringing inferior ones in to replace them. And havent these "top players" conclusively proved that they arent worth it. Top 4 wages, top 15 perfromances.... By referring to top players I thought it was obvious by mentioning people like Given, Martins, Beye etc Not the players like Duff who are on top 4 wages but giving top 15 performances. Obviously not though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 There will inevitably be some discussion on here at some point about amortisation of players contracts and whether it should really count as a cost. In my opinion it should because if you ignore it you dont reflect the money paid out for players. In other words if you ignore it you are basically saying we got Owen, Duff, Martins, Collo etc for nothing. Would not any money spent/received on player transfers be included in the operating expenses (whether it be for transfers in the current year or for delayed payments for transfers in previous years) ? No - money spent on players isn't charged against profit in operating expenses in the year it is incurred. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 And quaysides OP makes it clear that he has underwritten a £20m loss in the past year, hence giving that £20m a year he promised. Given that he hasn't actually paid out £17.8m on amortisation that figure is a little misleading (albeit technically correct). The best thing to do would be to look at the cashflows imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'd love to know what our wage bill is. The amount of players getting paid millions a year for doing f*** all is shocking. Hence the stories of all of our top players being available for the right price and who can blame them? These so called top players haven't got us anywhere near Europe which means they just aren't worth their wages. Why not get them out and bring in younger players for half the price and half the wages? Providing you can of course identify those who have the talent to perform in the first team. It's all making a lot more sense now. Ashley should have just been more open about all this from the outset. You don't get anywhere as a football club by selling your best players and then bringing inferior ones in to replace them. That's the problem Tooj. Our "top players" are in fact our more inferior ones. That is the point I was trying to make. We all watch this team week in and week out. List our best players this season in order of best to worst and you'll find that all the best performers are the cheaper ones no one was expecting much from. The big stinking pile of crap at the bottom are the ones getting heaps of money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BONTEMPI Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Fucking Allardyce's payoff boils my piss! That Freddie Shepherd is a right fucking tosser. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now