Jump to content

£60 million transfer profit in Ashleys' time in charge ?


Guest thenorthumbrian

Recommended Posts

Guest Geordiekev

That is a hell of a transfer profit in the time Ashley has had ownership of the club.

During the same period the support has held up well, the wage bill has been slashed and from next season United will be back to recieving substantial TV payments.

The amount made available for incoming transfers should be reasonably good, 25 million or so at a rough guess.  

 

Corporate Finance, brought to you in association with the Beano.

 

£7m a week profit I heard?

 

Nah Ashley's skimming around 15m on a weekly basis, moves it from NUFC to Llambias holdings then charges a holding fee before transfering it back, the tax man over looks this as he's currently sorting out April's end of year tax returns...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But don't worry non as I heard the cash is being put away in a kitty to offer us all a free hotdog and a pint for the coming season :snod:

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a hell of a transfer profit in the time Ashley has had ownership of the club.

During the same period the support has held up well, the wage bill has been slashed and from next season United will be back to recieving substantial TV payments.

The amount made available for incoming transfers should be reasonably good, 25 million or so at a rough guess.  

 

Corporate Finance, brought to you in association with the Beano.

 

£7m a week profit I heard?

 

Nah Ashley's skimming around 15m on a weekly basis, moves it from NUFC to Llambias holdings then charges a holding fee before transfering it back, the tax man over looks this as he's currently sorting out April's end of year tax returns...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But don't worry non as I heard the cash is being put away in a kitty to offer us all a free hotdog and a pint for the coming season :snod:

sounds good to me just dont tell nolan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't realise he was talking about transfers since nowt is mentioned about that in the title.  That's almost worse really since we can all see how much has been spent and brought in through transfers (within a few million either way anyway).

 

We've brought in about £75m from transfers and spent about £56m.

 

My error -  you're right, the reference to transfers isn't in the thread title. It's actually in the opening post, not that it matters much as the £60m sounds like an invented statistic anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest thenorthumbrian

TN, where did you get this from.

 

The club has made substantial profit in the Ashley era in the transfer market.

United are the 4th or 5th top supported team throughout the leagues, and costs have been cut right back in terms of players wages and staffing generally.

In addition the TV money will be restored to the full amount next season and Newcastle only had one season with the reduced parachute payment.

I fail to see how the club can still be in the dire financial position some near the current mob running the club are claiming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TN, where did you get this from.

 

The club has made substantial profit in the Ashley era in the transfer market.

United are the 4th or 5th top supported team throughout the leagues, and costs have been cut right back in terms of players wages and staffing generally.

In addition the TV money will be restored to the full amount next season and Newcastle only had one season with the reduced parachute payment.

I fail to see how the club can still be in the dire financial position some near the current mob running the club are claiming.

 

So you've made the figure up then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Roger Kint

TN, where did you get this from.

 

The club has made substantial profit in the Ashley era in the transfer market.

United are the 4th or 5th top supported team throughout the leagues, and costs have been cut right back in terms of players wages and staffing generally.

In addition the TV money will be restored to the full amount next season and Newcastle only had one season with the reduced parachute payment.

I fail to see how the club can still be in the dire financial position some near the current mob running the club are claiming.

 

Accountancy for dummies :facepalm:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest thenorthumbrian

:lol:

 

Sorry I misjudged your ability to have a serious debate.

Something obviously way beyond some of the single cell life forms who frequent this board     

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest thenorthumbrian

TN, where did you get this from.

 

The club has made substantial profit in the Ashley era in the transfer market.

United are the 4th or 5th top supported team throughout the leagues, and costs have been cut right back in terms of players wages and staffing generally.

In addition the TV money will be restored to the full amount next season and Newcastle only had one season with the reduced parachute payment.

I fail to see how the club can still be in the dire financial position some near the current mob running the club are claiming.

 

Accountancy for dummies :facepalm:

 

Witty and clever, just two of the qualities you lack....

Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

Sorry I misjudged your ability to have a serious debate.

Something obviously way beyond some of the single cell life forms who frequent this board     

 

Calm down.

 

I can see the point your making but you've not considered our outgoings.  We have nothing to reference that 60 mil against at the minute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Roger Kint

You expect serious responses to your vague ramblings?  :kinnear:

 

 

You havent even got any figures to back up your (wrong) predictions ;D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest secteur2010

you can sort of see where he's coming from but as pointed out, he's not included outgoings, etc.

 

mind, if he's right, I'll bum cliffy ahmed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest BooBoo

The whole "Fat Ash's raking the silver in" is simply one dull tribute to the tedious ramblings of the prize dullard, HTL. Sadly seldomly seen round these parts these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is possible that £60m could be right, for example we made a clear £12m profit on Milner, £6m on Given, £7m on Dyer etc etc etc.

 

To make a transfer profit you take the selling price and take off the net book value of the player.  The net book value of the player is the original purchase price less the amortisation charge. The amortisation charge is the original purchase price divided by the length of the players original contract times the number of years at the club.

 

So Given, Milner and Dyer etc all would have a net book value of nil and hence a profit of around £30m.

 

Add Bassong, who had no cost and that's another £8m.  Martins has a profit of around £5m too, Duff £2m etc etc etc...... Was Parker sold in the Ashley era?

 

Soon adds up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Say we did recoup that 60 mil in one season (and not season by season payments from other teams)  We are still pretty unsure of what our outgoings were/are.  So that 60 mil could have been swallowed by whatever our outgoings were.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be shocked if any of recouped transfer fees went back into the "running costs". I don't need to be an accountant to know where i think it has gone.

 

Of course it has, there's no way Ashley is pocketing any of it.  If he is then the accounts will show that up.  It's more likely that it has gone on player signing on fees, agents, sell on clauses, loan interest and payoffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would DL keep banging on about ashley putting 25 mil in (i know we aint seen the books yet)  If the club pulled in 60 and he trousered it?

 

So he aint putting any in really, its the clubs money anyway ???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would DL keep banging on about ashley putting 25 mil in (i know we aint seen the books yet)  If the club pulled in 60 and he trousered it?

 

So he aint putting any in really, its the clubs money anyway ???

 

Cashflow.  The club gets its TV money and season ticket money mostly over the summer. Wages are every month. 

 

But he isn't trousering it anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would DL keep banging on about ashley putting 25 mil in (i know we aint seen the books yet)  If the club pulled in 60 and he trousered it?

 

So he aint putting any in really, its the clubs money anyway ???

 

Cashflow.  The club gets its TV money and season ticket money mostly over the summer. Wages are every month. 

 

But he isn't trousering it anyway.

 

So you are saying we get all of our income upfront but our outgoings are staggered?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...