Twitter nonsense

[BeloEmre]

Mark Douglas says Chelsea want £20m for Sturridge.

 

Don't think they'll get that. Those clubs who're able to pay that amount of cash need a striker that's capable of scoring enough goals to take them to CL or Europe asap, and Sturridge is not that kind of player, yet. But I think he will be.

Carroll?

[Guest bimpy474]

We've never paid £20M before and we will never pay it under Ashley, i like the way we are approaching signing and if we do make two or three more at around £3m to £7m each, if the signing are turn out decent then we are going about it the right way finally.

[Guest Chubby Jason]

My mate who works for someone who knows someone close to mike ashleys

Doctor seems to think Defo will sign tomorrow.

 

Now I know for a fact this lad doesn't talk s***.

 

If he does not sign by lunch time tomorrow you can drink a pint of my p*ss.

 

I hope he doesn't sign then. I'd love that.

[Jack Flash]

You can get 5/1 on Defoe signing for us if anyone believes we're after him.

[Ketsbaia]

£20m is excessive for someone who - despite looking very promising - has still only had half a season of scoring goals. I mean he was great in that time and I'd really like to see him here, but he isn't necessarily the answer and hasn't proved himself yet. £12-15m is fair (begrudgingly accepting this English player inflation).

[morpeth mag]

how much for defoe? not sure i reate him but alot better than what we've got and might fit our new style.

[Mr Logic]

Our bezza Colin tweeting

 

Might start deleting posts that contain this. Getting beyond a joke.

 

The thread is basically called 'Bollocks', how much more beyond a joke can it get?

[toontownman]

Would be happy with Defoe, he is very hot and cold but still miles ahead of what we have. Wouldnt want to be paying more than 8m for him though.

 

Sturridge for 20m seems about right in todays stupid market, 10m is reasonable if not still too much but looking around at the likes of Jones, Bent, Carroll and Henderson going for 3 times their actual worth I would be slapping the same price on Sturridge if I was Chelsea.

 

 

[Guest Roger Kint]

Our overall loss after player trading on the last figures was £17m. I'm by no means an expert on the finances but considering it was widely reported that we received £30m up front for Carroll, without some serious spending in the rest of the transfer window and/or January I'm not sure how we will fail to post a significant profit next time around. Unless someone can explain how the wage bill has increased massively since the last set of figures.

 

Well dirty Derek did say we were breaking even so if wages stay about the same as last season or less we are laughing.......

 

 

[Rebellious]

When you buy goods irl who pays the tax? the buyer. Not saying its the same for football, but it's 50-50 that it could be

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 ?  Your now assuming the 35mill is an ex vat figure ? I was assuming the 35mill was Vat inclusive. Therefore after we give HMRC his 20% we would actually be left with 28mill. Yes its a very basic analysis of everything because we would need to know the whole accounts for that financial quarter. What I was trying to stress is just because you receive 35mill for someone doesnt mean you can go out and spend 35mill ? I don`t know quite what your going on about ?  Liverpool would be VAT registered because its obvious to anyone there above the threshold for opting out ?  Reading what you have written does not make any sense ?

 

 

[Wullie]

When you buy goods irl who pays the tax? the buyer. Not saying its the same for football, but it's 50-50 that it could be

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 ?  Your now assuming the 35mill is an ex vat figure ? I was assuming the 35mill was Vat inclusive. Therefore after we give HMRC his 20% we would actually be left with 28mill. Yes its a very basic analysis of everything because we would need to know the whole accounts for that financial quarter. What I was trying to stress is just because you receive 35mill for someone doesnt mean you can go out and spend 35mill ? I don`t know quite what your going on about ?  Liverpool would be VAT registered because its obvious to anyone there above the threshold for opting out ?  Reading what you have written does not make any sense ?

 

Our competitors won't stop spending money over tax concerns though, so the point is moot.

[Rebellious]

When you buy goods irl who pays the tax? the buyer. Not saying its the same for football, but it's 50-50 that it could be

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 ?  Your now assuming the 35mill is an ex vat figure ? I was assuming the 35mill was Vat inclusive. Therefore after we give HMRC his 20% we would actually be left with 28mill. Yes its a very basic analysis of everything because we would need to know the whole accounts for that financial quarter. What I was trying to stress is just because you receive 35mill for someone doesnt mean you can go out and spend 35mill ? I don`t know quite what your going on about ?  Liverpool would be VAT registered because its obvious to anyone there above the threshold for opting out ?  Reading what you have written does not make any sense ?

 

Our competitors won't stop spending money over tax concerns though, so the point is moot.

 

True Wullie. All I have been trying to get across in this thread was that I don`t buy into this Mike Ashley is secretly robbing our cash conspiracy theory. I think its bollocks. I just got sick of reading posts about there being this 35mill in his pocket and lifes that simple. I`m no accountant but I do run a business and pay all the taxes that Ashley pays albeit on a minute scale compared. I have not got time to explain accounts to people either. All I know is if you sell something, in this case a player by the time you take your percentage which is the gross profit its usually f**k all compared to what you started with. You have to minus running costs,VAT,PAYE,NI and other taxes. Even paying someone a wage costs an employer money.

 

You say our competitors wont` stop spending over tax concerns ?  Look what happened to Portsmouth.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mattslater/2010/02/portsmouth_fc_in_crisis_qa.html

 

Also this website is quite interesting. Its a table of how much was spent by each club and what position they finished in over the past few seasons.

 

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/transfer-fees-v-league-positions/premier-league-2007-2011.html

 

I just think a lot of people are spending the transfer window worrying about weather we spend 35mill or not. Rather than looking at who we have brought in and who has finally gone. We are a better team already than last year or the year before or the year before.

[SteveMc]

When you buy goods irl who pays the tax? the buyer. Not saying its the same for football, but it's 50-50 that it could be

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 ?  Your now assuming the 35mill is an ex vat figure ? I was assuming the 35mill was Vat inclusive. Therefore after we give HMRC his 20% we would actually be left with 28mill. Yes its a very basic analysis of everything because we would need to know the whole accounts for that financial quarter. What I was trying to stress is just because you receive 35mill for someone doesnt mean you can go out and spend 35mill ? I don`t know quite what your going on about ?  Liverpool would be VAT registered because its obvious to anyone there above the threshold for opting out ?  Reading what you have written does not make any sense ?

 

Our competitors won't stop spending money over tax concerns though, so the point is moot.

 

True Wullie. All I have been trying to get across in this thread was that I don`t buy into this Mike Ashley is secretly robbing our cash conspiracy theory. I think its bollocks. I just got sick of reading posts about there being this 35mill in his pocket and lifes that simple. I`m no accountant but I do run a business and pay all the taxes that Ashley pays albeit on a minute scale compared. I have not got time to explain accounts to people either. All I know is if you sell something, in this case a player by the time you take your percentage which is the gross profit its usually f**k all compared to what you started with. You have to minus running costs,VAT,PAYE,NI and other taxes. Even paying someone a wage costs an employer money.

 

You say our competitors wont` stop spending over tax concerns ?  Look what happened to Portsmouth.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mattslater/2010/02/portsmouth_fc_in_crisis_qa.html

 

Also this website is quite interesting. Its a table of how much was spent by each club and what position they finished in over the past few seasons.

 

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/transfer-fees-v-league-positions/premier-league-2007-2011.html

 

I just think a lot of people are spending the transfer window worrying about weather we spend 35mill or not. Rather than looking at who we have brought in and who has finally gone. We are a better team already than last year or the year before or the year before.

 

Good stuff rebellious and I agree with all of that - in particular the looking at the squad rather than balance sheet line.  The sad fact is though, that all logic withstanding, some fans and the media will use the 35m as a stick to beat the club with.  That is in large part the club's fault because of all the rhetoric about the 35m being spent (in the months since the Carroll sale).

[Mr Logic]

 

I just think a lot of people are spending the transfer window worrying about weather we spend 35mill or not. Rather than looking at who we have brought in and who has finally gone. We are a better team already than last year or the year before or the year before.

 

[Cronky]

Mark Douglas says Chelsea want £20m for Sturridge.

 

Don't think they'll get that. Those clubs who're able to pay that amount of cash need a striker that's capable of scoring enough goals to take them to CL or Europe asap, and Sturridge is not that kind of player, yet. But I think he will be.

 

Chelsea may be thinking that a lot of clubs in our kind of category will be after him, and they may get an inflated price by starting an auction.

 

Chelsea have managed to mess up the development of a few players (eg Johnson, Wright-Phillips) by buying young talent and then not using it. I hope that won't happen with Sturridge, because he has both pace and skill. At this stage, it's important he gets regular football in a side that matches his ability.

[morpeth mag]

I think you have to consider what the base spend for the club should be before you can decide if the £35m is supplementing this or not. I've just done some basic calculations that are there to be shot down. Based on a turnover of £100m plus I've given myself a player budget of £70m pa. This may be a little high but I'd guess is about the present position. With this budget I'm going to fund a squad of 25 players plus 10 youth players who may play first team football in the season. I'm going to have 5 star/international players, 6 first teamers, 9 who could expect to always expect to play or be on the bench and 5 utility players together with the 10 youths. I'm paying them £60k pw, £50k pw, £40k pw, 30k pw and £10k pw respectively for each category in my budget. Even with oncosts of 10% this is a total of £69m - just under budget.

 

If you then compare who we have in each of these categories I get:

 

Stars - Colo, Smith, Barton, Ben Arfa (4)

1st Team - Saylor, Tiote, Cabaye, Marveaux, Ba, Enrique, Xisco (7)

Regular - Krul, Harper, Simpson, Williamson, Jonas, Ameobi, Best, Lovenkrands (8)

Squad - Perch, Raylor, Kadar, Ferguson, Guthrie, Gosling (6)

Youth - Ameobi, Foster, Abeid, LuaLua, Vuckic, Ranger, Soderberg, Tavernier, Richardson, Moyo (10)

 

The allocation of players to status is my guess of their salary. From that you'll see that we have a full squad as we stand with our player budget used up. If you then assume that Smith and Xisco are a total waste of space and that they have one and two(?) years respectively left on their contracts then you might use £10m of the Any Carroll windfall to buy their spaces from the squad. This then enables you to sign two more players this Summer. Equally if you are able to move other players on like Best / Ranger then you free up spaces.

 

Despite the earlier ridicule of some I still think a club like NUFC should budget for at least £10m pa in transfer/agent fees. By my reckoning we've spent £5m or so net to date this summer including agent fees etc. It is clear that we have a budget of some £20m plus left so I'm still expecting a top striker to arrive this Summer or else I think we can genuinly ask where has the cash gone.

[Guest Geordiesned]

 

I just think a lot of people are spending the transfer window worrying about weather we spend 35mill or not. Rather than looking at who we have brought in and who has finally gone. We are a better team already than last year or the year before or the year before.

 

 

I think only time will tell if we are a better team or not tbh.

 

My concern though is that our squad is still far too small. Of the 25 man Premier League squad we have to name there, at present, is quite a few players who aren't good enough and kids who aren't ready.

[NG32]

Mark Douglas says Chelsea want £20m for Sturridge.

 

15 mil up front then they can have the other 5 mil once he has made 5 england appreances. 

 

 

Fuck it i dont know. 

 

[Dave]

FWIW Douglas still thinks we will make a £10m+ signing this summer, but it won't be a marquee signing. Not really sure how the two are mutually exclusive like, considering we've not made a signing of that value since Ashley bought the club.

[ponsaelius]

Yer, what constitutes a marquee signing is surely dependant on the status and position of the club. A £10 million+ signing for us considering our last few windows in particular would certainly be a 'marquee signing'

[Guest Heneage]

FWIW Douglas still thinks we will make a £10m+ signing this summer, but it won't be a marquee signing. Not really sure how the two are mutually exclusive like, considering we've not made a signing of that value since Ashley bought the club.

Coloccini?

[wormy]

Barfa was a marquee signing for me, like. Let alone a £10m+

[Mick]

 

True Wullie. All I have been trying to get across in this thread was that I don`t buy into this Mike Ashley is secretly robbing our cash conspiracy theory. I think its bollocks. I just got sick of reading posts about there being this 35mill in his pocket and lifes that simple. I`m no accountant but I do run a business and pay all the taxes that Ashley pays albeit on a minute scale compared. I have not got time to explain accounts to people either. All I know is if you sell something, in this case a player by the time you take your percentage which is the gross profit its usually f**k all compared to what you started with. You have to minus running costs,VAT,PAYE,NI and other taxes. Even paying someone a wage costs an employer money.

 

You say our competitors wont` stop spending over tax concerns ?  Look what happened to Portsmouth.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mattslater/2010/02/portsmouth_fc_in_crisis_qa.html

 

Also this website is quite interesting. Its a table of how much was spent by each club and what position they finished in over the past few seasons.

 

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/transfer-fees-v-league-positions/premier-league-2007-2011.html

 

I just think a lot of people are spending the transfer window worrying about weather we spend 35mill or not. Rather than looking at who we have brought in and who has finally gone. We are a better team already than last year or the year before or the year before.

 

You keep mentioning VAT, would the club not be able to reclaim the VAT?

[Guest michaelfoster]

FWIW Douglas still thinks we will make a £10m+ signing this summer, but it won't be a marquee signing. Not really sure how the two are mutually exclusive like, considering we've not made a signing of that value since Ashley bought the club.

Coloccini?

 

£9.1m

 

/pedantic

[Guest Heneage]

FWIW Douglas still thinks we will make a £10m+ signing this summer, but it won't be a marquee signing. Not really sure how the two are mutually exclusive like, considering we've not made a signing of that value since Ashley bought the club.

Coloccini?

 

£9.1m

 

/pedantic

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/newcastle_united/7546685.stm