Optimistic Nut Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Seeing those figures though, I hope to fuck Fulham win the Play Offs. Didn't Leeds make the Play Off Final in one of their early Championship seasons and have never been close since? This could be the biggest game in Villa's history coming up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ElCid Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 It's about £30m more than I'd have guessed off the top of my head but was always expecting a massive hit last year and not the greatest net spend last year. This year though it should surely be a figure around what the mid-table sides were spending or at least not far off? You maybe right but on past evidence and the fact that the fat cunt has delayed the accounts and stated his usual shit of Rafa getting every penny the club makes it think there will be very average amounts of money being spent this transfer window and certainly not enough to make Rafa thinks he has the tools to take this club forwards. And as for putting an exta 100 million on the club value is plainly laughable. The fat cunt has no intention in the slightest of investing into this club and taking it forward - something he has proven time and time again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 The fat cunt has no intention in the slightest of investing into this club and taking it forward - something he has proven time and time again. What exactly are you expecting? And a strange thing to say when the figures today show he put in £15m in 16/17. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ElCid Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 The fat cunt has no intention in the slightest of investing into this club and taking it forward - something he has proven time and time again. What exactly are you expecting? And a strange thing to say when the figures today show he put in £15m in 16/17. So he put in 15 million based on relegation that he was 100% at fault for and an increase of 30 million in wages yeah right - are you on a different planet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 He did put in £15m though. That's in the press release. So I'm on that planet right now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ElCid Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 He did put in £15m though. That's in the press release. So I'm on that planet right now. It's in the press release that we had an increase of 30 million in wages also. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chopey Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 The extra 6 weeks it took to post these accounts has me very suspicious plenty of time to cook the books Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ElCid Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 The extra 6 weeks it took to post these accounts has me very suspicious plenty of time to cook the books Exactly! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 The extra 6 weeks it took to post these accounts has me very suspicious plenty of time to cook the books Exactly! That extra 6 weeks makes little difference in terms of the time since the end of the period and now. These are numbers from June 2017. The only possible trick would be if our PL survival somehow impacts FFP (and I'm not sure how that now works as it seems to change so much) which is perhaps why we've taken the onerous charge. This will all make a lot more sense when the full accounts are published. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 The extra 6 weeks it took to post these accounts has me very suspicious plenty of time to cook the books 6 fucking weeks man, really? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sho Time Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Can't believe it took me this long to realise that Mike Ashley is an anagram of fuck off and die you cockney cunt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 The extra 6 weeks it took to post these accounts has me very suspicious plenty of time to cook the books 6 fucking weeks man, really? These tweets are from a few weeks ago Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Is this scenario at all possible? You have 2 businesses, 1 is massively profitable the other makes nowt therefore why not take some of the profitable bit of business 2 and move it to business 1 meaning the 2nd makes a bigger loss while the 1st a bigger profit. Ashley then includes the loss of NUFC in his personal tax return meaning 47% of that loss is recovered by paying less tax! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Nothing connected with this utterly shady cunt can be trusted. Vile man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odear Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 We spent just shy of 40m last summer. No way Rafa would accept 50 as a budget and see that as some sort of serious improvement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinport53 Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 We spent just shy of 40m last summer. No way Rafa would accept 50 as a budget and see that as some sort of serious improvement. I thought we only had an 11mil net spend though? If he gets 50mil and sales that means he would have 30 mil more as a rough figure compared to last summer. I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Chris Waugh of the chronicle reports "In Charnley’s statement, he refers to the “support and backing” Ashley provided - in the form of a one-off £15m interest-free loan, taking the total money the club owe the Sports Direct billionaire to £144m - while he also stresses such an approach was “only made possible by the continued financial support of the owner”. So £15m was added to the £129m the club owes Mike Ashley. But I took a look at the accounts a while back when I was bored and drunk. The loan was actually £33m and Ashley used the other £18m to repay himself some of the loan the club owed him? http://i65.tinypic.com/15ebivm.jpg F**k knows Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Chris Waugh of the chronicle reports "In Charnley’s statement, he refers to the “support and backing” Ashley provided - in the form of a one-off £15m interest-free loan, taking the total money the club owe the Sports Direct billionaire to £144m - while he also stresses such an approach was “only made possible by the continued financial support of the owner”. So £15m was added to the £129m the club owes Mike Ashley. But I took a look at the accounts a while back when I was bored and drunk. The loan was actually £33m and Ashley used the other £18m to repay himself some of the loan the club owed him? http://i65.tinypic.com/15ebivm.jpg F**k knows So in reality the debt owed to should have actually decreased by £3m? I wish even one journalist would start seriously looking into our accounts against Ashleys spin. Does it state anywhere in the accounts how much was currently owed at that point in time? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Chris Waugh of the chronicle reports "In Charnley’s statement, he refers to the “support and backing” Ashley provided - in the form of a one-off £15m interest-free loan, taking the total money the club owe the Sports Direct billionaire to £144m - while he also stresses such an approach was “only made possible by the continued financial support of the owner”. So £15m was added to the £129m the club owes Mike Ashley. But I took a look at the accounts a while back when I was bored and drunk. The loan was actually £33m and Ashley used the other £18m to repay himself some of the loan the club owed him? http://i65.tinypic.com/15ebivm.jpg F**k knows So in reality the debt owed to should have actually decreased by £3m? I wish even one journalist would start seriously looking into our accounts against Ashleys spin. Does it state anywhere in the accounts how much was currently owed at that point in time? You would have to look here https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00031014/filing-history to find out, but its what was being reported. Wouldnt the original £18m have to come from the club to reduce the debt? and if it did why is it part of a secured loan from mike Ashley himself? How do you repay debt from a loan without reducing the loan? IDK. I suppose its why Im not rich Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Thanks. Debt in 2015 was £129 million and in 2016 was £131.1 million I believe. So it should be roughly the same now(I'm missing out last season here aren't I?). All self inflicted by Ashley of course. Another 10 years and a few more relegations and we might owe him more than the clubs actually worth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 A clue in the accounts might be how Ashley has paid himself parts of the loan back in the past. Im sure people noticed after both promotion seasons from the championship.. Mike had a problem with bonuses for the players. Both Joey Barton and Lascalles had exactly the same problem, it suggests history with this tw@t repeats itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Are we still remembering to factor in all the revenue streams he's stolen from the club when being shocked at the "losses" announced? Free advertising for his tatty Chav clothes shops for starters, and isn't he creaming off all the profits from the club shop now through his own company? Or am I mistaken? He seems to keep doing this with different revenue streams so his other businesses make a profit and NUFC makes a loss, then he lends money back to NUFC, thus doubling down on what's owed back to him. He's a fucking parasite, he really is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Ashley has simply moved the exposure to a company having previously been in part provided by him personally. It’s not really relevant, could be for any host of reasons, most likely for tax management. Net impact is Ashley injected £15m into the business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 It was leaked the merchandise deal sports shiite had with Rangers was 7% the club received 7p for every £1 sold.. ours hasnt been revealed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelveys Hair Posted May 18, 2018 Share Posted May 18, 2018 Ashley has simply moved the exposure to a company having previously been in part provided by him personally. It’s not really relevant, could be for any host of reasons, most likely for tax management. Net impact is Ashley injected £15m into the business. So is it possible Ashley includes the loss of NUFC in his personal tax return meaning 47% of that loss is recovered by paying less tax? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts