Article in Sunday Express saying takeover imminent.....

Someone just mentioned that in league one you can't spend more than 60% of your turnover on wages. Looked it up and that is correct.

 

So what will our turnover be next season? Then take 60% and that will have to be our wage bill.

 

It's a bit of a weird one, all the information is here: http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php

They didn't hang about to spunk their parachute money in the Championship.

How are wigan managing it? They have signed about 32 players

 

Probably because of this.

 

The rules apply to all clubs and there is no moratorium for clubs relegated from the Championship. However, Transitional Arrangements are in place whereby clubs are allowed to exclude the wage costs of all players that the club signed pre September of the relegation season, if they were signed on contracts in excess of 3 seasons.

Their turnover included a parachute payment, ours wont

Edited March 14, 201610 yr by Horwich

Cost of living is much cheaper in Wigan

It's a bit of a weird one, all the information is here: http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/scmp.php

If gifts count as turnover, maybe Eddie would consider/has considered giving/writing off his £170m loans in instalments.

Not that there's likely to be any money to pay much in wages.

If gifts count as turnover, maybe Eddie would consider/has considered giving/writing off his £170m loans in instalments.

Not that there's likely to be any money to pay much in wages.

I wonder if Eddie needs a good accountant. OK, I know I'm a bit long in the tooth now but, even so, experience counts for a lot.

Not making any promises, mind you.

Jay Spearing not appearing came as a surprise to everyone! Ye Gods! I have no inside knowledge but you would have to be completely braindead not to realise that there were some contractual terms that brought about his loan to t'Rovers last season and his non-appearance for much of this.

What do you call a retired accountant that talks to himself?

What do you call a retired accountant that talks to himself?

A liability?

What do you call a retired accountant that talks to himself?

 

 

Mr. Bean Counterargument?

What do you call a retired accountant that talks to himself?

 

GudniB?

What do you call a retired accountant that talks to himself?

£200 /hr

What do you call a retired accountant that talks to himself?

A crude liability

A crude liability

'This is a football forum, we don't want folks on here who know what they're talking about, do we lads?'

But with apologies to those who might find words of more than one syllable too challenging, I can at least be  pleased that, even at my age, my mental capacity is not so impaired as to fail to understand that an impairment review is not an accounting option but an accounting obligation when an impairment event occurs.

Relegation in 2012 was not so much an impairment event as a financial car crash.

As the alternative was too horrendous to contemplate, the board possibly thought they could recover the situation with Eddie Davies pouring in yet more money.

It nearly worked but nearly wasn't enough and the impairment review that followed resulted in a reported loss in excess of £50m. Its academic now (it wasn't at the time) but the reality was that the £50m loss included impairments that probably ought to have been recognised a year earlier.

Just for the record, I have no gripe whatsoever over the loss in value of my comparatively small shareholding but I do have sympathy for those who lost a lot. With the benefit of hindsight, I think it was a mistake for Eddie to take over control of the club in the way he did (unless there was no viable alternative) but its a mistake that he has more than paid for.

 

As if relegation isn't bad enough..

'This is a football forum, we don't want folks on here who know what they're talking about, do we lads?'

But with apologies to those who might find words of more than one syllable too challenging, I can at least be  pleased that, even at my age, my mental capacity is not so impaired as to fail to understand that an impairment review is not an accounting option but an accounting obligation when an impairment event occurs.

Relegation in 2012 was not so much an impairment event as a financial car crash.

As the alternative was too horrendous to contemplate, the board possibly thought they could recover the situation with Eddie Davies pouring in yet more money.

It nearly worked but nearly wasn't enough and the impairment review that followed resulted in a reported loss in excess of £50m. Its academic now (it wasn't at the time) but the reality was that the £50m loss included impairments that probably ought to have been recognised a year earlier.

Just for the record, I have no gripe whatsoever over the loss in value of my comparatively small shareholding but I do have sympathy for those who lost a lot. With the benefit of hindsight, I think it was a mistake for Eddie to take over control of the club in the way he did (unless there was no viable alternative) but its a mistake that he has more than paid for.

 

 

My brain hurts.

My brain hurts.

Forget the accounting rules. We had paid too much in transfer fees and agents costs for under-performing players and it came home to roost in the 2012/13 accounts. A £50m loss in one year sounds horrendous, it was but a fair bit of it was interest that would never be paid and a lot more was player acquisition costs that could have been written off sooner.

Edited March 15, 201610 yr by GudniB

Sorry wrong post.

Edited March 15, 201610 yr by GudniB

The really worrying thing for me is that we were told (rumour mill and unsubstantiated reports) that the make up of SS's bid was £2.5m from Thames Valley Capital and £5m from some sorta Wonga. LOVS reporting that the bit that "moved" yesterday was the Thames Valley Capital bit - so the bit that wasn't actually Wonga... If that were the case, the deal would look like - "Here's a quid for your £50m of assets, thanks for wiping the debt. We don't actually have any money to run the thing and it's leaking cash. We need to go into liquidation. Thanks for the £50m of assets."

That's why ED left 15 million of debt on the books so that they didn't do just that.

That's why ED left 15 million of debt on the books so that they didn't do just that.

 

Some people complained that he was leaving this "small" debt in place, from the little I know about it, it sounds like the right thing to do in order to prevent immediate asset stripping

That's why ED left 15 million of debt on the books so that they didn't do just that.

Sorry MK I was quoting someone else's observation. If that is in the deal, well done, Eddie. Shame he didn't leave more on the books

Forget the accounting rules. We had paid too much in transfer fees and agents costs for under-performing players and it came home to roost in the 2012/13 accounts. A £50m loss in one year sounds horrendous, it was but a fair bit of it was interest that would never be paid and a lot more was player acquisition costs that could have been written off sooner.

 

 

My brain hurts more.

I just admire how Stelios is quietly going about his business.

Can someone more financially savvy than me answer the small poll below please:

 

 

Q: Eddie Davies is a cunt

[ ]  YES

[ ]   NO

 

 

Thanks