shurlock Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 (edited) Those accounts covered a period between 13 months and 25 months ago. A lot has happened and been spent since then, including £37.5m of transfers in and £30m on Staplewood. Such is the nature of financial results but they remain the latest ones. Will be very surprised if the transfer fees are all guaranteed (over several years) and not conditioned with add-ons. Whether Roma see the entire fee for Osvaldo is debatable. Of course, we've subsequently sold Lovren for a massive profit, the value of Wanyama is likely to hold up etc. Am sure the player wage bill as a % of turnover has crept up, even with the massive increase in TV money for the 2013/14 season but unless there have fundamental restructuring of contracts across the board, not enough to significantly move the dial and so its possible to be pretty sanguine about the financial condition of the club. Edited 27 July, 2014 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 (edited) Such is the nature of financial results but they remain the latest ones. Will be very surprised if the transfer fees are all guaranteed and not conditioned with add-ons. Whether Roma see the entire fee for Osvaldo is debatable. Of course, we've subsequently sold Lovren for a massive profit, the value of Wanyama is likely to hold up etc. Am sure the player wage bill as a % of turnover has crept up, even with the massive increase in TV money for the 2013/14 season but unless there have fundamental restructuring of contracts across the board, not enough to significantly move the dial and so its possible to be pretty sanguine about the financial condition of the club. Its hard to draw any meaningful conclusions from the accounts of a private company without the benefit of a detailed annual report explaining the context. Thats particularly true of a football club where the valuation of assets / liabilities is almost entirely subjective - how do you value two players signed for £10m on three year contracts one of whom has been outstanding but is 30 years old and the other has been crap, has a possible crocked knee but it only 22? Is one an asset and the other a nett liability? What if one gets a doubling in wages if hes called up for England? A PWC auditor sure as hell wont know. Multiply those variables by 25 odd first teamers and 40 or so academy and youth players and the margin for making the figures show what you want them to show is huge. For what its worth I think the board want to clean up the finances, accounting for them in the year they happened and clearing all loans, debt and staged liabilities like the Osvalso fee and Staplewood. As such I reckon we made a big loss for the year just ended 30th June, maybe £35m. The sales are to pay off all those liabilities and start afresh with a clean sheet. Edited 27 July, 2014 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 FWIW im pretty sure the club isnt uo for sale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 FWIW im pretty sure the club isnt uo for sale Then why would this be happening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 Then why would this be happening? Clear debt, lose players who have become disaffected, start afresh is my best guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 Clear debt, lose players who have become disaffected, start afresh is my best guess. If that's the case I presume that every time we finish higher than tenth (if that ever happens again) we can look forward to most of the team leaving. Joyous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 If that's the case I presume that every time we finish higher than tenth (if that ever happens again) we can look forward to most of the team leaving. Joyous. Well not the clear debt part, but yes we'll continue to lose players every year if we continue to do well, although not as many in one go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 July, 2014 Share Posted 27 July, 2014 Well not the clear debt part, but yes we'll continue to lose players every year if we continue to do well, although not as many in one go. It's the all in one go part that is the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintJackoInHurworth Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 For around two minutes, I did. But then I spoke to my source. They had meant to put it in a message along with some news about youth team targets, thought they had, and didn't check. They pointed out that in the last 3 years, there has only been this outgoing player and one incoming player that I didn't know about in advance. Now while the mood is naturally suspicious at the moment, I asked myself (putting myself in the shoes of others on here) what tangible benefit would my source of had by omitting or lying about the omission? It's not like we would have started the season and no-one would have asked where chambers had gone. It was less than 24 hours after speaking to my source that the news broke. So in this case at least, the conspiratorial angle just doesn't make any sense. Now if certain posters want to talk deliberate leaks - has anyone seen the express today? Considering so many people on here wait with avid interest for every word that Guan shares, I'm surprised that this post has received such little attention. I guess the problem is that everyone just assumed that Guan was talking about this article in the Express: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/492137/Arsenal-set-to-beat-Liverpool-in-16m-bid-for-Southampton-ace-Calum-Chambers However, Guan clearly stated that it was posted by the Express 'today' (i.e. Sunday) whereas that particular article was actually posted by the Express on Saturday! Besides, an article about Chambers leaving is hardly anything different from what is being reported elsewhere so why on earth would that be a leak from the club? My guess is that Guan was actually referring to this article in the Express which was posted on Sunday: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/492185/Ronald-Koeman-ready-to-splash-50m-on-new-look-Southampton Now, if that is a leak from the club, then it is far more interesting, if not wholly related to this particular thread (though it does make reference to Chambers, thus potentially confirming that the club may indeed be leaking confirmation that he is on his way). And since I, like Guan, only get two posts (though unlike Guan don't claim in any way to be ITK!) my own personal opinion on the probable sale of Chambers and the state of SFC is much like that expressed by others: * I don't understand why we aren't just saying 'no'. * I believe he will be worth far more in a year or two than he is now. * I believe it further adds to the perception that we are selling the crown jewels of SFC. * I believe it will adversely affect the attitude of potential transfer targets who will be less likely to join what may now appear to be a sinking ship. * I think the communication by the club is shocking. * I think the club is lacking a clear strategy or vision. * I suspect that KL does not have the business prowess of her father - if I remember correctly, didn't the MALI group of companies which her father set up fail under her leadership? However... * I don't for a moment believe the club is selling because it is in massive debt. I am good at maths and know a bit about business. With 80-something million pounds of TV and Premier League revenue for finishing 8th, all of our current debt was wiped out and I don't think our future debts to pay off Ramirez, Osvaldo, etc. are really that much and would be more than covered by our revenue at the end of the coming season. * I also believe/hope that RK is a good manager and will hopefully be able to mould our new squad (if we are to make several new signings) into shape successfully by Christmas at least, if not sooner. Yet... * I do fear that we could become the new Norwich - signing a load of new players who fail to impress and struggling as a result. If we become the new Tottenham - having the same issue but nevertheless, staying around fifth in the table as the previous season - then I would accept that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AussieDog Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Although I am disappointed with all the outgoings, I refuse to take off my rose tinted specs just yet. Why on earth get in an expensive management team (I am sure the Koeman brothers don't come cheaply!), and spend close to 20 million already, if all that is happening is that the club is being asset stripped ready for sale? It doesn't make sense to me. I'm happy to keep on topping up my half full glass at least for another couple of weeks, and still looking forward to my trip back in September for the Newcastle, Swansea & QPR games. Keeping the optimistic theme going...at least I shouldn't struggle to get tickets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convict Colony Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Yeah I read the express article yesterday and thought it at least outlined some intent to spend although I wasn't sure if the 50m includes the tadic/pelle fee's or if this is an additional 50mil ? Reckon they have assed McCarthy as being the back up right back given he has played a few preseason games and selling chambers just makes sense for back up RB otherwise we'd have too many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delmary Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Confirmed by Wenger, via talksport radio news. Will be formerly announced later today:-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baird of the land Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Disagraceful by Saints selling a supremely talented and versatile youngster for a fraction of what he would have been worth in a year or two. Wenger must be laughing his ass off at ripping at star player from us so easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Do people really think Chambers will be worth, say, 25 million? Can't see it. There is actually some logic to this sale. It's the fact that it adds pace to the apparent snowball which is the concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 (edited) Confirmed by Wenger, via talksport radio news. Will be formerly announced later today:-( What we've sold Chambers ???? WTF, and there was me thinking that he didn't travel to Bournemouth on friday because he was ill. Really the club need to stop bullsh*tting and man up a bit. Some of us could accept what's happening a bit more easily if they didn't keep dousing us in crap and mendacities. If the players are unwanted then just tell us so, if we need to sell, idem, if the club is soon to be sold then just say it, they'll be surprised how well it goes down, because as it stands they're duping virtually nobody and certainly not any buying or selling club.. Edited 28 July, 2014 by Window Cleaner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxstone Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Do people really think Chambers will be worth, say, 25 million? Can't see it. There is actually some logic to this sale. It's the fact that it adds pace to the apparent snowball which is the concern. While I can see the logic of Rickie winding his career down at his hometown club, Lallana/Lovren chasing bigger bucks so wanting to move on and Shaw was always going to be sold to a rich club as soon as he broke into our first team - But this sale of Chambers really does not make any sense to me at all! He was one I felt Ronald could build a new team around ... Gutted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Do people really think Chambers will be worth, say, 25 million? Can't see it. There is actually some logic to this sale. It's the fact that it adds pace to the apparent snowball which is the concern. I personally think he will go on to be a top international CB personally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 I personally think he will go on to be a top international CB personally He isn't yet though, which is what makes this transfer bizzare. We usually sell the finished youth product, not someone who is half way there and is off to be a squad player. It doesn't make sense and the club have clearly just blinked at the fee, end of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Johnson Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 He isn't yet though, which is what makes this transfer bizzare. We usually sell the finished youth product, not someone who is half way there and is off to be a squad player. It doesn't make sense and the club have clearly just blinked at the fee, end of. Unless Chambers has asked to leave of course £16 million is allot for a player who hasn't played much first team football at all & is still 2nd choice. I think the board probably have blinked at the fee because realistically he's probably only worth at most 7-8 million & while he has shown great potential, it's still only potential & he may never progress. Each transfer should be judged in isolation which is hard to do when the overall picture is looking pretty grim at the moment (though I think it will improve) If Chambers was the only player to leave this summer at £16million we'd be saying what good business it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSteve Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Do people really think Chambers will be worth, say, 25 million? Can't see it. There is actually some logic to this sale. It's the fact that it adds pace to the apparent snowball which is the concern. More IMO... I think this is the worst of all our sales.. He oozes class and reads the game very well for one so young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingdomCome Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 It would seem to me that Chambers has asked to go, the only reason this would make sense. Sadly Arsenal are a big pull. We might have added a big sell-on percentage though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 More IMO... I think this is the worst of all our sales.. He oozes class and reads the game very well for one so young. Can someone please name me other right backs who have transferred for more than Chambers. I have Daniel Alves and Sergio Ramos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Can someone please name me other right backs who have transferred for more than Chambers. I have Daniel Alves and Sergio Ramos. I do think that you need to take the new TV deal into account and that there is vastly more money swilling around corrupting the integrity of the game than ever before, increasing transfer fees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Can someone please name me other right backs who have transferred for more than Chambers. I have Daniel Alves and Sergio Ramos. It gets to the point whereby the fee received means absolutely nothing. We need a competitive team, and we don't have a competitive team at this moment in time. Reading Wengers comments, it doesn't even sound as if he was that fussed to get him this year either - said it's a gamble signing him. I'm sure if as a club, we'd have turned around to Callum and said.....1 more year,see where we are...and then to Arsenal..we're not selling him at the moment, I'm not sure we'd have had much of a fall out. This is one sale too far for me. The fee received is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toon Saint Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Can someone please name me other right backs who have transferred for more than Chambers. I have Daniel Alves and Sergio Ramos. Pompey got more for Glen Johnson. It gets to the point whereby the fee received means absolutely nothing. We need a competitive team, and we don't have a competitive team at this moment in time. Reading Wengers comments, it doesn't even sound as if he was that fussed to get him this year either - said it's a gamble signing him. I'm sure if as a club, we'd have turned around to Callum and said.....1 more year,see where we are...and then to Arsenal..we're not selling him at the moment, I'm not sure we'd have had much of a fall out. This is one sale too far for me. The fee received is irrelevant. Completely agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_ed Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 It gets to the point whereby the fee received means absolutely nothing. We need a competitive team, and we don't have a competitive team at this moment in time. Reading Wengers comments, it doesn't even sound as if he was that fussed to get him this year either - said it's a gamble signing him. I'm sure if as a club, we'd have turned around to Callum and said.....1 more year,see where we are...and then to Arsenal..we're not selling him at the moment, I'm not sure we'd have had much of a fall out. This is one sale too far for me. The fee received is irrelevant. Nail on the head for me. I also noticed that Wenger referred to 'English players on the market'. I may be reading too much into it but is he suggesting that we made it known he was available for transfer or talking about the transfer market as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir_fred Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 This is the worst mistake of them all. Why? This is destroying our philosophy. By selling a player raised within our clubs before he's even made his breakthrough sends a statement to all other young players. The message should be clear, we will raise you to a good footballer. Then you give back with a few years playing for the first team, then we listen to offers. Selling Shaw was ok, selling Chambers not as he was supposed to be the man stepping up. To be honest, you can understand why people wants to leave, and why we are struggling replacing them. All our hope is in Koeman's hand which is due to very bad top level management. If Ronald is slightly successful and leave next summer we will have the same problem again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Nail on the head for me. I also noticed that Wenger referred to 'English players on the market'. I may be reading too much into it but is he suggesting that we made it known he was available for transfer or talking about the transfer market as a whole. I think he was on about the market on the whole, doubt he was available for transfer. I simply think we received an enquiry and we smelt some money, so started talking. To me, this transfer seems to suggest that if any enquiry for any player is received, we will start talks/negotiations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convict Colony Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 bbc article just gone up http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/28497920 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toon Saint Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 This is the worst mistake of them all. Why? This is destroying our philosophy. By selling a player raised within our clubs before he's even made his breakthrough sends a statement to all other young players. The message should be clear, we will raise you to a good footballer. Then you give back with a few years playing for the first team, then we listen to offers. Selling Shaw was ok, selling Chambers not as he was supposed to be the man stepping up. To be honest, you can understand why people wants to leave, and why we are struggling replacing them. All our hope is in Koeman's hand which is due to very bad top level management. If Ronald is slightly successful and leave next summer we will have the same problem again. One of the strongest points Les Reed made in the two interviews he conducted before the transfer window opened was that we make players for Southampton Football Club, no one else. He has completely undermined his credibility with the sale of Chambers, and our clubs supposed 'philosophy' has been simply tossed to the wind. Pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killers Knee Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 bbc article just gone up http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/28497920 "Any confirmed Chambers deal is likely to see right-back Carl Jenkinson, 22, leave Arsenal on loan to gain regular first-team football." We should not be in the business of developing other teams players. This is a bad change in direction if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toon Saint Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 "Any confirmed Chambers deal is likely to see right-back Carl Jenkinson, 22, leave Arsenal on loan to gain regular first-team football." We should not be in the business of developing other teams players. This is a bad change in direction if true. Don't want Jenkinson, but Gnabry would be sensible if just to provide short-term cover for J-Rod. The lad is highly rated so would be nice to actually get something back from Arsenal for once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 "Any confirmed Chambers deal is likely to see right-back Carl Jenkinson, 22, leave Arsenal on loan to gain regular first-team football." We should not be in the business of developing other teams players. This is a bad change in direction if true. We won't be signing Jenkinson on loan, he'll be going elsewhere I expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 I personally think he will go on to be a top international CB personally See him more of a DM myself, I'm pretty sure that's how Arsenal plan on using him, back up RB, substitute DM. He has all the qualities for the job and I'd have liked us to use him there towards the end of last season when necessary instead of the wimpish JWP who needs to be further forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Won't really believe he's going until Les Reed confirms we've had no bids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Won't really believe he's going until Les Reed confirms we've had no bids or that he produces a note from his Mum saying that he couldn't play at Bournemouth last Friday because of a head cold or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint86 Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Considering so many people on here wait with avid interest for every word that Guan shares, I'm surprised that this post has received such little attention. I guess the problem is that everyone just assumed that Guan was talking about this article in the Express: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/492137/Arsenal-set-to-beat-Liverpool-in-16m-bid-for-Southampton-ace-Calum-Chambers However, Guan clearly stated that it was posted by the Express 'today' (i.e. Sunday) whereas that particular article was actually posted by the Express on Saturday! Besides, an article about Chambers leaving is hardly anything different from what is being reported elsewhere so why on earth would that be a leak from the club? My guess is that Guan was actually referring to this article in the Express which was posted on Sunday: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/492185/Ronald-Koeman-ready-to-splash-50m-on-new-look-Southampton Now, if that is a leak from the club, then it is far more interesting, if not wholly related to this particular thread (though it does make reference to Chambers, thus potentially confirming that the club may indeed be leaking confirmation that he is on his way). And since I, like Guan, only get two posts (though unlike Guan don't claim in any way to be ITK!) my own personal opinion on the probable sale of Chambers and the state of SFC is much like that expressed by others: * I don't understand why we aren't just saying 'no'. * I believe he will be worth far more in a year or two than he is now. * I believe it further adds to the perception that we are selling the crown jewels of SFC. * I believe it will adversely affect the attitude of potential transfer targets who will be less likely to join what may now appear to be a sinking ship. * I think the communication by the club is shocking. * I think the club is lacking a clear strategy or vision. * I suspect that KL does not have the business prowess of her father - if I remember correctly, didn't the MALI group of companies which her father set up fail under her leadership? However... * I don't for a moment believe the club is selling because it is in massive debt. I am good at maths and know a bit about business. With 80-something million pounds of TV and Premier League revenue for finishing 8th, all of our current debt was wiped out and I don't think our future debts to pay off Ramirez, Osvaldo, etc. are really that much and would be more than covered by our revenue at the end of the coming season. * I also believe/hope that RK is a good manager and will hopefully be able to mould our new squad (if we are to make several new signings) into shape successfully by Christmas at least, if not sooner. Yet... * I do fear that we could become the new Norwich - signing a load of new players who fail to impress and struggling as a result. If we become the new Tottenham - having the same issue but nevertheless, staying around fifth in the table as the previous season - then I would accept that! Very good post sir, I am also rather excited by what this season may bring. As I have said many times. KL has behaved very strangely for someone with no enthusiasm for the club and only sees it as a short term cash cow where she can sell up and move on asap.... She was in the directors box in 2010 with her nephew and that is certainly not the behaviour of someone with no interest in the club as she did not then have ownership. We have a lot of ungrateful fans who forget that she could have pulled the plug and ended this dream when her father passed away. I admit that it has been an uncertain summer for the club, and extremely painful. I remain hopeful that class additions will persuade Morgan to stay (and he is key for me) and the quality of player we are being linked with is very promising. Koeman was a world class player and a very good pedigree as a manager, he has money to burn, and knowledge of european markets, we do also have a quality academy... We've lost the cancer that thought only about themselves, (that does not include Rickie!), chambers will be a shame. But the money has been excellent. Through the fog of uncertainty, I see a vision to introduce a dutch/english merge of attacking quality football, built around exciting young players from both countries. It may not work, but it will be rather innovating. And if we keep buying cheap and selling for large profits, the only way will be up! We have Cortese to thank for that! We may not even lose money on Osvaldo since we won't be paying any of his add ons rofl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSFC Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 I'm not convinced that Chambers is going to turn into a 25m player but happy to be proved wrong. Him going is a surprise and I wonder whether McCarthy has shown huge promise in pre-season and so when Arsenal enquirer it was a difficult decision but one that could be made in the knowledge that at RB we are strong - Clyne first choice, plus Maya can cover as could cork if desperate, plus McCarthy. With such a good academy system there will be times or positions that end up with a bit of a blockage. I think this maybe what has happened here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 I'm not convinced that Chambers is going to turn into a 25m player but happy to be proved wrong. Him going is a surprise and I wonder whether McCarthy has shown huge promise in pre-season and so when Arsenal enquirer it was a difficult decision but one that could be made in the knowledge that at RB we are strong - Clyne first choice, plus Maya can cover as could cork if desperate, plus McCarthy. With such a good academy system there will be times or positions that end up with a bit of a blockage. I think this maybe what has happened here. It doesn't matter whether he turns into a 25 million £ or not, although that said a 25 million £ player won't be much in a couple of years time. He was a player that we had absolutely no reason to sell at this point in time. We don't need the money apparently but keeping the player would be handy. Arsenal don't need him right now although they're obviously keen to get hold of him, whether that was done now or in January or next June probably made no difference to them. Chambers is a better player than Jenkinson of course but Debuchy is solid and won't miss many games. No what we see here is the club selling a player because they had an offer that they just didn't have the gumption to turn down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Its hard to draw any meaningful conclusions from the accounts of a private company without the benefit of a detailed annual report explaining the context. Thats particularly true of a football club where the valuation of assets / liabilities is almost entirely subjective - how do you value two players signed for £10m on three year contracts one of whom has been outstanding but is 30 years old and the other has been crap, has a possible crocked knee but it only 22? Is one an asset and the other a nett liability? What if one gets a doubling in wages if hes called up for England? A PWC auditor sure as hell wont know. Multiply those variables by 25 odd first teamers and 40 or so academy and youth players and the margin for making the figures show what you want them to show is huge. For what its worth I think the board want to clean up the finances, accounting for them in the year they happened and clearing all loans, debt and staged liabilities like the Osvalso fee and Staplewood. As such I reckon we made a big loss for the year just ended 30th June, maybe £35m. The sales are to pay off all those liabilities and start afresh with a clean sheet. Players valuations (book asset value) are usually written down over the length of their contract. There may be a revaluation if a serious injury forces a retirement, for example. You wouldn't want to revalue upwards mid-term or you might be liable to a tax on the notional profit, unless you had made a big loss elsewhere and wanted to offset it somewhat, perhaps. I suspect this may explain the delay in tying some players down to linger contracts as there book values would probably increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Players valuations (book asset value) are usually written down over the length of their contract. There may be a revaluation if a serious injury forces a retirement, for example. You wouldn't want to revalue upwards mid-term or you might be liable to a tax on the notional profit, unless you had made a big loss elsewhere and wanted to offset it somewhat, perhaps. I suspect this may explain the delay in tying some players down to linger contracts as there book values would probably increase. Bought in players have their value ammortised over the course of their contract. I'm pretty sure (but am not certain) that homegrown players don't have a book value so stay off the balance sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Perhaps Chambers has a top 4/5 or Champs league side release clause? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Perhaps Chambers has a top 4/5 or Champs league side release clause? Ha, nice. Bit late to the party with that one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Ha, nice. Bit late to the party with that one... Did you mention it earlier? Sorry genuinely didnt see your post, saw some suggestion of it on twitter and thought it made sense? Would hope this is the answer as ive been positive, but getting hard to keep supporting the direction atm We NEED some good news fast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Did you mention it earlier? Sorry genuinely didnt see your post, saw some suggestion of it on twitter and thought it made sense? Would hope this is the answer as ive been positive, but getting hard to keep supporting the direction atm We NEED some good news fast how come you were a tw at as Glasgow and a decent poster as Heisenburg? Which one was the act? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 how come you were a tw at as Glasgow and a decent poster as Heisenburg? Which one was the act? Trying to cut down the post count. My views remain the same, but perhaps as GS i was guilty of forcing opinions on others. Realised i can make a point, offer an opinion without posting it 10x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Did you mention it earlier? Sorry genuinely didnt see your post, saw some suggestion of it on twitter and thought it made sense? Would hope this is the answer as ive been positive, but getting hard to keep supporting the direction atm We NEED some good news fast I didn't mention it, but someone else did. I wasn't having a go mind! Completely agree with you there though, be good if both Chambers and Shaw had that in their contracts. Bit stupid of Cortese to include it if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 I didn't mention it, but someone else did. I wasn't having a go mind! Completely agree with you there though, be good if both Chambers and Shaw had that in their contracts. Bit stupid of Cortese to include it if true. It may have been the only way he could convince them to sign the deals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Bought in players have their value ammortised over the course of their contract. I'm pretty sure (but am not certain) that homegrown players don't have a book value so stay off the balance sheet. That would make sense, but of course there's then a massive profit when they're sold to Man Utd for £27m, or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 28 July, 2014 Share Posted 28 July, 2014 Trying to cut down the post count. My views remain the same, but perhaps as GS i was guilty of forcing opinions on others. Realised i can make a point, offer an opinion without posting it 10x Fair enough. Seems to be working. Link to comment 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