Jump to content

Box_Man

Member
  • Content Count

    1,166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Box_Man


  1. We’ve got enough to stay up just about with the team below even if we sell Reach and release all the out of contracts

     

                                         Dawson

     

                  Hutchinson.       Lees.        Thorniley

     

    Baker.           Pelupessy.            Bannan.           Penney

     

                Joao.            Fletcher.        Forestieri 

     

    Wildsmith

    Fox

    Van Aken

    Kirby

    Winnall

    Nuhiu

    Rhodes

     

    Really weak in wide areas but if we can get through this season and next, then we can reshape the squad in 20/21 season and we would have circa 20 million plus scope for players if the chairman wants to give it another go within FFP/ P&S


  2. There are a few things in that statement that will get people’s backs up,

     

    He implied at the fans forum that supporter investment is a drop in the ocean compared to his investment which is true, however he also implied it didn’t make a difference how much fans put in, which you could say is also true given the levels of cash being hemmoraged currently.

     

    However he cannot seriously think after he has said all the above that a new fans scheme is going to generate any revenue at all?? I mean seriously why would anyone think that’s the way out of this mess....completely deluded.

     

    We are already paying as a fan base some of the highest prices in the EFL to watch an average side with a couple of good players.

     

    He has squandered millions, and seems like it was boom or bust over a three year plan with little foresight on year 4 & 5 and what to do if we didn’t go up.

     

    The next 18 months are all about staying in this division. 

     

     


  3. 1 minute ago, prowl said:

    Assets like the ground have a value shown in the accounts. If we sell the asset for the same amount as it is shown in the accounts for we effectively get the money but lose the asset so the 2 things cancel each other out.

     

    If we sell the ground for more than it is valued in the accounts then the money we get will exceed the asset value and we make a profit. If we get less it will show as a loss. Property like the ground should increase in value over time, some companies have their property re-valued regularly, some very rarely do. I've no idea what Hillsborough is shown in the accounts as being worth.

     

     If we get a lot more for the ground than it is really worth the authorities can disallow the excess on the basis that we are just trying to get round FFP. They have sweeping powers under the sustainability regulations to try to stop clubs fiddling the system.

     

    Thanks for explaining, appreciate it, going back on topic I’d sell Reach to the highest bidder hopefully for close to 15 million.

     

     


  4. 12 minutes ago, prowl said:

    If we sell Reach this year it is income this year as far as the accounts are concerned even if we don't get all the money up front. It doesn't make any difference Cash or terms.

     

    I think this is where we started. If you can't understand the point I'm afraid I can't explain it any better. My fault I'm sure. 

     

    I see where your coming from, I just thought you had to make allowances in the accounts for future/further revenue, multi year season tickets being an example.

     

    So there’s nothing stopping DC selling the ground for 30 million this income ALL showing in 2019 and then we pay DC ‘friend’ who we sell the ground to for 500k per year on going. Meaning we clear FFP this season and have 20 million left over to spend without selling anyone.

     

     


  5. 38 minutes ago, prowl said:

    If you get £10m up front. The money goes in the bank and appears as cash in the accounts. 

     

    If you get the money over 3 years one third will be paid straight away and 2 thirds are effectively a debt owed to the club. 

     

    For accountancy purposes you have money the club has earned and money it has spent. It doesn't matter if you have actually got the money in your hands, money owed to the club is still shown on the credit side of the accounts the same as cash received.

     

    FFP follows accountancy rules by and large.

     

    Company accounts aren't like an individuals day to day money where if somebody pays you cash you can go to the pub with it. You need a different mind set.

     

    I understand that, what I’m struggling with is we have to show the EFL a projection of income for the following year. You can’t account for things twice so if you have a 10 million hole this year then you need 10 million of income THIS year. No good getting it in 3-4 million chunks as we would fail this year surely?

     

     


  6. The chairman said we are failing FFP / P&S by ‘8 figures’ so north of 10 million. That’s the hole that needs plugging THIS season never mind future projections.

     

    I’d sell FF for 3-5 million if we could get him off the wage bill 

    Reach for 12 million and we would have had a good January, let Bruce plan for the exodus in the summer and go again next season.


  7. 16 minutes ago, prowl said:

    It doesn't make the slightest difference if it's cash up front or not. I know it does to the man in the street but to football clubs FFP relates to the accounts and cash is shown as a credit but so is money receivable in the future. If a club decides to buy another player it will be done on 'easy terms' anyway. 

     

    Other than that £10m  plus Hourihane would be a cracking deal.

     

    Are you sure?

     

    10 million now in jan will fall into this years figures which would go along way to solving P&S for this year.

     

    If we got paid over 3 years we would only be able to account for a 3rd of it this year and show a 3 million projection for next year and the year after.

     

    We would then have to find another 7 million this year to bridge the gap with P&S for this season.


  8. I was under the impression we need to raise circa 10 million in fees in January and shed 8 million in wages in the summer, ie not renew any of the expiring contracts.

     

    Im amazed Bruce would take a job under these constraints so ground sale or third party cash injection something must be going on.


  9. 2 minutes ago, darra said:

    Sometimes with some players, it comes a to a stage in their careers when its not about money but more about playing for the club you've supported all you life. Having said that it's still unlikely to happen.

     

    Wishful thinking as David Jones is a wednesday fan and he’s happy to take his 300k per week :rolleyes:


  10. I’d rest Lees, Hector, Hutchinson, Bannan, Reach & Matais

     

                                      Dawson

     

    Palmer.            Thorniley.            Pudil.             Penney.  

     

               Pelupessy.           Jones.          Boyd 

     

                                          Abdi. :ph34r:              

     

                        Winnall.                     Nuhiu.    

     

    Wildsmith 

    Baker

    Fox

    Bannan

    Reach

    Matais

    Fletcher


  11. 3 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

    Elmohamady is a dreadful player

     

    Dreadful is a little disrespectful to a player who has played 400 games half of them in the premier league and the other half challenging for promotion in the championship.

     

     


  12. 3 minutes ago, optimisticowl said:

    Just a thought, I wondered if the ground could be sold to a connected party, this would allow say, the Chansiri family to put money into the club without losing ownership of the ground or breaching FFP rules.

     

    The rules are clear they specifically refer to ‘fair market value’ and transactions at arms length.

     

    legally means we cannot over inflate the value of our stadium / training ground / shirt sponsorship etc etc in terms of bringing increased revenue into the club.

     

    arms length means there cannot be any financial connection between the buyer and the seller and no collusion is going on.

     

    even if we’ve found a loop hole, we are currently losing that much cash that 30 mill won’t go that far...


  13. Yes it’s his cash to a certain extent, but if he gambles and loses he’s £100 million out of pocket he flys back to Thailand and washes his hands of us.

     

    Our losses this season will be circa £10 million, knock that of the reported sale fee and it gives us cash for a couple of decent players....is it really worth the risk, would we become auto candidates, I don’t think so.

     

    His money, his gamble but I don’t like the prospect of renting Hillsborough to a third party who’s interest will only be a return on their investment.

     


  14. I just don’t see how this gets past the EFL.

     

    Arms length means no collusion between the buyer and the seller. Anything remotely linking DC and a prospective buyer will be deemed as collusion.

     

    There are plenty of mega rich owners in this league, if is was acceptable way of pumping 20-30 million into a club they’d all be at it.

     

     


  15. The appointment of Jos was the biggest car crash of a managerial appointment I can remember in all my years supporting Wednesday.

     

    zero experience of English football 

     

    in semi retirement 

     

    stubborn 

     

    didn’t have a clue what his best team or system was

     

    alienated key players

     

    .....thanks Jos, you muppet we could have 5-10 points if not more without him :rolleyes:

×
×
  • Create New...