wattagit Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 So can someone tell me if I'm wrong here but if CC sells the club even if the new owners were to have Man City type finances due FFP or whatever its now called we still can't spend F*** All Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogers Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 FFP is a spend Vs revenue issue How much a chairman has in the bank doesn’t translate to how much the club turnover from commercial activities, etc. I don’t think buying a couple of new players is our issue, it’s picking the best players we have and making them comfortable with the tactics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EccOvOwl Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 When did Carlos buy the club. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogers Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 This thread needs deleting..it’s got to be a wind up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Strafford Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 I don't think new owners willing to invest in equity and also with the actual means to demonstrate revenues associated with the SWFC brand, or revenues from companies they plan to be owned by SWFC will have a problem. I understand that our current owner has invested via debt, caused questions about the source of funds and therefore ultimate ownership, and has undermined his own credibility in respect of revenue streams by trying to get the league to sign off on drinks which the club did not own and which were not shipping in large volumes, and a taxi company that does not exist presumably becuase he mishalndled the deal with Arnie Singh and never realised that this transaction was all compounded by his mis-handling of the executive boxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonowl Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 5 minutes ago, Lee Strafford said: I don't think new owners willing to invest in equity and also with the actual means to demonstrate revenues associated with the SWFC brand, or revenues from companies they plan to be owned by SWFC will have a problem. I understand that our current owner has invested via debt, caused questions about the source of funds and therefore ultimate ownership, and has undermined his own credibility in respect of revenue streams by trying to get the league to sign off on drinks which the club did not own and which were not shipping in large volumes, and a taxi company that does not exist presumably becuase he mishalndled the deal with Arnie Singh and never realised that this transaction was all compounded by his mis-handling of the executive boxes. Equity or loan. It’s still £13m a season. ‘Revenues from companies owned by SWFC’ wouldn’t count anyway. You can’t just increase the revenue by attaching a different company to the parent company, it would be disregarded income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Strafford Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 2 minutes ago, londonowl said: Equity or loan. It’s still £13m a season. ‘Revenues from companies owned by SWFC’ wouldn’t count anyway. You can’t just increase the revenue by attaching a different company to the parent company, it would be disregarded income. That is exactly what Man City have done. Man City is the parent company to all of the sporting assets. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonowl Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 7 minutes ago, Lee Strafford said: That is exactly what Man City have done. Man City is the parent company to all of the sporting assets. No they are not. Man City are a subsidiary of the parent company, as are all the other football clubs they own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleo Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 10 minutes ago, Lee Strafford said: That is exactly what Man City have done. Man City is the parent company to all of the sporting assets. But do the same rules apply to Prem clubs ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MotherGoose Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 1 minute ago, doubleo said: But do the same rules apply to Prem clubs ? Similar but different rules. It’s UEFA rules that apply to the elite clubs because the punishment is barring from the Champions League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Strafford Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 8 minutes ago, londonowl said: No they are not. Man City are a subsidiary of the parent company, as are all the other football clubs they own. Well, maybe their whole structure has changed in the last year or so after my friend, who is part of the executive management team at Man City, explained it to me....... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonowl Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 Just now, Lee Strafford said: Well, maybe their whole structure has changed in the last year or so after my friend, who is part of the executive management team at Man City, explained it to me....... Nope it's always been the same. Maybe you misunderstood your very important friend. City Football Group is the parent company and always has been. Man City are a subsidiary and always have been. City football group have revenues of over £4bn. If they were allowed to get all this through the FFP door, I'm noy sure they would be scratching around paying players image rights through shady companies. You have to be careful because when you write things as fact in bold letters, some people take it as such and use it as a stick to beat the chairman..."the only reason we are in trouble is because the chairman is putting money in as a loan instead of equity, that Lee Strafford told me and he knows the people who run Man City so it must be true". 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgmetcalf Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 What the club books say, not the owners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgmetcalf Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Lee Strafford said: That is exactly what Man City have done. Man City is the parent company to all of the sporting assets. From my knowledge of business you can't just go transferring funds from one branch of the business to another. The tax man would be very interested in those kind of activities Edited December 21, 2018 by pgmetcalf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfoster Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 Interesting chat fellas. I've always thought that it seems surprising DC could buy and fund Weds single handedly- there is almost nothing about him on Google pre his involvement with us. I've always wondered if he was a figure head for other investors. I now wonder if for whatever reason they've stopped backing him, leaving him up the proverbial creek and causing the sleepless nights he referred to the other day .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wall Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, dfoster said: Interesting chat fellas. I've always thought that it seems surprising DC could buy and fund Weds single handedly- there is almost nothing about him on Google pre his involvement with us. I've always wondered if he was a figure head for other investors. I now wonder if for whatever reason they've stopped backing him, leaving him up the proverbial creek and causing the sleepless nights he referred to the other day .... His family own John West tuna, he's loaded. Which makes me wonder about the suggestion that he needs to borrow a tenner off paxo Edited December 21, 2018 by emersonthome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonowl Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 4 minutes ago, pgmetcalf said: From my knowledge of business you can't just go transferring funds from one branch of the business to another. The tax man would be very interested in those kind of activities Of course you can. There are a million and one reasons that one branch of a business can and would transfer funds to another, at least half of which are to (legally) avoid paying the taxman...it's just not remotely relevant to FFP (P&S) rules as it would almost certainly be disregarded income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morepork Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 Just now, emersonthome said: His family own John West tuna, he's loaded If only everything could be resolved with this statement....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddybeararmy Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 Good morning guys, could you give your opinions on a few questions? 1. If we did get a new owner, what steps could they take to allow them to plough money into the playing budget. 2. If chansiri stays in charge, do we need to sell players to avoid being back into an embargo in the summer. 3. Does it make any difference in regards to p&s if we sell players in this window or the summer window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogers Posted December 21, 2018 Share Posted December 21, 2018 10 minutes ago, emersonthome said: His family own John West tuna, he's loaded. Which makes me wonder about the suggestion that he needs to borrow a tenner off paxo His Dad owns something therefore he is rich 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