steelowl Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 5 hours ago, Ash76 said: Why mention it then? i think he's trying to be helpful by explaining that there are ways around it to people who don't think it's possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelowl Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 5 hours ago, Ash76 said: Why mention it then? i think he's trying to be helpful by explaining that there are ways around it to people who don't think it's possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonofbert2 Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 i just think he's only trying to be helpful by explaining that there are ways around it to people who don't think it's possible 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelowl Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 that post was so fecking eloquent it wanted to arrive twice 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OxonOwl Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 What I don't get is, I was under the impression that expenditure on infrastructure (Desso pitch) is not taken into account for FFP/PS purposes. If then, the sale of infrastructure (the ground) is included in FFP/PS calculations it is more than a loophole but a massive gap. So is this correct? Or are both expenditure and income from infrastructure items included but for something like the Desso pitch, they are amortised/depreciated/written off over so many years that they are not significant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owlinmad Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 24 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said: i just think he's only trying to be helpful by explaining that there are ways around it to people who don't think it's possible I think that as well. Not sure where you got that thought from . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred mciver Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 8 hours ago, Ash76 said: Why mention it then? Because- http://www.asser.nl/SportsLaw/Blog/post/unpacking-doyen-s-tpo-deals-the-final-whistle 1. The above shows how Doyen circumvented 3rd party -ownership laws 2. It also suggests how unethical they are 3. It provides a prime facia case that they may also have a financial interest our players, and they manage Joao too. 4. We may lose Hector to Fulham due their influence on Chansiri and incompetence , leading to an embargo 5. Bruce is complaining about their staff's interference and may even think Ashley's better than this so may walk and go to his home town club. 6. We are buying Bundesliga 2 players because of Doyen's conflicts 7. Bought Van Aken under their regime, refused McGuire at similar price 8. Ditto Abdi, refusing VARDY for £5 million 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 I just look back who started the thread - why mention the ground may be sold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred mciver Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 20 hours ago, mkowl said: I just look back who started the thread - why mention the ground may be sold Maybe Chansiri promised this to Bruce and then buckets of cash to get us and him to EPL. May be easier to just leave for your hometown club and £5 million a year wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standidno Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Chansiri promises Bruce the world and is giving him dregs. I would love to know if Bruce knows anything about borner or whether he had a say on Harris 2 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