Jump to content

Davidlingfield

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The answer to the lack of transfer activity is simple - there are no funds available.
  2. A basic review of the latest set of accounts make it very clear that there is simply no money to invest in players in January. Players need to be sold in either this or the next transfer window just to meet liabilities already incurred - sadly, it appears that the opportunity to invest wisely in players in the summer has been wasted.
  3. I admire your confidence in the finances being sorted - I am not so sure looking at amounts owed and plummeting value of the squad. I guess we will see over the next 12 months if relegation does become a reality.
  4. As I have said in previous posts, there is no governance at the Club - no challenge to decisions made by the Webbers, whether player trading or ticketing/sponsorship and other issues impacting on fans. The Webbers have no previous experience of running a football club so it is no surprise they make poor decisions. The result is that our fans feels disenfranchised from their club, and that is combined with poor on pitch performance as a result of poor signings. Sadly, it will likely continue to be a downward spiral unless addressed.
  5. The facts are pretty straightforward as I see it. We overpaid for the majority of new signings in the summer due to poor recruitment, so we won’t recoup anywhere near that amount when/if they are sold. Add in the significant salaries being paid and therefore difficulty in moving players on + the large deficit in transfer fees still owed compared to those owing. Therefore, if we are relegated this season, as I have already said in a previous post, we are in danger of being in significant financial difficulties over the coming 12-18 months.
  6. The problem is not necessarily Webber himself but the structure at the Club. There is no CEO or Chairperson to challenge any of his decisions, most importantly signings made after a promotion. Without this challenge, he has free reign to back his judgement which is at best questionable at Premier League level, he is completely left to his own devices. Organisations both inside and outside of football generally have a CEO AND Chairperson for a reason - to ensure a level of control and challenge so that “loose cannons” don’t go off and do their own thing. Until the structural issues are addressed, whether it is Webber or someone else, the problems will remain and probably worsen.
  7. Ah, makes sense - was certainly lost on me, but I can assure you I am not “unqualified”
  8. It’s not the next 12 months that concern me and I agree about the auditors signing off on that basis. It is longer term. I also agree with the point that a lot can change in 12 months - I guess I was just surprised about the quantum on this shortfall based on comments made by Stuart Webber about previous overspending.
  9. Hopefully - but I am not too sure about Cantwell's valuation currently?
  10. I wouldn't expect us to have a shortfall of £46m on transfers if we were bringing in young players - particularly as these numbers are inclusive of Buendia (definitely), Lewis and Godfrey (possibly) and maybe even some Maddison money. Intuitively, I would expect us to be buying cheaper and selling for more, but this suggests the other way around - although hopefully, those bought recently will generate higher values when eventually sold.
  11. There has been lots of talk on other threads about elements of the accounts released yesterday - this attempts to summarise potential future debt issues based on known future players-related payments and receipts. It ignores contingent based payments as these presumably will be triggered only by success (i.e. remaining in the Premier League) and therefore it feels a reasonable assumption to assume they would be self-funded by PL TV rights money. So: Amounts due in from player sales: Player debtors due within one year (Note 17): £26.5m Player debtors due after one year (Note 17): £27.8m Less: Short term loan repayable in Sept 2022 (i.e. repayment of accelerated receipts from previous player sales) (Note 19): £(25.2)m Total net cash due in from player sales: £29.1m Amounts due out from player purchases: Player creditors due within one year (Note 18): £(14.0)m Player creditors due after one year (Note 19): £(9.2)m Player creditors due on players bought after 1 July 2021 (not known if < or > 1 year) (Note 30): £(52.7)m Total cash committed to being paid out on player purchases: £75.9m Total cash shortfall £(46.8)m Now, this is not necessarily an immediate problem because of the unknown timing of the future £52.7m of payments. But whichever you look at it, it is a shortfall that will need to be addressed at some point, and feels no different to the risks taken in the previous McNally regime - risks that currently don't really seem to be generating rewards in terms of Premier League results. If we stay in the Premier League, this debt will probably be very manageable (although contingent payments will be triggered too as mentioned above) - however, if we are relegated, I think this is a concern, although we do have valuable players who could be sold to mitigate this.
  12. Unfortunately, this type of poor ticketing decision is inevitable at a club which has no senior management or accountability on the non-football side of the club. Sadly, this is just one example of poor judgement that will continue without anything being changed because of lack of focus on the relatively small decisions. Mr and Mrs Webber trying to run the Club with no checks and balances in the form of an independent Chairman will spell long term disaster unless addressed. Once Ed Balls resigned, this was inevitable.
×
×
  • Create New...