Canary Man of Kent

[quote user="1st Wizard"] [quote user="IBA"]Wiz... the ''area'' is not a dump at all. It aint all that compared to the ''area'' around Carrow Road but its way better than most ground ''areas'' You dont (as usual) know WTF you''re talking about [/quote] Actually, I think I do IBA. My opinion is based on my own experiences of the place (I stayed in the dump for far longer than one footy game!) Lowestoft has the same qualities too............so there![:D] [/quote] I agree with all those that are sticking up for Watford. I loved the time I spent living there and would happily have stayed there had I not had to move for work. It has a good nightlife, is second to none for transport links, it''s on the doorstep of London yet has beautiful countryside only a mile or two away. Cassiobury Park is great for a kick about with mates or for going for a run. Whilst I appreciate the Harlequin has its critics on the usual basis that it''s all the standard shops, that''s the same across every city centre in the UK with only the odd exception, it''s certainly a more pleasant place to visit with good ammenities and easy parking. I agree with the earlier poster that said it''s the nicest place on the tube map, (with the exception of Amersham and Rickmansworth).  

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="SimonOTBC"][quote user="1st Wizard"] [quote user="Arthur Whittle"]Complete dump! Get in and out![/quote] Totally agree, its a very nasty area! [/quote]   Have you ever been there or just being negative for the sake of it? Watford is ok, the bit around the ground is as bad as it gets really. Some very nice areas not far from there. [/quote] Yes, of course, I''ve been there, and its still a dump!. [/quote] Fair enough. I lived in the nicest part of Watford for a couple of years and found it to be ok. Would rather have lived in South Bucks though, or Rickmansworth

[quote user="1st Wizard"] [quote user="Arthur Whittle"]Complete dump! Get in and out![/quote] Totally agree, its a very nasty area! [/quote]   Have you ever been there or just being negative for the sake of it? Watford is ok, the bit around the ground is as bad as it gets really. Some very nice areas not far from there.

I really hope Clingan is fit, he has made all the difference in the games he''s played. I think he gives us the composure we need in midfield.

Marshall Semi   Omozusi   Grounds   Bertie Patti   Clingan       Rusty      Hoolahan Sibbi   Lita   Bench: Nelson, Lupoli, Fozzy, Drury, Croft Score: 2-0 Norwich What do you think? Will Fozzy be dropped? Will Clingan be fit? Will we win?

The previous two occasions we scored exactly 4 away from home were both against Rotherham, in the cup in a 4-2 win and in the league in a 4-4 draw.

Although, we did put 5 past Burnley later that season.

[quote user="Salahuddin"]The worry is that if we just have loan signings with Glenn leaving perm signings until the Summer, the money we have now will disappear like it always does! And then we will get the spin about rising costs in football, Agent and Loan fees![/quote] I agree 100%, but having a load of useless journeymen is no better. I don''t think Roeder is one to be messed about by the board, and I hope the board realise that if they annoyed him and he left then they would lose any remaining goodwill with the fans.

I totally understand where Glenn is coming from with regard to not wanting to sign a load of dross journeyman, and I also appreciate that realistically it is all about next season in terms of promotion. However, we do need to get some more bodies in, we are in a perilous position both in terms of league position and squad size with any injuries causing big problems on both counts. I believe if we get Taylor in and a striker on loan or permanently we will be absolutely fine, and waiting until the summer for getting new blood in will be the right decision, if we don''t however, who knows what might happen,it seems our current youths may not be up to scratch. All I know is I trust Roeder.

Confirmed on official site. Did he give any hints on positions?

weather forcast looks good for this afternoon so it should be ok.

Foley

Last I heard of him was he was Worthy''s assistant at Leicester at the end of last season. Don''t know what he''s up to now though

lets even the score tonight!   COYY!  

sounds good to me

Maybe Lee Clark?

  Megson, Are you having a laugh?! I''ve never seen such a pile of nonsense before. Not one thing you say in that is correct. Simon OTBC  

Without the accounts in front of me Mr Carrow I can''t really give you a firm opinion, additionally I''m not entirely familiar with accounting for football clubs. However, as a general rule an increase in retained profit in a business is considered to be a good thing, as it is an indicator of future growth, of reinvestment in the business. In the case of a football club however this in my eyes is less certain. I struggle to see how players meet the definition of an asset and therefore they would not be capitalised on the balance sheet, as such investment in players would go through retained earnings (reducing it) and therefore the it is unreliable to base any expectations on the companys future performance on this balance. Something certainly worth looking at is the cashflow statement. Profit bares no relation to cash, profit is simply an accounting construct. As such it would be interesting to see how the club has employed the cash, and how the cash position of the business has changed over the year. The survival of a business is only linked to its ability to meet its obligations as they fall due, (i.e pay cash to creditors), essentially profit is irrelevant, (although profit is likely to be a driver of cashflow). Based on what I have read, I would say that it seems the club as they have said are being prudent. They are likely to be concerned about there future cash position. It is desirable for companies to have a certain amount of debt on their balance sheet. Debt is a cheap source of finance. Additionally, as mentioned above, it is likely that there are restrictive covenants in place limiting the clubs ability to do certain things. It was mentioned that some clubs have greater debt than us, however it is possible that due to the nature of our debt at the time the secure loans were negotiated (i.e. when we were on the point of meltdown) the lenders have imposed extremely harsh covenants. In conclusion, if I were analysing these accounts and was unaware that they were for a football club it looks reasonably rosey, the only issue is that future cashflows will be hit hard due to a lack of investment on the football pitch and that in addition to that cash inflows will be reduced dramatically. I appreciate that''s quite a wishy washy answer. Essentially this is because I don''t have the accounts in front of me, and furthermore because accounting is a relatively subjective matter, and in the case of a football club a large amount of information remains concealed. SimonOTBC

Guys, Accountant here. Retained profit is just an accounting thing. Basically, in the income statement every year there will be a profit after tax figure, any dividends will be paid out of this. The result is a figure that is transferred into retained profit which is in the balance sheet. This is not cash it is a reserve. Reserves are what are used to finance the business be that in the form of working capital, (i.e. the payment of wages, rates etc) or the purchase of assets such as the development of the stadium etc. The retained profit figure is an accumulation of all profits not distributed to shareholders since the formation of the company, there are also other ways it can accumulate. It may be that they are using it to pay off debt, however, if you want to know what they have done with it then the cashflow statement will provide the answer. Hope that helps in some way, I''m not sure it really adds anything. If you''ve got any questions I''d be happy to help as much as I can. Simon OTBC