Transfer profit

[Dr Greenthumb 793]

Just having a look at the transfer profit for the season and we have made £16.6mil profit over the course of the season, whilst trimming the wage bill quite considerably. Does this mean there will be money available in the summer? Or does the current transfers are sweetening the amount of money we have made, when in reality, we haven’t spent too much

[Rogue Baboon 0]

I guess nobody really knows, as we also lose the parachute payments.

Making a bigger profit means we may be able to sell other players for a ''lesser amount'' (Naismith, Martin, McGovern, Wildschut etc) which then reduces the wage bill considerably.

On top of that we will then have any other transfer fees received, which could be considerable (Maddison, Klose), although the squad would then be extremely light so would need 8 or so players

[king canary 8,757]

It really all depends on the wage budget.

We need to shift Naismith, Martin and Wildschut permanently. Tettey and Wes will probably leave on frees. If we can shift Jarvis and McGovern too we''ll have taken a serious chunk out of the wage budget without damaging the first team too much.

[Dr Greenthumb 793]

With the parachute payments now, I’m assuming they have covered this seasons wage bill and a little bit of next. Hopefully there is a plan to get Jarvis and Martin off the wage bill. I think Hoolahan will go, but can see being lumbered with Naismith for another year.

[Guest]

How much were this season''s parachute payments?

£16M profit for this season might equivocate for next season if the wages are less.

And we have to assume that if we need money then Maddison is a nice bit of collateral for the season after.

[Sussexyellow 55]

The problem with profit is that you have to pay corporation tax on it.

Now we need a tax expert here which is not me! So I stand to be corrected.

However my understanding is that in the past, profits could be set against previous losses going back many years. A loophole which meant very little corporation tax was paid by football clubs. This loophole was closed in 2017 to limit it to just one year and to a max of £5m with I think a 50% offset above that.

With a big loss being prepared for in 18/19 it would be very unfortunate for the board if a large tax attracting profit was made in 17/18. I can already imagine the comments on here if money disappeared that way. However I would expect Steve Stone to be on top of this and legitimately minimising tax liability from the business done this January. NCFC were already forecasting a small profit for 17/18 presumably to be offset against a slightly larger loss made in 16/17.

This may of course be relevant to Ed Balls comment that there was no financial need to sell in the January 2018 window, indeed the opposite was probably true and may explain in part why we have held on to players we feared losing. The summer transfer window will of course be a different matter.

[Grumpy 147]

When we get to the start of next season we will have all the loanees coming back.I think it is about 12.With any luck there might be some at the end of their contracts but on the face of it the wage bill will suddenly take a back hit.

[pete 371]

Don''t forget Jarvis a significant economic strain we could have done without. A very expensive single goal.

[Woodman 92]

Out on loan:

Paul Jones (GK) - out of contract in June - expect to be released.

Remi Matthews (GK) - could be our number 1 next season

Russell Martin - one more season on contract I think, but could be sold

Marcel Franke - possibly sold unless things improve for him while on loan

Steven Naismith - one more year on his contract, aim to sell/pay up contract & release

Yanic Wilschut - does Farke rate him? look to sell?

Ben Godfrey - could be a big part of the team next season

Adam Philips - another one for next season, maybe.

Todd Cantwell - well favoured by Farke, can''t see him leaving.

Carlton Morris - not sure, never seems to have quite made it.

+ the 3 youngsters:

Efete, Jaiyesimi, Ramsay

[Salopian 1]

In terms of money changing hands - a considerable profit?

In terms of savings from loan players while they are away, better still, although in at least one case we are still paying 2/3 of the salary, as I remember it.

In terms of the future, who knows? We signed a number of younger players, one or two of who may come good of very good. Still better!

We ought to finish higher in the Championship than where we are currently - so more reward for position.

With all due respect to the club and team, it looks unlikely that we shall go into the play-offs, and almost impossible to get promotion, but this was the case even at the end of 2017.

One question is whether we can get rid of players coming back from loan in June. There are one or two in high salaries, and this represents a dead weight.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="keelansgrandad"]How much were this season''s parachute payments?

£16M profit for this season might equivocate for next season if the wages are less.

And we have to assume that if we need money then Maddison is a nice bit of collateral for the season after.[/quote]All speculation as we have no real idea of fees etc. Wildshutt''s transfer should remind us of that.Looking at the broader picture I''m sure the wage bill will be in line with our budget by the summer. There is ''money in the bank'' as far as the value of Klose, Pinto, Murphy, Oliveira and Maddison are concerned so we are not really on skid row.As to money for transfers then do we really need huge amounts ? I would suggest that is going to be more a case of developing players over a more longer term than paying heavily for the ''finished product'' - a sort of continuos production line, Godfrey, Phillips and Cantwell being those looking to step up ths summer.I don''t think that this will be so hit and miss as before. The whole ethos of the playing side of things now seems to be one of full commitment ie Trybull against Mulumbu. And we have a more focused scouting network as well as a more focused coaching set up.If we continue and this works then undoubtly players will move on to ''better'' things. Which will bring out the ''selling club'' cliche. Every club sells players, as players seek to find a level equal to their talents. For us it should be seen as one of us being able to find and develop these players - not simply as a means to survive, but as a means to progress and challenge.So let''s see what this lot can do before concernng ourselves to much about the summer.

[Big Vince 423]

The boy Stone said there was a £25 million black hole to be filled heading into next season.

So with £17 million in hand further summer sales and wage trimming will be required to break even next season.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Big Vince"]The boy Stone said there was a £25 million black hole to be filled heading into next season.

So with £17 million in hand further summer sales and wage trimming will be required to break even next season.[/quote]No, that is just you making up stuff again. His actually words at the last AGM were"Income for the club is down by almost £25m year on year, from £100.6m in 2015/16 to £75.9m in the last financial year."Season 2018/19 we will have around £30m less due to the ending of parachute payments. i suggest that our cutting of the wage bill by removing most of the high earners will have reduced the wage bill considerably by then.Whatever we have gained by the sales of Howson, Murphy, Pritchard and Cameron will have helped to give us a cushion to cover any difference between what we have to spend (contracted wages) and what our income is. I expect those two amounts to balance in the near future.Any panic as you infer would have seen a sale of Maddison and/or Klose and maybe others. That this did not happen suggests that once again your nonsense has been exposed as ............ nonsense. But unlike others I wish you well, as finding something to attack the club with does appear to be harder each week.Do keep trying though.

[Big Vince 423]

It was stated at the AGM that hard decisions will have to be made in the summer if the club is still in the Championship at that point.

The Maddison situation is simply a stay of execution as things stand. Everyone knows he will have to be sold by the summer because income from broadcasting will drop from £32 million this season to £7 million next season.

A £25 million black hole.

[Bill 1,788]

Ah, so ''the boy Stone'' didn''t actually say that, they were in fact your wordsGlad to have cleared that up.As to a black hole I would suggest that is what exists between your ears as matter (facts) go in and a simply swallowed up never to re-appear again.

[TIL 1010 5,246]

Incredible to think that some posters on here think we will have money stashed away in the bank for next season.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]Incredible to think that some posters on here think we will have money stashed away in the bank for next season.[/quote]I''m sure you can point us all towards these ''posters'' and maybe towards where they ''think we will have money stashed away in the bank for next season'' as I would hate for others to think you are making up stuff.

[TIL 1010 5,246]

You have the exclusive rights around here on accusing others of making stuff up which usually ends up with them being called liars. My thoughts and views on what i read do not require seeking justification by you so before you carry on please understand that i shall not respond to what will no doubt follow using such expressions as oh dear oh dear, you are not making up evidence now ,poor old plod and the usual inflammatory tripe you post on thread after thread.Have a lovely evening.

[Bill 1,788]

So it was made up, hence your ducking out, no surprise there then.Others can (if they can be ar sed) check through the posts and see that there is no claim by anyone of money stashed in the bank, or similar wordsHowever I did state this "There is ''money in the bank'' as far as the value of Klose, Pinto, Murphy, Oliveira and Maddison are concerned" which is a reference to their suggested value - and the expression money in the bank was put in commas to indicate that it was not a definite expression.Perhaps some on here would do well to actually reply to what is posted rather than dive in on the belief that they have finally ''got'' someone.

ps I shall refrain from making any jokes about banks, be they high street or piggy banks

[Icecream Snow 777]

[quote user="Sussexyellow"]This may of course be relevant to Ed Balls comment that there was no financial need to sell in the January 2018 window, indeed the opposite was probably true and may explain in part why we have held on to players we feared losing. The summer transfer window will of course be a different matter.[/quote]Strictly speaking he was telling the truth, the club is debt free, but needs a £7 million overdraft facility in the summer (we''ve got the money coming in transfer fees, but they''re paid across several seasons).The issue is that we can''t afford Klose, Pinto, Naismith, Jarvis, etc once the parachute payments run out, hence the rebuilding of the squad over several windows.

[Bill 1,788]

" £7 million overdraft facility in the summer"any link to that ?

[Coneys Knee 1,049]

Hercules? I''m just curious. Why are you so abrasive in so many of your posts?

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

[quote user="Icecream Snow"][quote user="Sussexyellow"]This may of course be relevant to Ed Balls comment that there was no financial need to sell in the January 2018 window, indeed the opposite was probably true and may explain in part why we have held on to players we feared losing. The summer transfer window will of course be a different matter.[/quote]Strictly speaking he was telling the truth, the club is debt free, but needs a £7 million overdraft facility in the summer (we''ve got the money coming in transfer fees, but they''re paid across several seasons).The issue is that we can''t afford Klose, Pinto, Naismith, Jarvis, etc once the parachute payments run out, hence the rebuilding of the squad over several windows.[/quote]The position may be that the club has arranged a £7m overdraft facility because - as the time of the AGM - it was budgeting for a cash-flow shortfall of about that amount. But since it could not then assume and factor in any sales in the January window that figure could well be the worst-case scenario, with Pritchard''s departure reducing the shortfall.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Coneys Knee"]Hercules? I''m just curious. Why are you so abrasive in so many of your posts?[/quote]yes''any link to that'' is quite abrasive''next time I shall add the word please afterwards

[Icecream Snow 777]

[quote user="Hercules"]" £7 million overdraft facility in the summer"any link to that ?[/quote][url]https://files.canaries.co.uk/canaries/AGM.pdf[/url]Thanks goes to Badger for originally pointing it out.

[Icecream Snow 777]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]The position may be that the club has arranged a £7m overdraft facility because - as the time of the AGM - it was budgeting for a cash-flow shortfall of about that amount. But since it could not then assume and factor in any sales in the January window that figure could well be the worst-case scenario, with Pritchard''s departure reducing the shortfall.[/quote]It''s hard to say. Certainly when Webber did a video interview with the Pinkun in November/December he said his expectation was that the club wouldn''t do any business in January. Primarily because we had to sell to buy, and that involved people wanting to buy players we wanted to sell at acceptable prices, but that he''d planned for different scenarios accordingly.Certainly the club will benefit from not paying Jerome and Pritchard 25-30k a week, and getting a contribution towards Naismith and Martin''s salaries.

[Bill 1,788]

It should be remembered that a cash flow ''shortage'' is not a debt, as the word is overdraft not borrowing. It is often that money coming in does not meet the timing of money going out, and that we will be due to make payments as the account period (and season) ends before money comes in.As purple has stated above the outgoings wages will have been reduced on the player sales and loans inc Wildschutt. If the club was in the precarious financial position some would have (and I suspect wish) then Watkins would not have been kept and either or both Maddison and Klose would have been sold.Would Gunn have joined us this summer when we had both McGovern and Jones ? Why spend on Hanley and Husband ?We will receive from broadcasting around £32m less this summer. Last summer we received around £9m in transfer fees and saved around £9m in wagesThis January we received around £14m in transfer fees with other savings in wages running until June. What extra we spent is not known but I would suggest far less than came in. I would suggest both Hoolahan and Tettey will leave, cutting the wage bill further.I would therefore suggest that we are ok financially, though it won''t stop the usual suspects from whining. For the rest, just enjoy the rest of the season.

[Big Vince 423]

[quote user="Hercules"]Ah, so ''the boy Stone'' didn''t actually say that, they were in fact your wordsGlad to have cleared that up.As to a black hole I would suggest that is what exists between your ears as matter (facts) go in and a simply swallowed up never to re-appear again.[/quote]

This Hercules fellow is really quite odious and ought to therefore be told the second word is off.