Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cambridgeshire canary

'We lack ambition.. when will Delia open her pockets?'

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Hugill hasn't left. We're also expected to make other signings, so again, I reiterate, what is your point?

I'm simply saying the accounts will show you, yet again, that all this 'savings' or 'money made on player sales' is spent on, as per usual, player signings and wages.

Ok and thanks for your answers, I’ll save everyone else of a borefest by continuing this exchange.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, GenerationA47 said:

I thought we were talking about paying Leitner a negotiated termination payment i.e. compensation for early termination of his  employment. Freely confess i know nuuuuthing of the registration payments of which you speak!

 

4 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Hugill hasn't left. We're also expected to make other signings, so again, I reiterate, what is your point?

I'm simply saying the accounts will show you, yet again, that all this 'savings' or 'money made on player sales' is spent on, as per usual, player signings and wages.

Compensation payments are not earnings for NIC purposes and are exempt from NIC completely even if they exceed £30,000.

https://landaulaw.co.uk/tax-treatment-in-settlement-agreements/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Ok and thanks for your answers, I’ll save everyone else of a borefest by continuing this exchange.   

Seriously - you might actually have a little bit of credibility in this debate if you actually acknowledged the very clear and obvious point that Hoggy keeps making to you and you keep sidestepping/ignoring. 

Our total wage bill the last time we were in the Premier League was £88,925, 000.

(That's EIGHTY EIGHT MILLION, NINE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS). 

How much do you think our total wage bill will be this season?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BigFish said:

 

Compensation payments are not earnings for NIC purposes and are exempt from NIC completely even if they exceed £30,000.

https://landaulaw.co.uk/tax-treatment-in-settlement-agreements/

Thank you. However I think  that is  talking about employee contributions, and we were on about what NCFC would have to pay.
 

The recent statute change specifically says employer NICs will be due on the amount over £30k IF tax is payable on it, & your link confirms:

If a settlement agreement offers compensation which exceeds £30,000, the excess will be subject to tax at your appropriate marginal rate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Seriously - you might actually have a little bit of credibility in this debate if you actually acknowledged the very clear and obvious point that Hoggy keeps making to you and you keep sidestepping/ignoring. 

Our total wage bill the last time we were in the Premier League was £88,925, 000.

(That's EIGHTY EIGHT MILLION, NINE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS). 

How much do you think our total wage bill will be this season?

Not when you also factor in additional spend of likely £20 million plus in wages over the next 3 years.
 

The above from Hoggy failed to mention all the savings in wages from departures and sales. So net wages (21/22) and money spent this window (after Buendia sale)is quite balanced out overall. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Given we have now spent over 40 million this window (Which will soon rise to just over 50 with our incoming Greek wonderkid) is there anyone left with that old viewpoint? Would love to hear from them 😉

The signings have been allowed due to the funds from Emi leaving and our increased revenue from being in the top league again. Delia has no money - we are a self funded club. 

Stop trying to wind people up with your endless 'ambition' nonsense; it really is quite tedious.

OTBC

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Alex Moss said:

Exactly. The sale of Emi roughly covers this, we have spent around £40mil this summer and we’re not even done yet. We would have to be scraping the barrel to knock the club for this in fairness. Personally, it’s surprised me, the level of spending, and I applaud Webber for going for it in this window. 

The sale of Emi covers the covid loss? I thought the sale of Lewis and Godfrey did that? Have we incurred a further 35 million in covid losses over the summer? Genuinely confused.

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, GenerationA47 said:

Thank you. However I think  that is  talking about employee contributions, and we were on about what NCFC would have to pay.
 

The recent statute change specifically says employer NICs will be due on the amount over £30k IF tax is payable on it, & your link confirms:

If a settlement agreement offers compensation which exceeds £30,000, the excess will be subject to tax at your appropriate marginal rate. 

It is fiendishly complicated, but you have missed the point that compensation payments are paid GROSS and the players involved are foreign nationals living abroad. HMRC have no say on the tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BigFish said:

It is fiendishly complicated, but you have missed the point that compensation payments are paid GROSS and the players involved are foreign nationals living abroad. HMRC have no say on the tax.

I'm not sure that it is a "compensation payment" in the same sense of an employment contract though? You buy and sell a player's registration at  agreed price. In employment law you couldn't bind an employee to you for 5 years. A footballers contract is not the same as a standard employment contract (although it contains elements of it).

I'm going to look at the Price of Football (book) again this evening to see if I can find  it.

Edited by Badger
Corrected grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BarclayWazza said:

Just love the accounting of some on here:

Last season we received roughly £15m for Lewis, £25m for Ben Godfrey and £40m in parachute payments.  Assuming the Gibson and Giannoulis deals were from last seasons budget, that paid for Sorensen, Placheta, Mumba, Dowell, Hughil, Gibson and Giannoulis.  I would wager that we are in credit from the Lewis and Godfrey money.

Equally, if the reported fees for Gunn, Lees Melou, Rashica and Sargent are as suggested, we're still in credit from the Buendia money.  We still have the approximately £100m PL money to come.

What's happening is the bare minimum that can be expected from a policy which allows the sale of your best players, reinvestment into the playing squad.  But don't be hoodwinked, some would have us believe that these purchases means that Delia is great and wonderful.  Her contribution to this is zero.  We sat on the 2018-19 PL money and as it stands, no 2021-22 PL money has gone on players. 

Currently, our net spend is less than that before the 2018-19 PL season.

 

100% sure you're a boring d1ck head that the club would be better off without.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

The sale of Emi covers the covid loss? I thought the sale of Lewis and Godfrey did that? Have we incurred a further 35 million in covid losses over the summer? Genuinely confused.

OTBC

You're only allowed to remember player sales for a few months on here. Members of the clique get cross. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Not when you also factor in additional spend of likely £20 million plus in wages over the next 3 years.
 

The above from Hoggy failed to mention all the savings in wages from departures and sales. So net wages (21/22) and money spent this window (after Buendia sale)is quite balanced out overall. 

*sigh*

Because in that post I was talking in the context of another poster who was talking about 'spending all the Emi money' - my point being even if we'd only spent £25m of the Emi Money, the remaining £10m so or whatever it was is taken up by the additional wages of the players signed with that money. A direct comparison, if you like.

When we look at incomings / outgoings overall; we'll see that yet again we'll spend close to, or more than £90 million on salaries plus the money we've spent on transfers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Midlands Yellow said:

You're only allowed to remember player sales for a few months on here. Members of the clique get cross. 

Some on here were using the Godfrey and Lewis money as being attributed to the signings we made of Gibson and Gianoulis, are we now saying they've also covered all the money lost from Covid? And again, The wages for Gibson and Gianoulis are much likely quite considerably higher than Lewis & Godfreys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

The sale of Emi covers the covid loss? I thought the sale of Lewis and Godfrey did that? Have we incurred a further 35 million in covid losses over the summer? Genuinely confused.

OTBC

I agree, I mentioned it too.  This £35m COVID hole has somehow become accountable for two seasons, so is it now £70m?  No one has suggested it is, so in my eyes that COVID loss was covered last summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hogesar said:

Some on here were using the Godfrey and Lewis money as being attributed to the signings we made of Gibson and Gianoulis, are we now saying they've also covered all the money lost from Covid? And again, The wages for Gibson and Gianoulis are much likely quite considerably higher than Lewis & Godfreys.

The club had at least £15m it did not spend in the 19/20 season, or at least that's what can be assumed if there was budget for that guy from France who didn't fancy it.  If Lewis/Godfrey covered the Covid loss, then that £15m remaining from 19/20 covers Gibson/Giannoulis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

Some on here were using the Godfrey and Lewis money as being attributed to the signings we made of Gibson and Gianoulis, are we now saying they've also covered all the money lost from Covid? And again, The wages for Gibson and Gianoulis are much likely quite considerably higher than Lewis & Godfreys.

Gibson could well be the top earner at the club, Gianoulis on half at best of that figure. When you splash decent cash on young but very talented players (from abroad) they don’t always massively eat into the wages budget. Drmic was probably on a weekly wage that matches Sargent and Tzolis combined. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hogesar said:

*sigh*

Because in that post I was talking in the context of another poster who was talking about 'spending all the Emi money' - my point being even if we'd only spent £25m of the Emi Money, the remaining £10m so or whatever it was is taken up by the additional wages of the players signed with that money. A direct comparison, if you like.

When we look at incomings / outgoings overall; we'll see that yet again we'll spend close to, or more than £90 million on salaries plus the money we've spent on transfers.

We will still spend a huge % of our income on wages. It's hard to understand how so many people don't take the wage bill into consideration. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Gibson could well be the top earner at the club, Gianoulis on half at best of that figure. When you splash decent cash on young but very talented players (from abroad) they don’t always massively eat into the wages budget. Drmic was probably on a weekly wage that matches Sargent and Tzolis combined. 

I'm sure we're still paying a large chunk of that, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

The club had at least £15m it did not spend in the 19/20 season, or at least that's what can be assumed if there was budget for that guy from France who didn't fancy it.  If Lewis/Godfrey covered the Covid loss, then that £15m remaining from 19/20 covers Gibson/Giannoulis.

Thanks, makes sense. Although I guess the £15m is a real assumption right now, rather than any evidence it was 'available' in terms of cashflow etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Beefy is a legend said:

We will still spend a huge % of our income on wages. It's hard to understand how so many people don't take the wage bill into consideration. 

People don't take the wage bill into consideration because no one in the media does either.  You never hear a journalist saying, they've got a £50m pot, of which £20m will go on transfer fees and £30m on wages.  The only figures ever reported are transfer budgets and the price a player cost, never wages (unless it's a renewal/ridiculous situation like Messi and PSG).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hogesar said:

Thanks, makes sense. Although I guess the £15m is a real assumption right now, rather than any evidence it was 'available' in terms of cashflow etc.

It will all show up in the accounts. I expect them to show we have spent verything we have.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Thanks, makes sense. Although I guess the £15m is a real assumption right now, rather than any evidence it was 'available' in terms of cashflow etc.

Oh 100%, but we'll see what the accounts say when they are published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

The sale of Emi covers the covid loss? I thought the sale of Lewis and Godfrey did that? Have we incurred a further 35 million in covid losses over the summer? Genuinely confused.

OTBC

I don’t know what transfers cover which loss etc, you would have to speak to Stuart Webber about that. What I do know is that there’ll be considerable other costs running the club, so it’s ridiculous to think that, for example, £100mil coming in should amount to £100mil going out. 

Not my money either at the end of the day. But it’s funny how people can spend it like it belongs to them, there’s some very entitled supporters out there.

Are you unhappy with the clubs spending this summer? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

I agree, I mentioned it too.  This £35m COVID hole has somehow become accountable for two seasons, so is it now £70m?  No one has suggested it is, so in my eyes that COVID loss was covered last summer.

I don't know what the club has said about this but at the risk of stating the obvious the pandemic had a significant negative effect on the financial year for the 2019-20 season and a massive negative effect on the financial year for the 2020-21 season.

Added to which, the club has to take the precaution of budgeting for the pandemic having a negative effect on the financial year for the 2021-22 season. It cannot possibly assume it will benefit from being allowed to have full houses, or as near as dammit, for all 19 games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

I don’t know what transfers cover which loss etc, you would have to speak to Stuart Webber about that. What I do know is that there’ll be considerable other costs running the club, so it’s ridiculous to think that, for example, £100mil coming in should amount to £100mil going out. 

Not my money either at the end of the day. But it’s funny how people can spend it like it belongs to them, there’s some very entitled supporters out there.

Are you unhappy with the clubs spending this summer? 

It’s a decent window unlike 19/20. The title thread was very biased and needed challenging though. Player sales and prized assets yet to be sold should have made us competitive in the transfer market which at last we have been. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PurpleCanary said:

I don't know what the club has said about this but at the risk of stating the obvious the pandemic had a significant negative effect on the financial year for the 2019-20 season and a massive negative effect on the financial year for the 2020-21 season.

Added to which, the club has to take the precaution of budgeting for the pandemic having a negative effect on the financial year for the 2021-22 season. It cannot possibly assume it will benefit from being allowed to have full houses, or as near as dammit, for all 19 games.

I agree of course.

But, having said that, I was under the assumption that the majority of the loss was due to loss of TV revenue from the pandemic etc rather than the impact of zero crowds (which obviously does play a part too!).  This broadcasting issue doesn't apply as a loss for 20-21 as I'm assume the club received the payments they were expecting that season, so the only real loss is match day revenue and any other commercial revenue around the ground lost due to restrictions - which I can't believe gets anywhere near another £35m?  I would also assume that the club budgeted, or at least had multiple budgets, including one for 20-21 that reflected a season with no fans and little to no commercial revenue from catering etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Midlands Yellow said:

It’s a decent window unlike 19/20. The title thread was very biased and needed challenging though. Player sales and prized assets yet to be sold should have made us competitive in the transfer market which at last we have been. 

Which is why I don’t understand what the fuss is about? 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

Which is why I don’t understand what the fuss is about? 

Master Cambridge set the agenda, now thankfully is has some balance. Have a super evening in Dorset, and don’t waste it all on here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Given we have now spent over 40 million this window (Which will soon rise to just over 50 with our incoming Greek wonderkid) is there anyone left with that old viewpoint? Would love to hear from them 😉

norwich.jpg

Our squad is improving every year since Farke/Webber. We have strengthened in all areas of the pitch. It wasn't long ago our squad included, Klose, Pinto, Duda, Trybull, Leitner, Naismith, Hugill etc and the fringe players rarely featured. We are in a much better position now regarding the first 11 and in the depth of quality available to pick from. It's a slow progress but progress all the same. The club is running without the need of Delia's cook book sales

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...