Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BlyBlyBabes

The importance of accounting for our parachute payments.

Recommended Posts

Presumably these are being treated as extraordinary/exceptional items.

Hopefully they are being treated as investible funds on the capital side and not being frittered away in the recurrent expenditure.

Could somebody from the club please update us? Or have I missed something? 

It seems to me that it is more than prudent now to consider our level of ambition this season, and look at ways of backing Peter Grant.

1f Peter can sustain the current momentum through Christmas, then it would probably make sense to look at ways of augmenting the club''s transfer budget. A new share issue?- for me I would say yes, if I could be satisfied as to the boards'' use of our parachute payments.

OTBC - now''s your chance. Never mind the danger.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect that most of the payments have been spent in two ways - players wages (including this year for those remaining players from the prem season) and stadium/infrastructure improvements.  After those and Nigels settlement I suspect that there is not much left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     The thing that i find hard to swallow is that every large sum of money recieved by the club in the last few years has been explained away on exactly the same things ie.wages,infrastructure costs,agents fees etc.If the parachute payments have covered these costs what about the Francis/Jonson/Ashton/Green money? We have spent well under half of what we have received in the transfer market since relegation. What about the continuing income from the TaylorWoodrow development? The 1.1million for the hotel land? The bonus 1.5million of G.Watlings loan being written off? What about the record season ticket sales and catering income? It doesn`t even begin to add up.

    In terms of wages, we only have a handful of players left from the Prem season anyway and the club stated they were all on a `divisional` pay structure. Dont forget that the back-up players to the 16 or so `first teamers` are kids who will be on peanuts.

    The accounts should make interesting reading but i think its high time the board were made to explain in detail some of the murkier aspects of  the clubs financial situation-the activities of subsiduary company `Kerrison Holdings` would be a good start. Any idea when they are out BlyBlyBabes? Also, if the parachute payments are `exceptional` income any idea if they would be listed as such in the accounts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Entirely agree Mr C.

Regardless of whether or not there''s anything to hide, the club''s attitude towards disclosure and accountability leaves a lot to be desired imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

should there not be at least 2 mill to spend ?

that is what we anted to spend on the boy who went to wigan from bristol city ( cant remember his name. ).

we have sold leon since then, that should have been enough to pay off worthington.

so if there is not 2 million in the kitty were has it gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Board have used a smoke screen right from the intitial ''Delia saves the club'' spin, to the present day. I really don''t trust them as far as I could throw them.....and after10 long prudent years, more and more of us are asking why we have such a poor team on the pitch.....and why are we so deeply in debt.

If as has been stated.....there is nothing left....why not? I appreciate that running a club costs money, but income has been steady and large sums have come in and simply evaporated. We spend a pittance on Chadwick.....the sort of money clubs like Oldham and Bristol City would expect to pay out........so have we forgotten that we are a potentially top club these days?  Is the message being sent out from Carrow Road that we remain Delia''s ''little old Norwich''.......so don''t expect very much from us?

If PG saves Delia''s bacon she will be a very fortunate person indeed......and I just hope he gets better backing than the hapless Worthington did. If not....the first decent offer to come along will snatch him away.....and once again we will be in turmoil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For years the club have operated on the basis, "Promise little, deliver more". We''ve seen it time and time again. Remember, we couldn''t afford Hucks, yet we got him. Same with Dean Ashton.

This summer was the first time in ages that new signings were so thin on the ground. Whether that was down to the Board not backing Worthy, or prospective transfer targets just not wanting to come to Norwich, we''ll never know. The reality is, it was probably a bit of both.

It''s also worth remembering that Worthy often paid transfer fees for players, but rarely received fees when players went. In fact, until we sold Ashton, fees paid out to clubs by Norwich exceeded the receipts coming back in by some considerable margin. Indeed, whilst I don''t have the exact figures to hand, I''m sure, even with the the receipts from Ashton, McKenzie and Green, the Club were still in a negative postion.

Worthy was well backed (at least until this summer) and he spent plenty of money in his time, the fact is, in many cases, he didn''t spend it particularly well.

It should also be remembered that the headline transfer fee, think Safri, often only tells part of the storey. By the time you''ve added on agents fees, registration fees and the "add ons", such as top ups based on the number of subsequent appearances by the player (Safri again) or for the club actually getting promoted (Svensson) the total outgoings can easily double.

Before I get accused of defending the Board, I''m not, I''m just trying to highlight some on the basic facts that is often overlooked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     Im not sure what kind of time-scale you`re thinking about GazzaTCC but certainly since relegation the club have made a huge profit in the transfer market. Who,other than Earnshaw for 3 million have we spent good money on? Etuhu 600k and Hughes 500k are the only ones i can think of-both easily covered by the Francis transfer alone. As for this summer being the first in ages where signings were thin on the ground, i seem to remember going into last season wondering what had happened to the idea of a big push to go straight back up. I think we just signed Colin And Hughes? And of course sold our best midfielder for 2 million (plus 300k when Wigan stayed up), failed to replace him, then within a few months were hearing all the usual "we`re skint" claptrap from the club.

     The only time the board have shown any ambition has been when it has been bankrolled by the fans in the form of share issues (Huckerby, Mckenzie, Svensson) and the non-redemption of the B shares (Ashton). They are just extremely lucky that most fans seem to have very short memories.

    Im afraid the "Worthy had loads to spend but wasted it" idea just doesn`t stand up. Worthy signed Hucks,Francis,Safri,Doherty,Mckenzie,Svensson,Ashton and Drury, all of whom are either valuable team members or have been sold on for a profit. Helveg and Jonsson could be cast as expensive flops but we actually made a profit on both. Thorne and Hughes can also be cast as flops but Thorne was free and Hughes is generally regarded as a good cover player in such a small squad. Of the more recent signings Robinson is at best average-but for 50k what do people expect? I dont think too many people would argue that Colin,Etuhu and Croft are not good young players who are now worth more than we paid for them. When Worthy spent money he bought in almost to a man very good players, he just had almost nothing to play with since relegation-hence playing the whole of last season with no right-sided midfielder in the squad-a farcical approach from a club supposedly making a serious attempt at promotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The money goes on players wages, bonuses and agents fees in the main. As have the parachute payments.

What does seem to be ignored generally is the fact that to buya plyer for £1 million, the club either has to have £1 million in the bank or negotiate a payments plan with the sellng club. You cannot borrow money to buy players anymore cos no one will lend it to you!

 

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...