Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
militantcanary

Accounts due

Recommended Posts

Judging by the past 5 years the accounts have been posted between 10 and 20th October each year, so some time next week they will be out and will make for interesting reading.

The lack of clarity on transfer fees make our profit in the summer anything between 500k and 6M.

i am not sure if the accounts will reveal the clause inserted with respect to relegation in our wages? Can anyone help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="militantcanary"]The lack of clarity on transfer fees make our profit in the summer anything between 500k and 6M[/quote]http://www.imagesbuddy.com/images/83/2013/08/stop-stop-im-gonna-pee-lol-graphic.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe you won''t see anything in this set of accounts as they are for the last financial year and won''t be upto date for this seasons relegation.

But will highlight just how much the club backed Hughton and dramatically he failed with the size of the budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy is correct on first point and woefully wrong on second as confirmed by the CEO. Quite why people highlight their blatant ignorance to abuse the club I still don''t know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m not beating the club at all, but will show how much was spent by Hughton last year on loans, wages and transfers only to pkay the most boring football seen at carrow road and ultimately failed big time.

Where am I abusing the club? Get your facts right before making daft comments I have nothing but respect for the board & CEO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Indy"]I''m not beating the club at all, but will show how much was spent by Hughton last year on loans, wages and transfers only to pkay the most boring football seen at carrow road and ultimately failed big time.

Where am I abusing the club? Get your facts right before making daft comments I have nothing but respect for the board & CEO.[/quote]absolute nonsensefirstly Hughton DID NOT spend any money, the wages and contracts were drawn up and authorised by the board, as were the incoming playersthe accounts will not show these supposed fees, unless you can show us where they are in the 2103 accounts, hereas to your attack .... as that is what it is as virtually every supporter bar a couple of the deranged on here, are fully aware that Hughton''s managing style caused dreadful football, and ultimately relegationand the amount of money spend on wages, loans and fees would have been pretty much the same whatever the manager - ...as the budget would have been the sameso why not give it a rest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What a crock you think that the players were chosen by the board then, Hughton would have told the boaed who he wanted and those loaned in Elnander & Gut.. were targeted by Delia!

Hughton made the list the CEO & board backed him regardless how you want to spin it.

As for beating the club where? As beating Hughton with a stick yes his team failed by his management & tactics and we were relegated.

Agree any manager would have been backed but IMO would have bought in his own set of players and style, but we will never know and can only comment on Hughton.

As for the accounts report you will find that operating expenses & other operating expenses will include all the loans, wages etc...so will give a clue to how much ( granted it includes more) but without the full balance sheets detailing all accounts and expenses no one can ever really know.

So thats all from me and still can''t see where I have beaten the club with a stick or but you carry on trolling.

I can''t be botheted to argue with people who just come on here fishing for arguements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"but IMO would have bought in his own set of players and style"so Hughton wanted Becchio, that''s why he played him so much I suppose

"so will give a clue to how much ( granted it includes more) but without

the full balance sheets detailing all accounts and expenses no one can

ever really know."

so why start a thread bleating about wanting to see the accounts ?............ that you admit won''t tell us what you want to know

and you squeak about trolling

dearie me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way I think Indy is quite correct in highlighting the ultimate and expensive failure of the three aged loanees that were Hughton''s pick, and only Hughton''s pick.Of Yobo, Gutierrez and Elamander only the latter justified the cost and his wages, and then, not, IMO, totally.Overall, though, I feel that CH''s transfer dealings were sound and without re-opening the Wolfswinkle debate, feel that there was a considerable degree of misfortune in the event of even this, his biggest flop.The Board appoints the manager and decides the transfer budget. Presumably the manager approves of his scouting staff and also uses his own judgement in presenting his "wish list" in accord with his needs, preferences and the money available to him.Hughton can be mostly criticised for the fact that some of the signings made during his management spell were out of kilter with the tactics he employed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I nevet started the thread you pompus troll.

All you ever do is insult and twist things so trot on Binner lover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh and you know it as fact that Hughton didn''t want to swap Morison for Becchio.....you really are simple to think the board would buy a player that the manager doesn''t agree to or are you having a dig at our board and moaning that tgey buy the players?

I''m not even going to lower myself to you you gradeca troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The accounts will show that NFC had a relegation zone budget as confirmed by CEO.

The obsession with one individual is crazy. The premier league is not a computer game - it involves many people. The manager has a limited influence as anyone who has led any team will know. Yes the football was negative but we are seeing plenty of teams play negative football against NCFC this season as manager''s see it as the most effective way to get a result aginst a stronger side eg Chelsea against Bayern being a classic example. Football is played by footaballers not a manager and the quality of the footballers is dictated by the relegation size budget as can be seen by the fact that we have only had a couple of players leave to relegation fighting clubs in the premier league. No dount people will continue to put their head in the sand and seek to deny reality and blame one individual but life in reality is more complicated than that. Yes ulimately CH failed. But he did an amazing job to keep us up the previous season and we finished where are finances dictated we should last season. By all means critize based on speculation, hindsight, no experience and no qualifications but recognise that is all we message board punters are doing and cut out the miserable, ignorant, maliscious, unnecessary, ungrateful abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great post T.

Of course as McNally himself said the principle reason for our relegation was we spent poorly in the summer. A number of people are responsible for this but I believe, had we stayed up, Hughton and Chester would have still been summer casualties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BroadstairsR"]Either way I think Indy is quite correct in highlighting the ultimate and expensive failure of the three aged loanees that were Hughton''s pick, and only Hughton''s pick.Of Yobo, Gutierrez and Elamander only the latter justified the cost and his wages, and then, not, IMO, totally.Overall, though, I feel that CH''s transfer dealings were sound and without re-opening the Wolfswinkle debate, feel that there was a considerable degree of misfortune in the event of even this, his biggest flop.The Board appoints the manager and decides the transfer budget. Presumably the manager approves of his scouting staff and also uses his own judgement in presenting his "wish list" in accord with his needs, preferences and the money available to him.Hughton can be mostly criticised for the fact that some of the signings made during his management spell were out of kilter with the tactics he employed.[/quote]not correct, as the business with Becchio demonstrated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Indy"]Oh and you know it as fact that Hughton didn''t want to swap Morison for Becchio.....you really are simple to think the board would buy a player that the manager doesn''t agree to or are you having a dig at our board and moaning that tgey buy the players?

I''m not even going to lower myself to you you gradeca troll.[/quote]eh ?what on earth are you wittering on about now ?

you squeak about spin then post up some old bo llocks about me having a dig at the boardbased it would seem on your inability to read something as it is posted

the simple fact is that -the accounts will not show the exact transfer fees, as they are usually spread over various accounts, as are appearance bonuses etcHughton fu  cked up the job as a manager - that is pretty much a given, so why keep returning to it ?the budget was what the club had, a figure irrespective of what manager was in changenow why not let it rest, and consider that next time you want to have a go at the club get your facts and argument right first

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Get things right, at no point have I had a dig at the club, I din''t start the thread, pointed out that we would not see this financial years accounts and returned your point about where you can find the figures in the financial report.

As I posted too any manager would have been given the same support and budget and Hughton wad an epic fail last season spending a vast amount in his targets.

If you know so.much about Becchio please give us the facts where Hughton didn''t want him!

You are pompous and twist things and last you keep refering to the majority of posters as dim well thats fine as we are City fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="T"]Yes the football was negative but we are seeing plenty of teams play negative football against NCFC this season as manager''s see it as the most effective way to get a result aginst a stronger side eg Chelsea against Bayern being a classic example. Football is played by footaballers not a manager and the quality of the footballers is dictated by the relegation size budget as can be seen by the fact that we have only had a couple of players leave to relegation fighting clubs in the premier league.[/quote] Teams going up into the Premier League playing a generic survival game are ten a penny, so perhaps you can explain how Swansea conspired to avoid playing the sort of garbage served up under Hoofton. They managed to finish 12th in a season in which they played in the Europa League, and 9th the season before when they also won the League Cup.A lot of fans seem to forget about Swansea when they make their excuses for poor football and poor results, frequently blaming budgets and pointing at teams in a worse position to justify their arguments. Swansea currently set the standard for a club of our size, and the owners and board are ultimately responsible for the fact that we''re no where near them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The old classic fallacious one example argument. You mean Swansea whose free rent is being investigated as being contrary to European law. That Swansea. Swansea and West Brom are indeed 2 clubs that have done better than NCFC in recent years given their finances but the majority have done worse. It''s classic variances about the mean. We did better than the mean for a couple of years and then returned to you mean last year.CH out performed one year and par the next. The rest is just classic blame and denial from people with no experience, qualications or understanding of probability or financial reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
e[quote user="Indy"]Get things right, at no point have I had a dig at the club, I din''t start the thread, pointed out that we would not see this financial years accounts and returned your point about where you can find the figures in the financial report.

As I posted too any manager would have been given the same support and budget and Hughton wad an epic fail last season spending a vast amount in his targets.

If you know so.much about Becchio please give us the facts where Hughton didn''t want him!

You are pompous and twist things and last you keep refering to the majority of posters as dim well thats fine as we are City fans.[/quote]

dearie me, this has to be a wind up"any manager would have been given the same support and budget and

Hughton wad an epic fail last season spending a vast amount in his

targets"
if any manager would have been given the same budget, then how on earth did Hughton spend a vast amount as the same amount would have been spent irrespective of who the manager was" If you know so.much about Becchio please give us the facts where Hughton didn''t want him!

"where did I say that, I didn''t. I merely queried "so Hughton wanted Becchio, that''s why he played him so much I suppose" which was questioning why would a manager who is supposedly in sole charge of signings (spending) sign a player and then not play him ?

"you keep refering to the majority of posters as dim "no, just those who are (see above)

now stop making up stuff and let it rest - Hughton has gone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And again good post T. That one example argument has been rife on here for years. Like Tangie''s Preston who were tglhe ''stick'' of choice back in the day. I know we are doing well when those clubs are in short supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="T"]The old classic fallacious one example argument. You mean Swansea whose free rent is being investigated as being contrary to European law. That Swansea. Swansea and West Brom are indeed 2 clubs that have done better than NCFC in recent years given their finances but the majority have done worse. It''s classic variances about the mean. We did better than the mean for a couple of years and then returned to you mean last year.CH out performed one year and par the next. The rest is just classic blame and denial from people with no experience, qualications or understanding of probability or financial reality.[/quote]You''ve not pointed out anything fallacious in my post, all you''ve done is stated as fact that the championship is our natural level and offered the same tired old excuse I alluded to previously by saying that other teams are worse. The truth is that Swansea have gone up a level on us because of the way their club is run and the way they choose to play football. They would never have appointed a manager like Hoofton, nor tolerated his dire brand of ''football''.There naturally aren''t too many examples of clubs like Swansea, but this is due to many other clubs being run badly and playing terrible football, ie exactly my argument as to why Norwich could and should be doing a lot better! Should it not be easier to stay in the top league if lots of other teams are run badly and play dire survival football? We outperformed before in the late 80s/early 90s because we played a brand of football which was far better than most other teams.No amount of flimsy excuses, suppositions or half-baked theories can explain away Swansea''s league performance. Your arbitrarily-applied reversion to mean theory is bound to be proved right eventually, but I don''t think it would have been any use in predicting Swansea''s performance if it was applied at the time of their promotion. But in the event that Swansea reverted to their mean (ie got relegated), they would still have enjoyed a far better innings in the top league than we did, plus winning a cup, playing in Europe and playing far better football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is your issue that we''re not doing as well as the best possible example of a team in similar circumstances to us?

Either you are top of the optimistic league or you need to think your logic through again.

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...