Jump to content
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

Football 2010-2011


Guest eFestivals

Recommended Posts

Reinsie doesnt even play for Barca! At least Macheda plays for Utd. And this is only a rumour. Reina did it in front of the entire country/world.

Maybe. He wouldn't get the racist abuse he gets in Italy anyway. But he could as easy turn into a pisshead. He seems like a bit of a clown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 10.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • eFestivals

    2125

  • ampersand

    1135

  • The Nal

    1089

  • TheGayTent

    766

Notice how you've fallen into your own trap there?

If you write off the value over a time period but are then thinking that the value is still there, what does the write-off in value apply to, and what does it mean in the real world rather than in an accountant's books? :blink:

Edited by ralph250
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record SP I think Reina was put in a tough position by the two Barca lads. He most certainly didnt conspire with them to run with the stunt. Think he was just taken by the moment and tried to make the most of it. Will be interesting to see does he make any kind of comments about it coming up.

As Neil says Cesc is a clever kid who knows he won't get his game with their current roster of players. I doubt he'll go anywhere this summer guv.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think I was clear enough. Fergie getting his players to tap up fellow contracted professionals is illegal. If found to be true he should be banned.

It's not concerned him before, why should it concern him now? :blink:

That is, why would it concern him when he's doing it? We of course know that he hits the roof when it gets done to his players. :lol::lol:

As just one of very many examples, the Berba deal was done illegally. Fergie picked him up from Manc airport before Spurs had given permission to talk.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were meeting out the blame for the debacle with the shirt I would call it

Puyol - 60%

Pique - 30%

Reinq - 10%

But what was he to do? Stop them putting the shirt over Fabregas' head? Help him take it off?

He made a reference to the connection CF clearly has with the club. He was really given no alternative by the actions of the other two gits.

For the record I think the whole thing with the shirt was one of the least classy things ive seen in the game. If I was a Gunner I would be f*cking livid.

Edited by The Nal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hes learned from his mistakes on that one (Gazza). And of course he goes mental when someone else does it to his players, who doesnt?!

Yep, and got his player. Last day of the transfer window, he knew he'd get away with it. Spurs had no option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's based on an assumption of an economic life (15 years). Unless United cease to be in 15 years (always possible), then it's not real loss is it? in respect of actual value of the company.

Correct. So why do it?

huh? Where's the huge debt being accumulated?

With the tax bill that'll arrive when selling up - which in Utd's case will be payable by the club and not the Glazers.

You can't get tax relief on buying the club - which is essentially what this is being done for - and then not get taxed on it when selling. And with CGT just having gone up, that's the impact back on Utd just gone up too.

The only way it doesn't happen like that is if the club has really fallen by the value they're claiming in the accounts - and as you recognise, it hasn't, because just as the Glazers paid for 'goodwill', so will any buyer.

That money would go back in to the clubs books as non-tangible asset again.

Not necessarily. It depends how a new owner wants to work their tax liabilities.

How the Glazers have done things works for them (in the short-term, anyway), because it means they're paying less in tax each year currently than they'd otherwise be doing - but as I say, it hits back later.

For an owner who actually has some money behind them, it's probably not how they'd choose to do things, because it's not the most tax efficient in the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and I'm not saying everything will be fine and rosy, just trying to analyse the accounts objectively.

Equally for the 3 year and 3 month period outlined in the prospectus: (year ends June 07,08,09 and Sept 09). Page 47.

In (000s)

Net Cash Inflow from Operating Activities £300,930

Interest received £3243

Interest paid (£133,763)

Sale of Players registrations £145,356

Purchase of Players registrations (£151,532)

Sale of tangible fixed assets £1,012

Purchase of tangible fixed assets (£32,760)

Sale of investments £1,581

Purchase of shares (£7,332)

increased net financing/borrowing of £11,346

Net taxation recieved £2,360

net cash acquired with subsidiary undertaking £113

------

£465,941

(£325,387)

-----

£140,554....£43,247 free cashflow per 12 month period.

Adds up with turning £6,029 (at June 06, Page F-96 on the prospectus) to £146,583 cash in bank at Sept '09 (Page F5)

F96

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yup i can't wait for you to defend theo when he has another crappy season :P

But what's 'crappy'? There's Theo crappy, and then there's Lennon crappy. It's a no-contest. :P

In all seriousness, if he stays fit and gets a decent run in the team, then there's no reason why he shouldn't be turning in the sorts of performances that he was before spending most of 18+ months out injured. While he's never going to be a doing-it-every-game player, he's already shown that he's more than capable of doing it regularly and to an overall better standard than Lennon will ever manage.

He's still only 20 remember!

(or is he now 21? Whatever, still very young in footie terms).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what's 'crappy'? There's Theo crappy, and then there's Lennon crappy. It's a no-contest. :P

In all seriousness, if he stays fit and gets a decent run in the team, then there's no reason why he shouldn't be turning in the sorts of performances that he was before spending most of 18+ months out injured. While he's never going to be a doing-it-every-game player, he's already shown that he's more than capable of doing it regularly and to an overall better standard than Lennon will ever manage.

He's still only 20 remember!

(or is he now 21? Whatever, still very young in footie terms).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our future is now entirely in the hands of three people, two of whom we hate

Instinctively I can't help but see Ashcroft's involvement as a bad thing, but apparently he doesn't "do" administration. I guess at least we can now go on and humiliate the likes of Reading, QPR, Coventry and Aldershot in peace, and if the worst is to happen at least we know that it won't happen this season.

Edited by beLIEveR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...