scoobos

I think thats the problem mate, the business model targets people who can't budget to have 20 quid at the end of the week after the beers and fags - who are simple. Or worse even it preys on really desperate people who just need to make ends meets to feed themselves and their families. I seriously know a family where I live in the South East , where Mum eats 2 meals a week because she's so skint with the kids. 2000% APR+ needs banning and the lending industry regulated - but ho hum - as the years go by more and more of the "football heritage" is dying in the name of cash.

In my living memory (since 1977) it was probably the euro game against Scotland where Gazza scored that absolutely wonder goal in 96, but I was lucky enough to be there and just the right age to have a proper all week piss up to boot.

On topic, I'm perhaps one of the dying minority on here who thinks that its a good thing we're giving Pardew another year. I blame most of this on the board, I've said before I believe any manager would struggle with the deck hes been given. But to be perfectly honest, its more a case of better the devil the know - I just can't see us getting anyone "as good" as him as a replacement - now that's a sobering thought.

Whilst you did give me a good beating over my personal take on the accounts, I would argue that its not a simple as that - given that he's tied it to Sports Direct as far as advertising revenue goes. He draws profit and dividend from Sports Direct, he gave "Free" advertising to it from NUFC ... So in part he probably has had a few mil out of the club, but indirectly (and finally this is something I think is fact, rather than conjecture) I reckon if hes cutting costs for Sports Direct, by using NUFC - that can still be seen as taking money out the club - if he'd offered NIKE the kind of coverage he's had for SD, it would cost them millions. I wish I had more, cos my spidey sense says Mike must have ulterior motives, maybe this will stick a bit ?

Why so? I've always thought it was a great site and pretty impartial mostly too.

Thankfully my company doesn't make losses (touch wood) Quality thread title change

King of information. Problem I have here is that apart from Rafa, I don't think any of those managers are any better than Pardew - or unlikely to come (e.g Roberto Di Matteo , Blanc)

She would be very appreciative.

that comment is useless without pics

Thanks for carrying this on - that wasn't my point though, unless I wrote it incorrectly, it was that corp tax liability is not carried forward and is only charged once. I'll stop derailing my own thread now though and say that it looks to me like Cabaye can't settle, I expect him to try to leave in the summer - and given his current form and attitude issues I would only be a little gutted, as long as we replace.

Nothing like making an arse of myself on a forum is there Seriously though , I still don't really understand where that 32 mil went.

I don't want Poyet :uhoh: :uhoh:

point four was that the profits were taxed once. that took six million edits , that last post

Uff I'm making this very dry sorry - now given that you are an accountant I'm foxed by HMRC's site and the guidance I've always followed!! http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/taxon/uk.htm#1 understanding tax credits. I am 100% sure that retained profits are not subject to corporation tax - they get taxed and assessed yearly, as does an individuals income. You can retrospectively get done if you deliberately break the law to reduce liability but it doesn't carry forward mate, that's my understanding anyway. Personal taxes are 41% of gross salary, so yes I am arguing over a (relatively) small amount - its 83k tax. Finally we've said nothing on the 32 million profit that disappeared the next year into a 35 million loss, (so net 3 million loss) I fail to see how, given the sales we've made. Employees NI = £7,214 PAYE = £76,098. on 200K. Maybe I need to hire you to explain the retained profits thing, because my accountant and my other ones have NEVER ever brought previous year profits into a return, ever. It's subject to corp tax on the year its made and that's it. Are you really a chartered accountant or are you pulling my leg?? (not trying to be an arse, honest guv)

why so? (I do have an accountant , I've only manually filed once, many years ago)

I'll add I'm not saying I'm right - but I am a company director myself and file these accounts each year, so I reckon I'm alright at reading them (hopefully!!)

Ok I'll bite on this one Firstly, didn't know that - am surprised. fair comment. Secondly, really ? how do you know Llambias doesnt own shares? It would be strange to have a director who doesnt. 200k a year is still a piss take. Thirdly, Dividends are tax free to a point , you get 10% credit when you cash them. Loan interest is taxable. So you don't pay the first 35k , the second bracket is still low (lower than PAYE) Forthly, it doesn't work like that - you cannot take previous years into account - you either turn profit in that financial year or you dont. (profit BEFORE dividends) Fifthly - bone of contention for me . David Milliband was on 110K at sunderland for example. Sixthly - 50% tax bracket is gone mate, so theres no way his take home is 50% less than his payout, but yeah, thats fair enough. Seventhly : I'm very suspicious of this particular entry regarding 1million being held under "operating leases" - and also the fact that the club has turned 32 million profit in 2010 according to these accounts - and then a loss of 35 million (on what , where is this loss coming from , the boardroom operating costs ????) that's more than balancing the books.

"which is probably the issue, too many football spectators, not enough football supporters" - yup I also think this - the sunderland clear out was just embarrassing and not the conduct of "the most loyal fans in the country" , but yeah, each to his own I suppose.

funny how we are talking about managers we can afford , when Llambias is taking 200k SALARY before dividends and paying fook all corporation tax. There's a fine line between selling "balancing of the books" as being in the genuine interest of the club and balancing the books to ensure that the corp tax liability is 0. 5 years of owning us like this is 1 million cash, in salary alone for 1 director - if you accept that he's likely to sell at equal or greater to the value of the club , that is not good for us. I've been reading the accounts this morning I also noticed that Sports Direct DID NOT pay for the naming of the arena. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/apr/25/sports-direct-mike-ashley-shares) I'm banging on though on that point and derailing my own thread

I really would be pleased (if we can afford it) if we got Rafa. I reckon its a dream though, he's out of our league on many financial levels.

BigW - I'm one of the people who shouts "get out wide". I wasn't aware this was a horrid cliche. Could you advise of a new alternative shout please? I'm a yorkshire man - so shouting Shooooooooot in my accent doesn't quite work.

I wouldn't be so sure we won't agree , but I hope we don't - if it takes another 2 or 3 managers and horrible heart rippingly bad seasons for us to agree. I'm starting with Ashley is evil , mainly due to the Keegan trial - if you haven't read the transcript from that you really should. I could have my mind changed, but I don't really see any progress. All this "i've balanced the books" comes down to nothing if we continually fail and become a dead wood club. This is a man, who I believe is brokering his deals on the premise of "We'll put a minimum fee in " or "come to the premiership and prove yourself" knowing they'll get sold if they bloom. I just can't see him keeping anyone whos on red hot form, if 25 mil comes in; he's said as much. (not big money anymore for the big 4) - so what are we to be? A glorified feeder club? How many other owners have publically set a price on his entire squad?

Spot on, I really hope he gets the send off he deserves. He's been the ultimate loyal player over the years, it must have been so tough up against Shea and then Krul coming into form for what should have been his swansong campaign. I hope carzola doesn't turn up to play and I reckon thats 25% of the threat gone.

sorry to add fuel to the fire, but Its a good thread this. So when you say "Keeping pardew ... equivalent to keeping simpson over deb" , it infers that we have a manager on the market, at our rates and willing to follow Ashleys model who is 3x the manager P is... Thats just not the case. The reality is, get rid of Pardew - and get in someone equal or worse. We can't aim higher than Pardew (and honestly, I think its harsh saying hes shat anyway, given he got Manager of the Year last year" You can't cry stability and not expect to have to take the rough with the smooth. Ashley is a nightmare that causes this in my view, nothing more nothing less. You are looking at what we have had so far - managers from the past, or completely unproven first timers. Pardew imo is probably the best out of what we have had (bar hughton who I was happy with) . Are you saying we should rid of Pardew for someone of the same ilk as his predecessors? the only people I see who can fill the new and past are: 1. Michael Appleton (unproven new, fucked Blackpool up the arse for a "better" contract at pompey) 2. Martin O'Niel, Mick Mcarthy, George Graham, (done it - Daglish). you know what, I'll stick to Pardew and continue to throw my frustration at Ashley for putting us in this position.

Great post OTF. hmm, should add something really. we can replace shola with a 6 foot scarecrow that hopefully we can aim at from our back line.