Guest alex Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 HBA is fair enough if you allow for the fact it was the same window. Tiote, not really. Its moot anyway like. Surely you go by season/financial year? Lets look at the summer we made a profit by selling Woodgate and then spent money in January on Boumsong, Faye and Babayaro, is this a case of the club 'trousering' money in the Summer and spending from a different pot in the January or is it that we look at it as a + or - over the course of a season? It's 'only' £3.5m anyway so it doesn't make that much difference to the argument either way. However, I would say that the Tiote transfer fee was obviously money already available from a pre-agreed transfer budget or however you want to phrase it, since there's no way the club knew they were getting that sort of deal for Carroll in the January. Didn't the last set of accounts show Ashley had advanced the club money short term with the view of getting it back? I seem to remember them saying it was for when we signed Best, Routledge and Williamson to secure promotion. If that is the case then it's likely that the same thing was done for that seasons transfers with the view of him getting the advance back when the club had it, unless you think we pulled the money out of this air despite us already making a loss for the previous season and a predicted loss for that coming one. You might as well be honest and just say Carroll paid for the relegation tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Maiga hasn't signed but you're including him to fit your agenda. Might as well include the £25m for Tiote to Chelsea too then. You can include Tiote if you like but last I heard he wasn't rumoured to be having a medical today. Well it was partly tongue-in-cheek but it's fair enough to at least entertain the notion that Maiga's arrival is being finance by January outgoing(s). That could well be the case but again if Maiga came in before Tiote is sold then surely you lump them in together and not as someone else suggested we have some mythical £25 million pot that doesn't include Maiga as he was bought first? Glad we agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeris 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 "The Carroll money" is the name of a business political subagenda Ashley's using to manipulate YOU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Again, i think it would be moot though Baggio as in that case we'd have spent just over £15m of £60m in transfer fees. Its all speculation for now anyway since Maiga hasnt signed yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Read the accounts, Baggio is right about our summer spending last year as the revenue for the relegation season was £52.4m and our costs were £74.4m. So having spent in cash terms (not including any accountancy tricks like depreciation, just in pure cash terms) £22m more than we earned, we then spent money on players. The only way we could have done that was through bridging loans based on future income. The Ben Arfa money was physically transferred to the French bank the same month the Carroll money was transferred to our, meaning our bank account was £30m up. The money to be supposedly spent on Maiga, plus the agent fees of over £6m brings us to about half of that £30m. Despite making a loss I think some think we paid for Ben Arfa, Tiote, Obertan and agents fee's with magic beans. That's nearly £18 million that had to come from somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4859 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) yes but that example could only work if we'd sold Carroll before signing those players in january, which we didnt and correct me if Im wrong but hasnt the financial year moved on since carroll was sold? its also a different season (as was this summer) if you want to include the tiote deal no? no one taking that one up? youve also missed out signing Santon at least and Im sure there were some others this summer oh yes, that that french bloke Cabaye is it?? Edited December 13, 2011 by Semimental Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 HBA is fair enough if you allow for the fact it was the same window. Tiote, not really. Its moot anyway like. Surely you go by season/financial year? Lets look at the summer we made a profit by selling Woodgate and then spent money in January on Boumsong, Faye and Babayaro, is this a case of the club 'trousering' money in the Summer and spending from a different pot in the January or is it that we look at it as a + or - over the course of a season? It's 'only' £3.5m anyway so it doesn't make that much difference to the argument either way. However, I would say that the Tiote transfer fee was obviously money already available from a pre-agreed transfer budget or however you want to phrase it, since there's no way the club knew they were getting that sort of deal for Carroll in the January. Didn't the last set of accounts show Ashley had advanced the club money short term with the view of getting it back? I seem to remember them saying it was for when we signed Best, Routledge and Williamson to secure promotion. If that is the case then it's likely that the same thing was done for that seasons transfers with the view of him getting the advance back when the club had it, unless you think we pulled the money out of this air despite us already making a loss for the previous season and a predicted loss for that coming one. You might as well be honest and just say Carroll paid for the relegation tbh. Indeed. There should however be about £13m left over which is the agent fees and Maiga funnily enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 HBA is fair enough if you allow for the fact it was the same window. Tiote, not really. Its moot anyway like. Surely you go by season/financial year? Lets look at the summer we made a profit by selling Woodgate and then spent money in January on Boumsong, Faye and Babayaro, is this a case of the club 'trousering' money in the Summer and spending from a different pot in the January or is it that we look at it as a + or - over the course of a season? It's 'only' £3.5m anyway so it doesn't make that much difference to the argument either way. However, I would say that the Tiote transfer fee was obviously money already available from a pre-agreed transfer budget or however you want to phrase it, since there's no way the club knew they were getting that sort of deal for Carroll in the January. Didn't the last set of accounts show Ashley had advanced the club money short term with the view of getting it back? I seem to remember them saying it was for when we signed Best, Routledge and Williamson to secure promotion. If that is the case then it's likely that the same thing was done for that seasons transfers with the view of him getting the advance back when the club had it, unless you think we pulled the money out of this air despite us already making a loss for the previous season and a predicted loss for that coming one. You might as well be honest and just say Carroll paid for the relegation tbh. I thought Martins, Duff and Beye paid for that tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 yes but that example could only work if we'd sold Carroll before signing those players in january, which we didnt and correct me if Im wrong but hasnt the financial year moved on since carroll was sold? its also a different season (as was this summer) if you want to include the tiote deal no? no one taking that one up? Incorrect, incorrect, a loss-making season followed by a net spend positive summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4859 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 yes but that example could only work if we'd sold Carroll before signing those players in january, which we didnt and correct me if Im wrong but hasnt the financial year moved on since carroll was sold? its also a different season (as was this summer) if you want to include the tiote deal no? no one taking that one up? Incorrect, incorrect, a loss-making season followed by a net spend positive summer. fair enough, youre the expert on money stuff (I think its you anyway) what about the other stuff? Baggio seems to like making the season/financial year point ignoring that both have switched since we sold carroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 HBA is fair enough if you allow for the fact it was the same window. Tiote, not really. Its moot anyway like. Surely you go by season/financial year? Lets look at the summer we made a profit by selling Woodgate and then spent money in January on Boumsong, Faye and Babayaro, is this a case of the club 'trousering' money in the Summer and spending from a different pot in the January or is it that we look at it as a + or - over the course of a season? It's 'only' £3.5m anyway so it doesn't make that much difference to the argument either way. However, I would say that the Tiote transfer fee was obviously money already available from a pre-agreed transfer budget or however you want to phrase it, since there's no way the club knew they were getting that sort of deal for Carroll in the January. Didn't the last set of accounts show Ashley had advanced the club money short term with the view of getting it back? I seem to remember them saying it was for when we signed Best, Routledge and Williamson to secure promotion. If that is the case then it's likely that the same thing was done for that seasons transfers with the view of him getting the advance back when the club had it, unless you think we pulled the money out of this air despite us already making a loss for the previous season and a predicted loss for that coming one. You might as well be honest and just say Carroll paid for the relegation tbh. I thought Martins, Duff and Beye paid for that tbh. That doesnt help your argument though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Is this Baggio changing tack btw, since the wheels are coming off the Trans-Europe Express? Edited December 13, 2011 by alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 yes but that example could only work if we'd sold Carroll before signing those players in january, which we didnt and correct me if Im wrong but hasnt the financial year moved on since carroll was sold? its also a different season (as was this summer) if you want to include the tiote deal no? no one taking that one up? Incorrect, incorrect, a loss-making season followed by a net spend positive summer. fair enough, youre the expert on money stuff (I think its you anyway) what about the other stuff? Baggio seems to like making the season/financial year point ignoring that both have switched since we sold carroll Its complicated. Accounts are done for tax purposes, not for transfer money debates. What drives transfer money availability is cash flow. So you need to think about when income arrives in the bank and when that income is spent. Wages go our every month, season ticket sales come in Q2, TV money is distributed retrospectively after each scheduled period completes. Sky schedules 3 times a season. All of this in and out occurs outside of transfer windows, seasons and financial years. Its a flow in and out, hence the business term 'cash flow'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Is this Baggio changing tack btw, since the wheels are coming off the Trans-Europe Express? Mixing up your transport metaphors somewhat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4859 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 yes but that example could only work if we'd sold Carroll before signing those players in january, which we didnt and correct me if Im wrong but hasnt the financial year moved on since carroll was sold? its also a different season (as was this summer) if you want to include the tiote deal no? no one taking that one up? Incorrect, incorrect, a loss-making season followed by a net spend positive summer. fair enough, youre the expert on money stuff (I think its you anyway) what about the other stuff? Baggio seems to like making the season/financial year point ignoring that both have switched since we sold carroll Its complicated. Accounts are done for tax purposes, not for transfer money debates. What drives transfer money availability is cash flow. So you need to think about when income arrives in the bank and when that income is spent. Wages go our every month, season ticket sales come in Q2, TV money is distributed retrospectively after each scheduled period completes. Sky schedules 3 times a season. All of this in and out occurs outside of transfer windows, seasons and financial years. Its a flow in and out, hence the business term 'cash flow'. which really leads it all back to this idea of "the carroll money" being inherently flawed yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 yes but that example could only work if we'd sold Carroll before signing those players in january, which we didnt and correct me if Im wrong but hasnt the financial year moved on since carroll was sold? its also a different season (as was this summer) if you want to include the tiote deal no? no one taking that one up? Incorrect, incorrect, a loss-making season followed by a net spend positive summer. fair enough, youre the expert on money stuff (I think its you anyway) what about the other stuff? Baggio seems to like making the season/financial year point ignoring that both have switched since we sold carroll Its complicated. Accounts are done for tax purposes, not for transfer money debates. What drives transfer money availability is cash flow. So you need to think about when income arrives in the bank and when that income is spent. Wages go our every month, season ticket sales come in Q2, TV money is distributed retrospectively after each scheduled period completes. Sky schedules 3 times a season. All of this in and out occurs outside of transfer windows, seasons and financial years. Its a flow in and out, hence the business term 'cash flow'. which really leads it all back to this idea of "the carroll money" being inherently flawed yes? Indeed, its always been my point that this money was not put into some special pot marked 'Carroll money', its subsumed within the weekly / monthly financial operations. However, you can look at is as an exceptional item in the context of the preceding financial periods if they involved losses. If the club was running year on year at exactly break even and the only thing that happened was Carroll going, then the impact would be like a £35m spike in the accounts. Our situation was not like that though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 yes but that example could only work if we'd sold Carroll before signing those players in january, which we didnt and correct me if Im wrong but hasnt the financial year moved on since carroll was sold? its also a different season (as was this summer) if you want to include the tiote deal no? no one taking that one up? youve also missed out signing Santon at least and Im sure there were some others this summer oh yes, that that french bloke Cabaye is it?? So how much of the Carroll money is left now then? Maiga £7m Obertan £3m Tiote £3.5m Ben Arfa £5m Agents fee's £6m Signing on fee's £??? That's presuming Enrique and Nolan went for the same as we paid out for Santon and Cabaye. Anyone else missing off the list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Is this Baggio changing tack btw, since the wheels are coming off the Trans-Europe Express? Wheels coming off?! If we hadn't lost the 3 we did we would be talking about being CL contenders so it's hardly wheels coming off is it? If we don't hit the 30 point mark by the turn of the year then I'll consider the wheels could be coming off, until then it's daft talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 I might have been joking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 3112 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 (edited) On transfer budgets. My thinking is that there is no 'transfer budget' per se and that each deal is dealt with on a case by case basis. In saying that there is probably an absolute hard cap that probably sits somewhere around the £8mill mark that Ashley will not go over come hell or high water, including from the threat of relegation, should it arise. So basically, while comparing the Maiga deal to what is left of the Carroll money may be fun, or at least pass the time between Saturdays, it is essentially a completely meaningless exercise. Gotta do something while LM is at the pub though I suppose. Edited December 14, 2011 by toonotl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sochaux01 0 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 according to the french media maiga WILL sign for newcastle for around 7 millions euros. Guy has created only but trouble since this summer, refusing to train and to play just before games kicked off and not performing well when on the pitch and now he s going to earn millions in the premiersh*t. nothing against you lot BUT I really really really really hope he turns out to be a MASSIVE FLOP !!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Cheers, mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sochaux01 0 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 ben arfa, maiga, you like the trouble makers at st james Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Well at least this guy is calling the stadium by its proper name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sochaux01 0 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Well at least this guy is calling the stadium by its proper name. nice one bubbles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now