Did you pencil out a different figure?
- Status
Did you pencil out a different figure?
Whatever we receive from the sales of Cleverly and Niasse.
Don't despise our friend's conservative take on the club's books
I'm confident it will be a lot, Koeman will have asked for a certain amount at the least and has been made promises he will get it. If the club don't deliver he's definitely the type of man just resign rather than having to backtrack in the media and make excuses to the supporters in order to spare the board, unlike his predecessors.
The money is there, it's just getting the right players and getting the deals done. Last summer we were given the run around by clubs and agents looking who were never interested in doing business with us. This time we need to go into things a lot more discreetly.
The money is there, it's just getting the right players and getting the deals done. Last summer we were given the run around by clubs and agents looking who were never interested in doing business with us. This time we need to go into things a lot more discreetly.
Tell your friend he can keep up with him on the twitters. He often is on the Blue Room podcast as well.
Frank Gallagher
Player Valuation: £50m
For anyone thinking we will be spending 'big' without selling better remember all our previous windows.
Nothing has changed here.
We will be being prudent.
Nothing has changed here.
We will be being prudent.
Thanks for that.
I am skeptical for many and several reasons which I won't bore you with, but 3 that stick out like sore thumbs are the wages figure which was projected by the board at the time of the GM to be 110 ish mil, the compo for RM was a provision in the 2016 accounts so should be included in a projected cash flow for 16-17, and finally after repaying RMF, it was shown in the backdrop at the GM that we had borrowed 20 ish mil from them again and was projected to be outstanding at 31 May 17. If we are allegedly sat on gazillions of cash, why the need to borrow to tide us over til final PL payment?
Just saying.
Bit of a sideways question, but I've always been intrigued at why the PL makes their payments in bulk and doesn't make installment payments during the campaign. The facilities and merit payments obviously can't be paid up front, but I don't see why they've all got to be paid on the back end.
On the wages, does that £110m from the AGM assume the Barkley and Lukaku contracts which never happened?
Some of the amortization assumptions didn't add up for me... for instance, if you assume transfers are both paid through installments but also spread over a short time period (to keep the assumptions tidy), how they do you extrapolate the £66m (or so) and say that we could spend more.
Obviously a better forecast will make certain assumptions on future budgets, wage growth, transfer payments due in future periods, etc., and that will show you what you can "spend now" more accurately, but either keep the assumptions simple or complex, but not both.
Not sure if there was a contract on the table for Barkley at the time, but if him and Lukaku got an additional 110k between them a week, it would only account for 5.72 mil over a full year to 31 May.
Amortization and depreciation are both red herrings as they are non-cash movements, another problem is you can't really calculate a cash position without taking into account movement in Debtors and Creditors.
Simply put, it is a conflation with flawed logic as it assumes that all profit and loss movements are cash, in terms of player sales and profit thereon it recognises the profit then assumes that the cash movement is half the profit - the cash flows would not reflect this as the replacement players outgoing cashflows are ignored.
I understand what esk has tried to do, but it is pretty much finger in the air stuff unless you have access to the records.
Edit the 60 odd mil is an increase based on EBITDA + 50% profit on disposal perhaps?
- Status
