Because in those seasons we've spent 85% of our total turnover on salaries alone, and have about £60m per year of amortisation to add to that. And we didn't sell either Mitrovic or Palhinha for nearly £50m each, either. After remaining amortisation was removed, both were between £30m and £35m -- SW6.doc

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Sunday, June 01, 06:13:13am [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, May 27, 03:53:47pm
Author: Same Old Story
Author Host/IP: 85-115-50-2.mailcontrol.com / 85.115.50.2
Subject: Because in those seasons we've spent 85% of our total turnover on salaries alone, and have about £60m per year of amortisation to add to that. And we didn't sell either Mitrovic or Palhinha for nearly £50m each, either. After remaining amortisation was removed, both were between £30m and £35m
In reply to: Buttoned up 's message, "Why is PSR tight we have had premier league money last 3 years sold 2 players for nearly 50 million each and should have at least 25 million of stansfield money don’t know how we can be close to PSR we should sell our womens team for 100 million to ourselves as well so we should be good for at least 200 million spend" on Tuesday, May 27, 03:40:28pm

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

I know this is a bit of a, how longs a piece of string question, given lengths of contract, accounting, all manner of variables aren’t known yet, but if you had to take a guesstimate, where would you see our budget being roughly this summer, assuming we get close to FPR limits? Somewhere around last couple of net summer spends of circa £25/£30m? (NT) -- Henry1879, Tuesday, May 27, 03:56:55pm (cpc113812-lea23-2-0-cust213.6-3.cable.virginm.net/86.26.216.214)
- Annoying i know, but net spend isn't a relevant metric, due to residual amortisation. For instance, we could sell Andersen for £24m, and it would only be enough to write back the amortisation remaining. If we sold, say, Robinson for the same amount, it would be £24m straight to profit and ready to spend. But i get what you're asking. I think we could have, if deals are structured well - £80-£100m worth coming in, as long as we sell £25m+ that has no amortisation offset. If that makes sense. (NT) -- Same Old Story, Tuesday, May 27, 05:12:28pm (85-115-50-2.mailcontrol.com/85.115.50.2)

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.