TwatDoesn’t matter what we do, it will be an issue for this clown. Tariq is clearly a
is the word you needed here my friend, **** also works but twat for a little bit of variety is better :)
TwatDoesn’t matter what we do, it will be an issue for this clown. Tariq is clearly a
Think it’s when a player is sold at less than his ‘book value, taking into account contract amortisation?
Twat
is the word you needed here my friend, **** also works but twat for a little bit of variety is better :)
Don’t they just sign 35+ year old strikers who are worth Fk all anyway!I dunno why but that made me think of our quiet neighbours.
Every player is technically carried as an asset on the balance sheet with the amount being roughly the transfer fee divided by the number of years on the contract, decreasing over the life of it. If someone gets sold for less than that value at any point (or is say, sent to prison rendering that player worthless) the difference would be a player impairment charge.Does anyone know what 'Player Impairment' is? I was looking for Roque Santa Cruz's name in there but couldn't see him?
Everydays a school day.At the risk of boring you all silly, panjar in Urdu has a variety of meanings, including rib, skeleton and,,,,,er, frame - something which I suspect red shirt client "journalist" tariq panja knows from his time leaking CAS related shit in the service of his scarlet masters.
Panjar also rhymes with kunjar, which again can mean the name of a clan/tribe, gypsy, nomad, tramp.
The definition of kunjar I've grown up with has always been meaning in a derogatory way, basically equivalent to a ****, twat or wanker. QED! ;-))))
I am sure they will report Mendy's leaving as a huge financial loss (probably fair enough in this case though tbh) the biggest transfer bollock of them all, injuries/form and the ensuing court case verdict.Every player is technically carried as an asset on the balance sheet with the amount being roughly the transfer fee divided by the number of years on the contract, decreasing over the life of it. If someone gets sold for less than that value at any point (or is say, sent to prison rendering that player worthless) the difference would be a player impairment charge.
Its a lot more ..more likely to just be short of £2B.I think Swiss Ramble looked at this a bit ago. I think we've earned >£1bn in TV money and prize money in the Sheikh Mansour era, and about 200m in the past year or so
Doesn't have to be a sale, it's used if the actual value of a player becomes considerably and permanently less than his value in the balance sheet carried forward. The balance sheet value is reduced to his actual value. Accounting principle is lower of cost (amortised) or net realisable value.Every player is technically carried as an asset on the balance sheet with the amount being roughly the transfer fee divided by the number of years on the contract, decreasing over the life of it. If someone gets sold for less than that value at any point (or is say, sent to prison rendering that player worthless) the difference would be a player impairment charge.
Yep and his first name has something to do with magic. As Tommy Cooper used to say: "and now, for my next Tariq".Everydays a school day.
City should sue him for the money lost.I think it could be a write down on Mendy and his final year?
Whatever the outcome, his value in the books has been wiped out.
Its why City should give the BBC the same treatment the Rags once did.Nothing from the BBC about City’s revenues, complying with UEFA and PL FFP regulations, our broad base of sponsors, prize money, TV money, player sales, etc, just City are majority owned by Sheikh Mansour. The BBC have basically given Tea Bag a platform to spout his shite via their website. So the masses that read the article, bar Liverpool, United, and Arsenal fan who hate us anyway, will think City are getting away with state financial doping. Good old Auntie bullsh*t!
![]()
Man City and Paris St-Germain putting European football in danger, says La Liga boss
La Liga president Javier Tebas says European football is "in danger" unless clubs such as Manchester City and Paris St-Germain can be controlled.www.bbc.co.uk
Excellently explained my friendEvery player is technically carried as an asset on the balance sheet with the amount being roughly the transfer fee divided by the number of years on the contract, decreasing over the life of it. If someone gets sold for less than that value at any point (or is say, sent to prison rendering that player worthless) the difference would be a player impairment charge.
Yeah like I said, if there's something obvious where the value needs to be reduced they'll do so, sale or otherwise. I don't believe they go in and make adjustments unless something pretty drastic happens though.Doesn't have to be a sale, it's used if the actual value of a player becomes considerably and permanently less than his value in the balance sheet carried forward. The balance sheet value is reduced to his actual value. Accounting principle is lower of cost (amortised) or net realisable value.
I am sure that City will be insured against any possibility of a player being unable to play.City should sue him for the money lost.
That's my belief. If you sell a player at less than book value, you'd just record it as a loss on sale.I think it could be a write down on Mendy and his final year?
Whatever the outcome, his value in the books has been wiped out.
The comments made in the High Court by the judge (Mrs Justice Moulder) criticised the delay but it was clear she was addressing both parties in the case. She stressed in the judgement, see paragraph 4 and 10 in the published judgement below, that both the PL and City had wanted to keep their negotiations private. Her overall tone was essentially "put up or shut up." My reading of this farce is the PL have got no evidence because they still have not produced any (at least in public) and it is not up to City to help them out.Indeed, and even manages to blame City for "dragging out a PL investigation for years..."
What an utter twat!
The strangest thing about that BBC story is the claim by Tebas that it is impossible for City to have 68 per cent of revenues from commercial income because Real Madrid get only 54% and the Real Madrid brand is bigger. But City get a higher percentage because of the very high broadcast deals from winning the PL for four out of five years. And TV coverage also generates bigger sponsorship deals. It is dishonest for the BBC to report that dishonest comment without qualifying it. That comment would only make sense if Real played in the PL.Nothing from the BBC about City’s revenues, complying with UEFA and PL FFP regulations, our broad base of sponsors, prize money, TV money, player sales, etc, just City are majority owned by Sheikh Mansour. The BBC have basically given Tea Bag a platform to spout his shite via their website. So the masses that read the article, bar Liverpool, United, and Arsenal fan who hate us anyway, will think City are getting away with state financial doping. Good old Auntie bullsh*t!
![]()
Man City and Paris St-Germain putting European football in danger, says La Liga boss
La Liga president Javier Tebas says European football is "in danger" unless clubs such as Manchester City and Paris St-Germain can be controlled.www.bbc.co.uk