Chelsea Thread - 2022/23 | Pochettino confirmed as new manager

[SWP's back]

I've been posting on this site for long enough to know saying some things won't sit well with the locals but at least I'm honest in my beliefs. I remember when I said I thought KDB being injured by Rudiger was accidental and that resulted in a pile on spanning multiple pages :)

*spits*

 

[Vialli98]

You obviously didn’t pay too much attention to the media shortly after our take over.

Obviously not, it was bloody 15 years ago :)

But my point still stands.

 

[Vialli98]

*spits*

I bet you're delighted to see his struggles in Madrid :)

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I bet you're delighted to see his struggles in Madrid :)

Absolutely thrilled - couldn't have happened to a nicer guy :)

 

[Shirley]

Obviously not, it was bloody 15 years ago :)

But my point still stands.

Simply makes your point worthless

 

[halfcenturyup]

Great post generally but this is a brilliant point and one that hadn't really occurred to me before.

If a loan was made to an employee, the difference between the interest rate applied to the loan and what was considered to be a market interest rate would be treated as a benefit in kind, with the employee paying tax on that at the relevant rate.

I agree that FFP should have treated it as a disguised expense, and disallowed it from the FFP calculation. Applying a notional 5% to that £1.6bn gives an additional "expense" of £80m a year.

Isn't there an argument that is was more of a deemed capital contribution? That's the way it would have been treated for tax purposes wouldn't it? If it wasn't and it was forgiven, then the forgiveness would be taxable? I know there are compensating losses, but some of them would have expired? This sort of thing was a long time ago for me and I may be mixing up jurisdictions....

That's why I am a little suspicious of this "forgiving debt" talk. Isn't it more likely it was capitalised at the end and just not taken into account in the purchase consideration?

But then again. What do I know?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Go to the message board of any club and they'll tell you there's an agenda against their club. United fans think the authorities and press are all ABUs. Chelsea right now are accusing UEFA of having a long standing agenda against Chelsea. If every fanbase thinks it about themselves it stands to reason that there is no actual agenda against any particular club?

Nope. It just means the fans of every other club are wrong.

Imagine being us. (Vomits)

 

[Vialli98]

Simply makes your point worthless

What? How does the media attention around City in 2008 have any impact my point that literally fans of all clubs think and say the exact same thing City fans say about the press and governing bodies?

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Nope. It just means the fans of every other club are wrong.

Imagine being us. (Vomits)

In fairness Vialli was referring to normal supporters

 

[Vialli98]

Nope. It just means the fans of every other club are wrong.

Imagine being us. (Vomits)

I honestly just laugh when I see Arsenal, Chelsea, United and City fans all simultaneously claim there is a long standing agenda against their club only and the powers that be are all working together behind the scenes to stop them progressing and winning.