M18CTID said:This is hilarious - some clown on RAWK is convinced these new 5 year deals for Silva, Kompany, and Aguero is merely a ploy to circumvent FFP.
And there was me thinking that it was just a great bit of business to tie down the spine of our team to long-term deals as it gives us a huge amount of stability and security going forward.
very good business accounting if you ask me.Chippy_boy said:M18CTID said:This is hilarious - some clown on RAWK is convinced these new 5 year deals for Silva, Kompany, and Aguero is merely a ploy to circumvent FFP.
And there was me thinking that it was just a great bit of business to tie down the spine of our team to long-term deals as it gives us a huge amount of stability and security going forward.
The clown is probably part correct in that I suspect reducing our amortisation charges on player contracts may well have been part of the thinking.
St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:Can somebody explain to me...With Kompany,Silva,Aguero signing new deals how does this work in relation to amortisation?
mancity dan said:St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:Can somebody explain to me...With Kompany,Silva,Aguero signing new deals how does this work in relation to amortisation?
Kompany we are only talking about £400k a year saving, Silva was signed for £21m 4 years ago, so rather than £5.25m a year it would now be £2.33m a year, Aguero signed for £38m 3 years ago so rather than £9.5m a year would now be £4.75m a year.
So overall just over £8m a year.
BringBackSwales said:mancity dan said:St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:Can somebody explain to me...With Kompany,Silva,Aguero signing new deals how does this work in relation to amortisation?
Kompany we are only talking about £400k a year saving, Silva was signed for £21m 4 years ago, so rather than £5.25m a year it would now be £2.33m a year, Aguero signed for £38m 3 years ago so rather than £9.5m a year would now be £4.75m a year.
So overall just over £8m a year.
Plus Nasri and Kolarov
Not as far as UEFA's Fair Play Calculation is concernedaguero93:20 said:They could list it as club related income in the same way you'd use interest on a bank balance or charges on a loan adversely. However let me assure you, Uncle Malc left the shop in shit and they're scrambling to keep afloat. We should wish them every success, don't want them selling the club.SilverFox2 said:Marvin said:It's revenue versus expenses. That's the break-even calculation
Raising money through a share issue would not count as revenue, but you could use it to finance expenditure. Not sure if that's what you are asking
I think when a Company lists it's shares they have to state in their listing documents what the Capital Issue is for
I use MUFC as an example only but as I understand your answer the Glazers have recently sold about 5 or 7.5% of their stock exchange listed shares so I wondered if any portion of this could be used to for example to buy players without being subject to FFP rules ?
a) Revenue – Gate receipts
b) Revenue – Sponsorship and advertising
c) Revenue – Broadcasting rights
d) Revenue – Commercial activities
e) Revenue – Other operating income
f) Profit on disposal of player registrations (or income from disposal of player
registrations)
g) Excess proceeds on disposal of tangible fixed assets
h) Finance income
It might work if you could really persuade them to make such a huge investment on behalf of a rival club. Better to do it the City waypaul1894 said:So just slightly changing the subject,if our owners and psg's owners got together and agreed to sponsor each others teams for say 1bn over whatever length of time for say training kit,or the car parks,would this not be a way round financial doping