United Thread - 2022/23

[TFC]

God doesn't will it

And Allah is a City fan so they are fucked ;)

 

[aguero93:20]

Noooooooooooo I hope we’re 3up if we get a penalty in the final.

We're not getting a penalty against the rags so put it out of your mind.

 

[hammocity]

It's not shareholder loans. It's all bank loans. They won't be writing anything off
.......

I get that but effectively can the new owners just pay back the loan (as Bohley did but to charity in his case) and start debt free and able to spend within the confines of FFP which previously would have included operating costs, wages and transfer fees as part of the original debt?

 

[Boo or Boo-urns]

That clown ten bag hag actually thinks they were better team and shud have taken there chances. Is he fooking blind as well as stupid ?????

In the pre-match, Ten Rags was still banging on about how entertaining it was for the neutrals/viewers his team served up in the FA CUP semi-final 0-0 drab draw against Brighton.

Spinmeister general.

 

[JASR]

Jasr, can you explain why the Rags can’t do similar to the Chavs and write the debt off at the point of takeover?

I’ve had a problem with how Chelsea have acted financially and just can’t get my head around why they were able to structure the takeover to effectively subsidise the club to the tune of around 45m per year without applying any benefit in mind on a soft loan that had reached 1.4b whereas other clubs were paying interest charges on debt.

Debt has nothing (still) to do with the FPP rules afaik, so clearing the debt doesn't free up money to spend on transfers/wages - which are governed by FPP rules based on revenue/spend. It might free up a small amount of debt interest payment, but that's a drop in the ocean compared to wages.

 

[hammocity]

Debt has nothing (still) to do with the FPP rules afaik, so clearing the debt doesn't free up money to spend on transfers/wages - which are governed by FPP rules based on revenue/spend. It might free up a small amount of debt interest payment, but that's a drop in the ocean compared to wages.

I know that debt was allowable but the interest on it affected ffp as it was part of the operating expenses. The new rules aline to turnover against wages and transfer fees. However, Chelsea artificially inflated their income to cover operating costs to the tune of 1.4b over 20 years and then just wrote it off without any conversion to shares or debt implication.

Our owner could have saved the current accusations against the club by financing a soft loan every year, running it up to a significant amount and then just write off.

Somethings not right when the accusations against us are minimal compared to Chelsea’s apparent legal and financial shenanigans.

 

[Hoghead]

would be absolutely brilliant if they drop out of the top 4 by the end of the season, hopefully Brighton taking advantage and not Liverpool.

yes i realize we're still to play Brighton

And so do Arsenal. So, best us both, no change for either of us but 6 points for Brighton. Win Win.

 

[moomey]

I know that debt was allowable but the interest on it affected ffp as it was part of the operating expenses. The new rules aline to turnover against wages and transfer fees. However, Chelsea artificially inflated their income to cover operating costs to the tune of 1.4b over 20 years and then just wrote it off without any conversion to shares or debt implication.

Our owner could have saved the current accusations against the club by financing a soft loan every year, running it up to a significant amount and then just write off.

Somethings not right when the accusations against us are minimal compared to Chelsea’s apparent legal and financial shenanigans.

It’s simple - your phrase “artificially inflated their income” is just plain wrong.

I know that debt was allowable but the interest on it affected ffp as it was part of the operating expenses. The new rules aline to turnover against wages and transfer fees. However, Chelsea artificially inflated their income to cover operating costs to the tune of 1.4b over 20 years and then just wrote it off without any conversion to shares or debt implication.

Our owner could have saved the current accusations against the club by financing a soft loan every year, running it up to a significant amount and then just write off.

Somethings not right when the accusations against us are minimal compared to Chelsea’s apparent legal and financial shenanigans.

they didn’t falsely inflate income - not quite sure what accounting practice you’re referring to but writing off a debt doesn’t falsely inflate historic income. Any write off “credit” to the profit and loss will hit the current period and not impact adjusted profit for ffp purposes.

 

[Vienna_70]

I never ever want the rags to achieve anything . If they were to miss out on top four to liverpool it would make me happy . The only club i have truly hated all my life

And, if the rags miss out on CL this season, it will be the second consecutive year, so , according to financial experts, such as @Prestwich_Blue, income from sponsors will decrease substantially.

 

[Inter Me Nan]

I'll be dressed as a giant seagull.

Seagulling, like it.