Summer Transfers 2013

[aimaad22 3458]

It's not washing dirty laundry, it's educating ourselves, that's what these forums are for. And btw Ashley really only owns one company and that's MASH Holdings through which he owns Saint James' Holdings and has a shareholding in Sports Direct, it's important to remember that he doesn't own SD, he only has a 64% shareholding (approx.).

 

Thats puts him in control though, the company basically does what he wants.

[ewerk 26285]

Basically yes, my point with that, which I didn't explain, was that he doesn't receive the full benefit of any corporation tax saving. It was be more beneficial for him to have NUFC making a £10m loss than trying to plug that loss with an inflated £10m advertising fee transferred from SD to NUFC.

 

Tbh I'd need ot sit down and think the whole thing through properly but right now I have neither the time nor the inclination.

[aimaad22 3458]

I wish we had a PM system to discuss this between us. In my mates company which turns over a considerable sum, he saves loads by "investing" in his Plan B company. Any spend on expenditure is out of profit and therefore he saves on his Corp tax bill, I seriously don't understand why its not the same.

 

In my little company, anything I spend on expenses for marketing comes out of profit too, so I do save corp tax on that as it would be profit.

 

But , we don't have a PM system and I've made an arse out of myself enough in the past few weeks.

 

That said, I'm off to Cayman in 1 week, so tax isn't a worry anymore thank fook <smug mode>

 

depends dunnit, on how much he charged, and also how much of that profit is being put into Republic , or one of the shatty manufacturers he's bought. I'm not saying its exclusive between NUFC and SD, this guy owns tens of companies, including the manufacturers who provide his stores with product. Unfortunately, its perfectly acceptable for him to spread his "Profit" from SD across all his little subsidiaries, if Tescos can do it with 100's of millions, then I'm pretty sure Ashley can.

 

I'm a bit shamed really that I'm apparently so off the mark, as I've dealt with running businesses and taxes and accountancy for nearly 10 years now.

 

It's like Tesco's for example, they announce profits, push out the divvies and then somehow manage to "invest" that money in some warehouse in Indonesia and therefore reduce their liability. Quarterly profits and Annual profits often don't match, like starbucks another example 2 mil quarterly profit, but when it comes to return time, there is no profit as the monies have been invested into other subsidiaries.

 

I saw the relationship between NUFC and SD as the same.

 

I'll leave it though, as although you do, I don't like washing my dirty laundry in public, especially if I'm losing face.

 

Taxation authorities usually have strict transfer pricing rules. Also the fact SD is listed means all related companies will be under public knowledge and dealings will have to be disclosed in the accounts. Their are tons of accounting standards that have to be complied with here. While I am not suggesting companies still cant get away with murder its not as easy as you guys are making it out. And quarterly and annual profits really dont have to 'match', there could be tons of reasons, actually I doubt they ever 'match' as you are expecting them to.

 

 

[aimaad22 3458]

Basically yes, my point with that, which I didn't explain, was that he doesn't receive the full benefit of any corporation tax saving. It was be more beneficial for him to have NUFC making a £10m loss than trying to plug that loss with an inflated £10m advertising fee transferred from SD to NUFC.

 

Tbh I'd need ot sit down and think the whole thing through properly but right now I have neither the time nor the inclination.

 

I agree, and Im sure it would not be practically possible to 'save' tax that way as it is being described unless the HMRC are complete bellends.

[scoobos 297]

Mash holdings owns puma or some shit like that too though doesn't it? If he's the only share holder then he does profit from savings on Corp tax because he gets a big divvy right?

 

These subsidiaries are individual businesses in their own right, like nufc, sd are.

 

I believe he owns the following brands too, which he will spread any profit through in similar manners, e.g: (I could be wrong on some of these)

Donny, liillywhites, karrimor, Dunlop, Slazenger, puma (shirt deal anyone?), kangol, Lonsdale, a majority in umbro, the list probably goes on. Most of these ar leveraged through deals with MASH for exclusivity rights, again masking profit as investment.

 

I'd like to continue but I do know I could just be super suspicious, but if be very very surprised if this isn't what's going on. Umbro and nufc next is my bet.

[scoobos 297]

 

the HMRC are complete bellends.

Now there's something we can agree on, they are.

 

MASH is a LTD not a PLC, so the only thing that needs to be "disclosed" is the annual return, right? There are NO shareholders, its a private Class 1 share , all of them to Ashley.

 

Look up Vodafone and see what happened there, its almos identical to the abuse I'm highlighting and they are all doing it. The gov't excuse is that they are wealth and job generators and would go elsewhere.

 

In my time as a company director,ive learnt that tax is basically an honesty / morality policy for anyone other than paye staff.

 

Apologies for once again derailing a thread for a tax argument

Edited August 19, 2013 by scoobos

[ewerk 26285]

I have to go now but to keep it brief, Mike Ashley doesn't own any of those companies, Sport Direct does. Well, again, they own them indirectly through subsidiaries such as Sportdirect.com Retail Ltd, Sports Direct Holdings Ltd etc.

[aimaad22 3458]

Aye, well I dont expect Ashley to be an angel businessman the issue here is scooboos & co. getting confused about corporate accounting. I would try to explain but its a subject in itself so people would probably be better off reading a proper book on it

[scoobos 297]

Ok explain this then.

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/mash-(uk)-holdings

 

Seriously, mikes business engine has only 100 quid capital?

 

This isn't much different to what I'm saying mikes doing with nufc either :

http://news.sky.com/story/1100798/vodafone-earns-5bn-but-pays-no-corporation-tax

 

But even if you do things right, there's nothing a few posh meals with the head of hmrc cant put right

Edited August 19, 2013 by scoobos

[aimaad22 3458]

Ok explain this then.

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/mash-(uk)-holdings

 

Seriously, mikes business engine has only 100 quid capital?

 

This isn't much different to what I'm saying mikes doing with nufc either :

http://news.sky.com/story/1100798/vodafone-earns-5bn-but-pays-no-corporation-tax

 

But even if you do things right, there's nothing a few posh meals with the head of hmrc cant put right

 

Look nothing's foolproof. Just because someone else has done it doesnt mean Ashley is doing it. He may or may not be, the things you are getting worked up about dont prove anything.

 

About the capital, do you anything about the way companies are set up or work in the modern day? For instance I hope you never see a modern derivative instrument at work then because something with a nominal value of 10 quid could get or lose you hundreds of thousands.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Ashley doesn't own Puma, and I don't believe he acquired a stake in Umbro after Nike sold them.

[PaddockLad 14584]

Demba unused sub for Chelsea on Saturday. If Ashley wants to protect his investment he should instruct Kinnear to bring him in on loan. If we can only live off scraps with no structured pattern of attacking play then Cisse and Remy aren't enough to keep us in the division. The manager is irrelevent in a way, because if there is a change we all know who the new one will be.

Edited August 20, 2013 by PaddockLad

[Kid Dynamite 5904]

Converse to those that think protests are pointless, I reckon not renewing is pointless, as there are always going to be thousands of fans who couldn't get season tickets who will snap them up hoping to keep them for the good times years down the line. So Ashley will feel nothing.

 

For all I think about the destruction of the club, I still see turning up on the match day as a special thing. My first days as a toon fan was being brought up to Newcastle with my best mate and his dad and sitting through endless defeats and shite matches in awful weather but still shouting them on (mid to late 80's for years was poor). I went to 11 away matches last year and even that still brought back the excitement of St James.

 

What I'm trying to say through ramble is, even when we are living through this, as much as you want to, you will still yearn for your seat if you throw it away, or I would anyway.

 

Protests and damaging that twats ego so much he just ups and fucks off is the only hope I have of hurting him. You'll never see me in Republic or Sports Direct, which is what I think he really cares about - but turn down a match day ticket, no way - even if we get drubbed tonight I'll still get something out of it . Shame you poor fuckers have to put up with my whining afterwards and before though

There isn't a waiting list for season tickets. We rarely even fully sell out our games.

[ewerk 26285]

Ok explain this then.

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/mash-(uk)-holdings

 

Seriously, mikes business engine has only 100 quid capital?

 

Okay, the first clue that that company isn't Mike Ashley's holding company is the fact that it says right at the very top that the company is dissolved.

 

Also, the nominal start up capital is irrelevant and for the record, MASH Ltd has a figure of £1000.

[ewerk 26285]

Demba unused sub for Chelsea on Saturday. If Ashley wants to protect his investment he should instruct Kinnear to bring him in on loan. If we can only live off scraps with no structured pattern of attacking play then Cisse and Remy aren't enough to keep us in the division. The manager is irrelevent in a way, because if there is a change we all know who the new one will be.

 

I'd take him back for the same fee we sold him for. He's already behind Lukaku and Torres and is going to be knocked even further down the pecking order if Jose gets the new striker that he wants.

[trophyshy 6434]

The manager is irrelevent in a way, because if there is a change we all know who the new one will be.

[Gemmill 34422]

This won't be popular, but if you look at football these days and how rigged it is in favour of the billionaire clubs, you kind of have to ask yourself what the point is for a club like us spending a lot of money.

 

That lot last night have spent £783m in the last 5 years on transfer fees, and probably a third of that again on agent payments. Although we are both Premiership clubs in name, you would reasonably expect Man City vs Newcastle United in 2013 to look like a Premiership team vs a League 2 team did 10 years ago. That's how big the gap is imo, I don't think that's an exaggeration.

 

So given that position, and the fact that it's a completely unbridgeable gap for a football club run normally, then you're left with two options:

 

You either spunk every last penny up the wall in the hope of becoming the best of the also rans (with the reward of a possible Cup Final once every 5 years and the drain of Europa League football).

 

Or you just do the bare minimum to get by.

 

If you're in it for the long haul, then option A is the one to go for. But for Ashley it doesn't make any sense.

 

I've kind of got some sympathy for his position. People talk about the scourge of doping in cycling or athletics, but the money that these top clubs have is a MUCH bigger advantage than any drug could give an individual athlete and should be seen as much more detrimental to the sport. But for some reason, it's seen as glamorous rather than a bad thing. But honestly, it's reduced most clubs to the point where there's barely any point in trying anymore and so we aren't.

[Tooj 17]

This won't be popular, but if you look at football these days and how rigged it is in favour of the billionaire clubs, you kind of have to ask yourself what the point is for a club like us spending a lot of money.

 

That lot last night have spent £783m in the last 5 years on transfer fees, and probably a third of that again on agent payments. Although we are both Premiership clubs in name, you would reasonably expect Man City vs Newcastle United in 2013 to look like a Premiership team vs a League 2 team did 10 years ago. That's how big the gap is imo, I don't think that's an exaggeration.

 

So given that position, and the fact that it's a completely unbridgeable gap for a football club run normally, then you're left with two options:

 

You either spunk every last penny up the wall in the hope of becoming the best of the also rans (with the reward of a possible Cup Final once every 5 years and the drain of Europa League football).

 

Or you just do the bare minimum to get by.

 

If you're in it for the long haul, then option A is the one to go for. But for Ashley it doesn't make any sense.

 

I've kind of got some sympathy for his position. People talk about the scourge of doping in cycling or athletics, but the money that these top clubs have is a MUCH bigger advantage than any drug could give an individual athlete and should be seen as much more detrimental to the sport. But for some reason, it's seen as glamorous rather than a bad thing. But honestly, it's reduced most clubs to the point where there's barely any point in trying anymore and so we aren't.

 

Or you could do what Spurs have done.

[Gemmill 34422]

And have what to show for it? They're still wasting their time and aren't competitive. Do you think any of the top clubs are genuinely concerned about Spurs?

[PaddockLad 14584]

Gemmills right in a lot of ways, "financial doping" as somebody termed it a while back. Tooj is also correct, I actually though that after we finished 5th we were going down the same road as Spurs, and had high hopes for us. Got that one wrong

[hostile_statue 0]

At least their fans can dream, and don't have to worry about relegation.

[Tooj 17]

And have what to show for it? They're still wasting their time and aren't competitive. Do you think any of the top clubs are genuinely concerned about Spurs?

 

They're competiting for a top 4 position and are giving a damn good go of it.

 

Their fans know this and are happy with that as at least they're trying their hardest to bridge the gap despite their financial constraints compared to Man City, Man Utd and Chelsea. At least their fans can go to games and watch their team giving it their all as well as their club away from the pitch.

 

We're just trying to tread water so there's a massive difference.

[PaddockLad 14584]

And have what to show for it? They're still wasting their time and aren't competitive. Do you think any of the top clubs are genuinely concerned about Spurs?

I think if you asked a Spurs fan in 2013 if he liked where the club was going he'd say yes, very much so. They play pretty good football too, which is enough for most fans.

[Ken 119]

You don't need to spend yourself into oblivion. Arsene Wenger's done OK on a limited budget. But for all that to happen you need a technical coach that will stay loyal to your club. Roberto Martinez would have been a good target, our club has a larger budget to work with than Everton. Even Glenn Hoddle. A manager who works to a certain football philosophy and certain system. But these things are far beyond the thinking of the club's hierarchy. Newcastle United - Back to the Future.

[Dr Gloom 19814]

it's all deeply depressing. i'd rather we did what spurs and arsenal do - spend within their means but at least have a go at it. instead of essentially giving up, which is what ashley has done.

 

our only hope is that balancing the books turns out to be a smart move next season when uefa's ffp rules kick in. i suspect though that it'll make little difference and those clubs bankrolled by sheikhs and oligarchs will remain at the top of the table.