Kid Dynamite 5941 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 (edited) Someone on Twitter mentioned the years accounts ending on July 1st and not expecting a penny to be spent until then Edited June 25, 2015 by StraightEdgeWizard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26540 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I saw that and didn't quite understand the reasoning behind it. It's not like we have shareholders to please so we want to massage the figures and it's not like we're in danger of failing the FFP requirements. If anything the club should be looking to get deals done before 1st July and so reducing the profit figure in an attempt to appease the fans. Unless he's looking to sell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Think we bought Perez last June because profits were healthy enough to remain positive. This year we've already spent £20m rather than recouping £20m so the accounts need to cater to that £40m turnaround without posting a loss so I can see some merit in that theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26540 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Why do we not need to post a loss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Being a profitable club is the ONLY thing Ashley has been able to hang his hat on after 8 years. Would be pretty embarrassing for him of we didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26540 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 If we're actually delaying moves in the transfer market just so the club looks to be more profitable then it's absolute madness. Whether a deal is done this side of July or after it's still coming out of the agreed transfer budget for the window. To base your transfers around a set of statutory accounts that doesn't actually affect anything is nonsensical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34740 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Signing a new player will have next to no impact on profit anyway, it's almost entirely balance sheet initially. So aye that's not right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9027 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26540 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Signing a new player will have next to no impact on profit anyway, it's almost entirely balance sheet initially. So aye that's not right. Well aye, that's why I didn't make it as an accountant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34740 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Well aye, that's why I didn't make it as an accountant. We are a select band of brothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26540 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jun/24/richard-keogh-newcastle-derby-steve-mcclaren Just as long as he isn't being bought for the first team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 31 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Well aye, that's why I didn't make it as an accountant. Equally they can agree a transfer without it hitting the accounts until whatever date they want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kelly 1117 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jun/24/richard-keogh-newcastle-derby-steve-mcclaren Just as long as he isn't being bought for the first team. You expecting us to buy anyone better like? He fits in exactly with all of the other defensive names that have been mentioned so far (ie players from Brighton and Bournmouth). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 McClaren said on radio yesterday that he's excited and looking forward to the next 3 transfer windows.No quick fix for us then and it's looking like his £60m wor chest is for 3 transfer windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9027 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 McClaren said on radio yesterday that he's excited and looking forward to the next 3 transfer windows.No quick fix for us then and it's looking like his £60m wor chest is for 3 transfer windows. How'd you come to that conclusion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Most managers and fans concentrate on one transfer window.A reported £60m is available for incoming players ( probably including wages ).Would it suprise you if £60m isn't spent in this transfer window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26540 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 It would surprise me if reports of £60m aren't complete bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34740 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 He might just really love transfer windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 5941 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 He'll be sat at home on deadline day with a Chinese watching Jim White on the box Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrossthepond 707 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 At this rate we'll be lucky if we spend 6m. The new Ashley dawn isn't looking too rosy. Surprise surprise. Hope nobody renewed on the back of that load of panicked bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9027 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Most managers and fans concentrate on one transfer window.A reported £60m is available for incoming players ( probably including wages ).Would it suprise you if £60m isn't spent in this transfer window. Wow, there'sa whole heap of things happening in this post. I agree with your first statement. I too have read that figure bandied about. I would not be surprised if we spend less than £60m. So, that said, how do you come to the conclusion that the £60m figure that's being bandied about for this window is actually for the next three windows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Equally they can agree a transfer without it hitting the accounts until whatever date they want So the lack of transfers is deffo down to choice, rather than any temporary restrictions. Shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Crabeller wants out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26540 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Equally they can agree a transfer without it hitting the accounts until whatever date they want Not really. I'd imagine that once an unbreakable contract is signed then it would have to be accounted for as a short-term liability. I'll let Gemmill decide where the corresponding double entry should go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34740 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 If the deal is legally binding, it would need to be recognised, yes. I can provide T Accounts if anyone needs me to step them through the transaction. I no longer work as an accountant btw, this is strictly a hobby for me now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts