| ST update on 19:37 - May 28 with 3100 views | Nortbankboy |
| ST update on 19:35 - May 28 by Nortbankboy |
Who owns the other 22%? |
Sorry 32% |  | |  |
| ST update on 08:44 - May 29 with 2923 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 18:03 - May 24 by Swanjaxs |
It's just a hunch, but when the yanks finally ride off into the sunset, they wont be out of pocket. |
The payment of salaries that should have been far, far less is one way they have managed to keep the money rolling in. |  |
| |
| ST update on 10:31 - May 29 with 2859 views | Dr_Winston |
| ST update on 18:34 - May 24 by thornabyswan |
Fairy nuff plenty think the same but not seen anything to back it up in the accounts.
So disagree on that one mate [Post edited 24 May 2020 18:35]
|
This.
The clubs accounts are audited for the precise purpose of ensuring accuracy and identifying taxable income so the HMRC doesn't get stiffed. Despite this there are plenty of people out there still convinced money is going out of the club with no evidence whatsoever to suggest it.
It ain't happening. The only way they're going to recoup their money is by selling the club on for equal or greater value. That won't happen outside the PL. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| ST update on 17:33 - Jun 1 with 2500 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 10:31 - May 29 by Dr_Winston |
This.
The clubs accounts are audited for the precise purpose of ensuring accuracy and identifying taxable income so the HMRC doesn't get stiffed. Despite this there are plenty of people out there still convinced money is going out of the club with no evidence whatsoever to suggest it.
It ain't happening. The only way they're going to recoup their money is by selling the club on for equal or greater value. That won't happen outside the PL. |
As I keep saying, salaries. | |
| |
| ST update on 17:49 - Jun 1 with 2465 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
| ST update on 17:33 - Jun 1 by NotLoyal |
As I keep saying, salaries. |
Do you think they shared the £234,608 paid in director salaries for 2019 amongst all 27 of them? If so, taking out just over £8,689 each doesn't sound that bad. |  |
| |
| ST update on 17:51 - Jun 1 with 2476 views | Treforys_Jack |
Shhh mun they are taking out, just nobody can say how. |  | | |
| ST update on 17:54 - Jun 1 with 2470 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 17:49 - Jun 1 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
Do you think they shared the £234,608 paid in director salaries for 2019 amongst all 27 of them? If so, taking out just over £8,689 each doesn't sound that bad. |
Well, re read your post Dwight and you may have the answer. Nobody has mentioned the 28 or so regards money. Your nearly 300k you mention, plus Pearlman earns 700k ish ? Birch 600k, let’s start there these salaries are jobs for the boys and a disgusting reflection on the way the club is being run. There’s more than one way to take cash out of the till. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| ST update on 17:55 - Jun 1 with 2466 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 17:51 - Jun 1 by Treforys_Jack |
Shhh mun they are taking out, just nobody can say how. |
Or have the nouse to see a bit wider than their eyebrows. | |
| |
| ST update on 18:04 - Jun 1 with 2453 views | Treforys_Jack |
| ST update on 17:55 - Jun 1 by NotLoyal |
Or have the nouse to see a bit wider than their eyebrows. |
How are they taking it out? I'm not saying their not, but just repeating it over and over doesn't make it true, it just becomes a conspiracy theory. [Post edited 1 Jun 2020 18:06]
| | | |
| ST update on 18:44 - Jun 1 with 2425 views | perplex |
| ST update on 18:04 - Jun 1 by Treforys_Jack |
How are they taking it out? I'm not saying their not, but just repeating it over and over doesn't make it true, it just becomes a conspiracy theory. [Post edited 1 Jun 2020 18:06]
|
Probably in such a clever way its difficult to prove if an how they are doing it. so its a question of do you give them the benefit of the doubt or not, personally I will go for not. | | | |
| ST update on 14:33 - Jun 2 with 2244 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
| ST update on 17:54 - Jun 1 by NotLoyal |
Well, re read your post Dwight and you may have the answer. Nobody has mentioned the 28 or so regards money. Your nearly 300k you mention, plus Pearlman earns 700k ish ? Birch 600k, let’s start there these salaries are jobs for the boys and a disgusting reflection on the way the club is being run. There’s more than one way to take cash out of the till. |
So now you are suggesting Birch is part of an illegal scheme where by the football club pays him an inflated salary which he then transfers to the 27 investors?
The accounts state that..
"Total compensation of key management personnel (including the directors) in the period amounted to £737, 366."
That would include Pearlman (is he still here?) and Birch's salaries. So immediately we're down from your estimation of £1.6m. Now you're accusing all 27 involved (plus Birch and Pearlman) of engaging in illegal activity which would carry serious charges all for the purpose of just over £27k each, which I think would be a minor amount of money for most involved considering they are multi millionaires. | |
| |
| ST update on 15:05 - Jun 2 with 2235 views | Whiterockin |
| ST update on 14:33 - Jun 2 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
So now you are suggesting Birch is part of an illegal scheme where by the football club pays him an inflated salary which he then transfers to the 27 investors?
The accounts state that..
"Total compensation of key management personnel (including the directors) in the period amounted to £737, 366."
That would include Pearlman (is he still here?) and Birch's salaries. So immediately we're down from your estimation of £1.6m. Now you're accusing all 27 involved (plus Birch and Pearlman) of engaging in illegal activity which would carry serious charges all for the purpose of just over £27k each, which I think would be a minor amount of money for most involved considering they are multi millionaires. |
Just as a matter of interest what period do those accounts cover. [Post edited 2 Jun 2020 15:06]
|  | | |
| ST update on 15:10 - Jun 2 with 2226 views | Whiterockin |
Trevor Birch was employed on 18.03.19 so only covers a couple of months of his salary. | | | |
| ST update on 16:49 - Jun 2 with 2155 views | EasternJack |
| ST update on 17:54 - Jun 1 by NotLoyal |
Well, re read your post Dwight and you may have the answer. Nobody has mentioned the 28 or so regards money. Your nearly 300k you mention, plus Pearlman earns 700k ish ? Birch 600k, let’s start there these salaries are jobs for the boys and a disgusting reflection on the way the club is being run. There’s more than one way to take cash out of the till. |
So - the americans and their friends spent £68M to buy the club so that they could give jobs to Pearlman/Birch etc. So assuming that's £1M a year in salaries they take out - at 50% tax, that would take 136 years of salaries to recoup what they spent (and that's assuming Birch/Pearlman etc pass on their salaries back to owners...)
Seems a pretty inefficient and ineffective way to recoup their spend.
Any spend that's of a level that would even look at recovering their £68M would stand out like a sore thumb in the numbers. [Post edited 2 Jun 2020 16:50]
|  |
| |
| ST update on 17:48 - Jun 2 with 2124 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 16:49 - Jun 2 by EasternJack |
So - the americans and their friends spent £68M to buy the club so that they could give jobs to Pearlman/Birch etc. So assuming that's £1M a year in salaries they take out - at 50% tax, that would take 136 years of salaries to recoup what they spent (and that's assuming Birch/Pearlman etc pass on their salaries back to owners...)
Seems a pretty inefficient and ineffective way to recoup their spend.
Any spend that's of a level that would even look at recovering their £68M would stand out like a sore thumb in the numbers. [Post edited 2 Jun 2020 16:50]
|
I'm not one of those who have stated they are doing anything unlawful, I'm offering some relative facts that can clearly be seen. As an aside what is clear and obviously not clear are two different things, criminals don't disclose their stripping of assets in orderly disclosures such as accounts.
They either are or they are not, I'm just offering a few things that are to me references as to overpayments. And people being paid massive sums of money to do the majority shareholders bidding. You can strip assets indirectly, by placing people in positions of management who do deals that in time reflect acquisitions of money. Business deals, that on the face of it are just that but don't disclose payments or gratuity received in time. Sales of stock that reveal percentages paid to those at the top of a companies hierarchy.
I'm not saying anything about guilt but just offering some explanations and in other posts in support of our owners. Life isn't as clear as we would like, we had this with silver shield, Mike Lewis and finally Tony Petty. And still people argued the toss because they 'support Swansea city' People even took payments from Lewis to infiltrate and disrupt action against him. So, any theory is a good theory.
The passage of time always reveals an answer. And repeats itself continuously. [Post edited 2 Jun 2020 17:50]
| |
| |
| ST update on 18:47 - Jun 2 with 2086 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 14:33 - Jun 2 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
So now you are suggesting Birch is part of an illegal scheme where by the football club pays him an inflated salary which he then transfers to the 27 investors?
The accounts state that..
"Total compensation of key management personnel (including the directors) in the period amounted to £737, 366."
That would include Pearlman (is he still here?) and Birch's salaries. So immediately we're down from your estimation of £1.6m. Now you're accusing all 27 involved (plus Birch and Pearlman) of engaging in illegal activity which would carry serious charges all for the purpose of just over £27k each, which I think would be a minor amount of money for most involved considering they are multi millionaires. |
I've had a lot of words put in my mouth, but you are up there with the best..
Im advocating nothing, stating nothing, just giving an observation. And again it isn't my fault you can't see round the corners in front of you. | |
| |
| ST update on 19:24 - Jun 2 with 2061 views | jack247 |
The edgy thing to say is that they are embezzling money, you don’t know how, but they definitely are.
The more plausible scenario is they ran the club awfully in the PL (even giving them the benefit of the doubt on some signings that looked great at the time but flopped catastrophically). They still haven’t recovered from that and look to have pretty much written us off as a bad investment. | | | |
| ST update on 21:55 - Jun 2 with 1990 views | Badlands |
| ST update on 16:49 - Jun 2 by EasternJack |
So - the americans and their friends spent £68M to buy the club so that they could give jobs to Pearlman/Birch etc. So assuming that's £1M a year in salaries they take out - at 50% tax, that would take 136 years of salaries to recoup what they spent (and that's assuming Birch/Pearlman etc pass on their salaries back to owners...)
Seems a pretty inefficient and ineffective way to recoup their spend.
Any spend that's of a level that would even look at recovering their £68M would stand out like a sore thumb in the numbers. [Post edited 2 Jun 2020 16:50]
|
Why bother offering anything remotely close to reality in challenging Not Loyal?
The bloke has go a serious problem. |  |
| |
| ST update on 22:06 - Jun 2 with 1985 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 21:55 - Jun 2 by Badlands |
Why bother offering anything remotely close to reality in challenging Not Loyal?
The bloke has go a serious problem. |
I generally leave insults off here unless there is good cause to direct them personally. Face to face.
Read what I have, said, I'm just offering scenarios not anything other than that, if your brain doesn't comprehend dialogue and opinion without insulting people that's not a matter for me, your intelligence levels are down to you. You clearly havent read what I posted or don't have the ability to understand it. I've said nothing that deserves a response like that, I don't have a problem at all, not yet anyway. [Post edited 2 Jun 2020 22:10]
| |
| |
| ST update on 09:42 - Jun 3 with 1874 views | monmouth |
| ST update on 19:24 - Jun 2 by jack247 |
The edgy thing to say is that they are embezzling money, you don’t know how, but they definitely are.
The more plausible scenario is they ran the club awfully in the PL (even giving them the benefit of the doubt on some signings that looked great at the time but flopped catastrophically). They still haven’t recovered from that and look to have pretty much written us off as a bad investment. |
This is far more likely. It doesn’t mean they wont try and get as much as they can they can from the failed investment (stable championship club, try and sell maybe, with a hope that some magical promotion happens), but they certainly won’t be throwing good money after bad.
All the other stuff like executive salaries is just peanuts in the scheme of the investment losses. If they were in that frame of mind we would not have loaned Brewster, Gallagher and that fecking hopeless centre back. The clubs money is still visibly being spent on club activities. If they want to start really asset stripping it is going to be very visible, but it’s quite hard to envisage how. If it weren’t for the Trust sell all assets, play the kids, and pay dividends would be the obvious answer.
But I don’t think that’s the strategy. At the moment they have no real interest and are leaving it to Birch, but are hoping for an on field miracle is my view. What happens if that on field miracle is blatantly not possible and we’re on the slide, might be a lot more unpleasant viewing.
That said, I wouldn’t be relying on audited accounts being correct in any shape or form. They will be ‘true and fair in all material respects’ as indeed were Carillion’s... |  |
| |
| ST update on 09:59 - Jun 3 with 1863 views | NotLoyal |
| ST update on 09:42 - Jun 3 by monmouth |
This is far more likely. It doesn’t mean they wont try and get as much as they can they can from the failed investment (stable championship club, try and sell maybe, with a hope that some magical promotion happens), but they certainly won’t be throwing good money after bad.
All the other stuff like executive salaries is just peanuts in the scheme of the investment losses. If they were in that frame of mind we would not have loaned Brewster, Gallagher and that fecking hopeless centre back. The clubs money is still visibly being spent on club activities. If they want to start really asset stripping it is going to be very visible, but it’s quite hard to envisage how. If it weren’t for the Trust sell all assets, play the kids, and pay dividends would be the obvious answer.
But I don’t think that’s the strategy. At the moment they have no real interest and are leaving it to Birch, but are hoping for an on field miracle is my view. What happens if that on field miracle is blatantly not possible and we’re on the slide, might be a lot more unpleasant viewing.
That said, I wouldn’t be relying on audited accounts being correct in any shape or form. They will be ‘true and fair in all material respects’ as indeed were Carillion’s... |
How dare you add value to the thread Mon, being objective and pragmatic, and yes to an extent I agree. | |
| |
| ST update on 10:27 - Jun 3 with 1834 views | jack247 |
| ST update on 09:42 - Jun 3 by monmouth |
This is far more likely. It doesn’t mean they wont try and get as much as they can they can from the failed investment (stable championship club, try and sell maybe, with a hope that some magical promotion happens), but they certainly won’t be throwing good money after bad.
All the other stuff like executive salaries is just peanuts in the scheme of the investment losses. If they were in that frame of mind we would not have loaned Brewster, Gallagher and that fecking hopeless centre back. The clubs money is still visibly being spent on club activities. If they want to start really asset stripping it is going to be very visible, but it’s quite hard to envisage how. If it weren’t for the Trust sell all assets, play the kids, and pay dividends would be the obvious answer.
But I don’t think that’s the strategy. At the moment they have no real interest and are leaving it to Birch, but are hoping for an on field miracle is my view. What happens if that on field miracle is blatantly not possible and we’re on the slide, might be a lot more unpleasant viewing.
That said, I wouldn’t be relying on audited accounts being correct in any shape or form. They will be ‘true and fair in all material respects’ as indeed were Carillion’s... |
Yes, absolutely.
The way they (and their predecessors during the latter years) ran the club, it was just about sustaining itself in the PL. We were wholly ill equipped for relegation, hence the fire sale and selling off the silver.
That doesn’t mean we can’t bring the odd free, loan or cheap player in. I’m sure we’ll get reasonable money for Rodon and maybe spend 10% of it in the summer.
The way I see it, they aren’t criminals, they are just speculators. Their gamble failed and they have distanced themselves accordingly. | | | |
| ST update on 10:34 - Jun 3 with 1825 views | Phil_S |
| ST update on 10:27 - Jun 3 by jack247 |
Yes, absolutely.
The way they (and their predecessors during the latter years) ran the club, it was just about sustaining itself in the PL. We were wholly ill equipped for relegation, hence the fire sale and selling off the silver.
That doesn’t mean we can’t bring the odd free, loan or cheap player in. I’m sure we’ll get reasonable money for Rodon and maybe spend 10% of it in the summer.
The way I see it, they aren’t criminals, they are just speculators. Their gamble failed and they have distanced themselves accordingly. |
We were indeed ill equipped for relegation and hampered totally by crazy contracts given to the likes of the returning Ayew and Bony to start with amongst many others.
The problems of the club started when the desire to sell became higher than the desire to protect and whilst eyes were off the ball bad decisions were taken without thought for the long term security of the football club.
Nobody could have predicted a global pandemic doing the damage that it has done but at the same time we were facing a financial disaster this summer anyway and would have been gambling on the sale of certain key players to keep us afloat |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
