 | Forum
Reply | Chromecast
at 17:17 15 Jun 2020
laptop browsers work (chrome works best for me).
you have to use the app for phones and tablets, not computers. |
| Forum
Reply | Never Mind The Bollocks...
at 19:50 15 Oct 2019
i think it's more boring than that... once upon a time the bbc were obsessed with not advertising anything, so the very mention of marks and sparks was banned (as was the case with coca-cola in lola by the kinks) |
| Forum
Reply | Sheffield Weds the latest club to dodge FFP by buying their ground...
at 14:31 16 Jul 2019
to reiterate:
"...well if we sold it to a member of the board, it would be deemed a 'related party transaction' and valued in the books at 'fair value' (regardless of whether that was more or less than the original transaction).
it's possible to make an accounting profit on the sale when fair value is higher than book value (usually a result of accounting policies meaning that the ground and stadium are recorded at lower-than-market valuations in the books). but it's very difficult to do when buying it back (unless the market valuation goes down due to, say, a property market crash)." |
| Forum
Reply | Sheffield Weds the latest club to dodge FFP by buying their ground...
at 10:10 15 Jul 2019
...well if we sold it to a member of the board, it would be deemed a 'related party transaction' and valued in the books at 'fair value' (regardless of whether that was more or less than the original transaction).
it's possible to make an accounting profit on the sale when fair value is higher than book value (usually a result of accounting policies meaning that the ground and stadium are recorded at lower-than-market valuations in the books). but it's very difficult to do when buying it back (unless the market valuation goes down due to, say, a property market crash). |
| Forum
Reply | Freeman
at 10:11 2 Jul 2019
i guess it can also be that the buying club doesn't want to advertise how much it is paying. spuds haven't disclosed how much they paid for jack clarke today (allegedly £10m-ish), i'm guessing leeds would like to let their fans know the fee if it was that much. |
| Forum
Reply | Tough battle ahead in ongoing war with FFP - Column
at 10:01 21 Jun 2019
the last set of accounts valued all the land and buildings held (not clear whether this includes warren farm and/or harlesden etc) as £17.136m. no idea what the current market value of loftus road would be - i think the old bbc tv centre went for about £200m a few years back, so possibly a bit more than £17m.
i don't think the cash would need to be paid all at once... it's quite common for large sums to be paid in installments over a number of years (this is usually what happens with transfer fees for example). the sale would need to be supported by a legally enforced contract that genuinely transfers ownership.
by the way... i think it would be a terrible idea to go down this road. |
| Forum
Reply | Tough battle ahead in ongoing war with FFP - Column
at 16:29 20 Jun 2019
it's a general accounting rule, so applies to all ffp.
it deals with related party transactions (ie where a company or individuals associated with the owners buys or sells stuff to the company). in the accounts, everything should be recorded at fair value. so even if air asia did pay £20bn for a box, the amount recorded in the books is revalued to say £5k, even though we received much more actual cash.
the aim is to stop accounts being made to look better than they are to trick investors into buying the company.
don't ask me about derby... i think i heard that the issue was that the ground was valued well below its market value in the books and so the sale at great profit got around the related party transactions by being at around market value. |
| Forum
Reply | Our country is fckd match thread
at 11:05 12 Jun 2019
i always hate going anywhere near politics, but i've never understood why everyone seems to feel the question on any second referendum is so tricky.
i don't understand why having 3 options (accept whatever deal the government offers, leave with no deal or remain in the eu) and letting everyone set out their first and second choices is so tricky. after counting all the first choice votes, the third-placed option is eliminated and the second choices for that option are added to the remaining two options.
that way, there should (hopefully) be some proper discussion about what the three options actually mean and people can make an informed decision. |
| Forum
Reply | Players Released
at 00:16 11 May 2019
me neither... particularly given the non-criticism that pav's non-existent crossing skills get.
that said, if he really is on such a top-dollar wedge, then we really need to look for alternatives unless he is willing to take a reasonable paycut (which, arguably, he should be). |
| Forum
Reply | Players Released
at 15:20 10 May 2019
could be... do remember nedum making a claim about the club trying to bring in a replacement for him at roughly his old wages, when he was complaining about the deal that he was offered by us to stay...
"I'd only missed about 10 weeks of football in three years so I felt it wasn't right, especially as I knew they were trying to recruit other players for similar or more money," Onuoha said.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/45481218 |
| Forum
Reply | FFP - why only us?
at 17:28 6 May 2019
firstly, i don't know how the efl have decided that... but i'm sure that it will have been classed as a 'related-party transaction', the question is whether the amount paid represents a fair value for that transaction.
derby's ffp accounts should only contain the following transactions - the profit (or loss) on the sale of the ground (calculated using the book value of the ground) and an annual charge for the leasing back of the ground from the owner (again calculated at a fair value).
in theory, it should be quite difficult to fiddle the figures... the accounts should include a valuation of the stadium's value - land and buildings should be revalued regularly to reflect real estate prices, so quite how derby could claim that a (roughly) 100% profit on the book value is a fair value will be interesting to say the least.
what this really shows is the short-termism of these rules... no one in their right mind would have assumed that ffp would lead to clubs getting rid of their grounds for a short-term cash flow solution. |
| Forum
Reply | FFP - why only us?
at 16:06 6 May 2019
... because that would be classed as a related-party transaction, which the league would reassess at 'fair-value' (probably more or less nothing, due to tune group not needing a football stadium in london). |
| | klonk
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 1 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 1 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.