| And apparently we're still broke 😀 (n/t) on 18:06 - Oct 7 with 2832 views | Swanjaxs |
[Post edited 7 Oct 2020 18:10]
|  |
|  |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 18:15 - Oct 7 with 2810 views | Garyjack |
Surely they are only going by transfer incoming and outgoings? There is no way the club has made a profit of over £63m in the last 10 years. |  | | |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 18:17 - Oct 7 with 2805 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
Swansea are not broke and by the looks of it can trade comfortably this year. Buying players comes from cash surpluses.
The net difference between Stoke and Swansea is around £220,000,000 an astonishing number and still Swansea are well above Stoke in the table last season and so far this. Swansea was outbid by Stoke for Joey Allen and Ryan Woods. They overpaid.
£180,000,000 of Stoke's debt is to their owners. Swansea wil have no debts to the owners if the Silverstein /US loan is converted to shares. The US owners are learning from their mistakes. Recruitment in recent times under Clement and Potter was poor. The indication are that this aspect has improved dramtically with Scott and Coooper being very careful. Of their loan and permanent signings only kalulu and Peterson failed ot deliver. |  |
| |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 18:26 - Oct 7 with 2787 views | Garyjack |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 18:17 - Oct 7 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Swansea are not broke and by the looks of it can trade comfortably this year. Buying players comes from cash surpluses.
The net difference between Stoke and Swansea is around £220,000,000 an astonishing number and still Swansea are well above Stoke in the table last season and so far this. Swansea was outbid by Stoke for Joey Allen and Ryan Woods. They overpaid.
£180,000,000 of Stoke's debt is to their owners. Swansea wil have no debts to the owners if the Silverstein /US loan is converted to shares. The US owners are learning from their mistakes. Recruitment in recent times under Clement and Potter was poor. The indication are that this aspect has improved dramtically with Scott and Coooper being very careful. Of their loan and permanent signings only kalulu and Peterson failed ot deliver. |
The castle in your avatar has an uncanny resemblance to the one in Disneyland. It would explain a lot!  | | | |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 21:19 - Oct 7 with 2596 views | Catullus |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 18:17 - Oct 7 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Swansea are not broke and by the looks of it can trade comfortably this year. Buying players comes from cash surpluses.
The net difference between Stoke and Swansea is around £220,000,000 an astonishing number and still Swansea are well above Stoke in the table last season and so far this. Swansea was outbid by Stoke for Joey Allen and Ryan Woods. They overpaid.
£180,000,000 of Stoke's debt is to their owners. Swansea wil have no debts to the owners if the Silverstein /US loan is converted to shares. The US owners are learning from their mistakes. Recruitment in recent times under Clement and Potter was poor. The indication are that this aspect has improved dramtically with Scott and Coooper being very careful. Of their loan and permanent signings only kalulu and Peterson failed ot deliver. |
If that were true then why Silverstein? If we were 63 million in profit then why talk of selling Rodon?
Unless you are saying the owners have taken that 63 million as a dividend?
It's nonsense, Swansea lost 7 million last tax year. Profits from transfers have been gobbled up by EPL wages on Championship incomes. |  |
| |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 21:42 - Oct 7 with 2566 views | Garyjack |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 21:19 - Oct 7 by Catullus |
If that were true then why Silverstein? If we were 63 million in profit then why talk of selling Rodon?
Unless you are saying the owners have taken that 63 million as a dividend?
It's nonsense, Swansea lost 7 million last tax year. Profits from transfers have been gobbled up by EPL wages on Championship incomes. |
The guy is 100% bonkers. He makes things up in his mind and thinks he's posting them as fact. Though stating we have a cash surplus is one of his best yet!
Don't be surprised if his reply to you will include another slating of the trust. He often does that to deflect from the facts that are presented to him. I prefer to mock him as often possible but he's so far down the road of insanity he somehow believes i'm vexed when i do so. Poor sod. | | | |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:08 - Oct 7 with 2519 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 21:42 - Oct 7 by Garyjack |
The guy is 100% bonkers. He makes things up in his mind and thinks he's posting them as fact. Though stating we have a cash surplus is one of his best yet!
Don't be surprised if his reply to you will include another slating of the trust. He often does that to deflect from the facts that are presented to him. I prefer to mock him as often possible but he's so far down the road of insanity he somehow believes i'm vexed when i do so. Poor sod. |
If the club has no cash surplus what do the club pay the wages with Garyjack? What did they pay for Lowe with? What money are they using to paint the stadium?
Swansea has small debts. Stokes debts are massive.
You have completely missed the point again. Swansea is just about getting by because of the £60m surpus on transfers. Wages paid, and the infrastructure developed (£15-20m) and the academy in place (£3m a season for 5 season) and managers paid off. Presumably the recent loan covers this and any shortfalls and may be upto £5-10m to cover Covid 19. Some dough for Celina and Pterson helps. This might mean SCFC does not need to sell Rodon and can hold out for top dollar.
The £160m deficit on transfers of Stoke has contributed to the £180m debt to the Bet 365 holding company. They are no stronger than Swansea and despite this free money are below Swansea last seasion and below them this season as well. This tells me Swansea as a club are vastly better run than Stoke.
Garyjack mock away and get a few of you mates to join if you like. | |
| |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:26 - Oct 7 with 2488 views | Chief |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:08 - Oct 7 by ReslovenSwan1 |
If the club has no cash surplus what do the club pay the wages with Garyjack? What did they pay for Lowe with? What money are they using to paint the stadium?
Swansea has small debts. Stokes debts are massive.
You have completely missed the point again. Swansea is just about getting by because of the £60m surpus on transfers. Wages paid, and the infrastructure developed (£15-20m) and the academy in place (£3m a season for 5 season) and managers paid off. Presumably the recent loan covers this and any shortfalls and may be upto £5-10m to cover Covid 19. Some dough for Celina and Pterson helps. This might mean SCFC does not need to sell Rodon and can hold out for top dollar.
The £160m deficit on transfers of Stoke has contributed to the £180m debt to the Bet 365 holding company. They are no stronger than Swansea and despite this free money are below Swansea last seasion and below them this season as well. This tells me Swansea as a club are vastly better run than Stoke.
Garyjack mock away and get a few of you mates to join if you like. |
I actually agree with you here - I cannot see how we are actually in the red considering the austerity since relegation (despite what the published accounts say).
However this does make a complete mockery of you repeatedly saying on other threads that Silverstein our white knight &the trust were unable to invest in our hour of need! |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:29 - Oct 7 with 2483 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 21:19 - Oct 7 by Catullus |
If that were true then why Silverstein? If we were 63 million in profit then why talk of selling Rodon?
Unless you are saying the owners have taken that 63 million as a dividend?
It's nonsense, Swansea lost 7 million last tax year. Profits from transfers have been gobbled up by EPL wages on Championship incomes. |
Swansea appear to have cash to fullfill all its obligations like wages, transfer budget outstanding debts and painting the stadium. The transfer surplus is mostly gone I would imagine. The talk coming out of Cardiff city is far more negative.
The club was potentially in trouble before the hard US cash but this is budgeted to cover costs and since then Celina and Peterson have brought in cash. The lack of communication with Cooper over Peterson might indicate things are still quite tight.
The US cash might also alow Winter to turn down offers from PL clubs for star players that do not meet club valuations. The surplus on transfers has all gone to cover the reducing parachute with a £20m reduction this year.
The Trust is bit sniffy about the Silverstein / US money which is true to form. An organisation worth £21m, 4 years ago has nothing to offer today. | |
| |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:32 - Oct 7 with 2472 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:26 - Oct 7 by Chief |
I actually agree with you here - I cannot see how we are actually in the red considering the austerity since relegation (despite what the published accounts say).
However this does make a complete mockery of you repeatedly saying on other threads that Silverstein our white knight &the trust were unable to invest in our hour of need! |
It’s about what we will owe not what we do owe.
As a club we know what our players will cost to keep through the length of their contracts, so while we may have that cash now, it’s earmarked.
We have have £2m in the bank for example. But that all has to be paid to Ayew this year, if that is spent then we must then loan/sell to get the money.
So having money and not being in debt, doesn’t mean we have the availability to spend. Much of a football clubs outgoings are earmarked outgoings rather than lump sum outgoings. |  |
| |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:52 - Oct 7 with 2452 views | Garyjack |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 22:08 - Oct 7 by ReslovenSwan1 |
If the club has no cash surplus what do the club pay the wages with Garyjack? What did they pay for Lowe with? What money are they using to paint the stadium?
Swansea has small debts. Stokes debts are massive.
You have completely missed the point again. Swansea is just about getting by because of the £60m surpus on transfers. Wages paid, and the infrastructure developed (£15-20m) and the academy in place (£3m a season for 5 season) and managers paid off. Presumably the recent loan covers this and any shortfalls and may be upto £5-10m to cover Covid 19. Some dough for Celina and Pterson helps. This might mean SCFC does not need to sell Rodon and can hold out for top dollar.
The £160m deficit on transfers of Stoke has contributed to the £180m debt to the Bet 365 holding company. They are no stronger than Swansea and despite this free money are below Swansea last seasion and below them this season as well. This tells me Swansea as a club are vastly better run than Stoke.
Garyjack mock away and get a few of you mates to join if you like. |
What is this nonsense you keep banging on about with comparing us with Stoke? There is no comparison to be made. Whether they are run well or not has absolutely no bearing on our clubs finances as we are worlds apart. Their owners are willing to take the hit. Our majority shareholders have not put one penny into the club since they purchased a 68% share in 2016, despite the sell outs (Leigh Dineen being the biggest mouthpiece) claiming the club would have access to larger finance, and also claiming that in the event of relegation from the Premier League, that SCFC would be in a better position to 'take the hit'. That clearly wasn't the case was it?
If you think that the club has anything near a cash surplus then you are deluded at best and borderline insane at worst. I will prefer to go with the latter judging by your first sentence. Do you seriously think that paying wages, buying then selling players, carrying out essential maintenance and taking out loans means that we have a cash surplus? Dear me!  | | | |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 11:19 - Oct 8 with 2260 views | jasper_T |
We were relegated with £60m in net liabilities set to fall due and after the Oli sale that was more or less wiped out. That's where all the net transfer profit went. Legacy of the PL transfer activity, promising to pay clubs for players over time while selling future payments from other clubs to banks for quick up front cash. | | | |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 12:25 - Oct 8 with 2232 views | magicdaps10 |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 11:19 - Oct 8 by jasper_T |
We were relegated with £60m in net liabilities set to fall due and after the Oli sale that was more or less wiped out. That's where all the net transfer profit went. Legacy of the PL transfer activity, promising to pay clubs for players over time while selling future payments from other clubs to banks for quick up front cash. |
So, the previous board were out of their depth, sold up because they could no longer control things, sold up at the businesses peak....... And then sold to a group with out any due diligence whilst keeping certain people in the dark until it was to late!?
And now we are left with owners who really don't care and are more interested in playing musical chairs. |  |
| |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 17:12 - Oct 8 with 2089 views | BillyChong |
Waaaw, the yanks have decided they can paint the stadium. Let’s give them a standing ovation. Whoop dee do. Proper next level stuff that. Wonder if they awarded Jaxx Bay the contract for the work. | | | |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 17:20 - Oct 8 with 2086 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| And apparently we're still broke 😀 on 17:12 - Oct 8 by BillyChong |
Waaaw, the yanks have decided they can paint the stadium. Let’s give them a standing ovation. Whoop dee do. Proper next level stuff that. Wonder if they awarded Jaxx Bay the contract for the work. |
They control the stadium as well. Unfortuantely the costs could have been offset by a concert or two over the Summer. Hey ho onwards and upwards. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
