Jump to content

Tribunal Update. Or not. Have a look - the mods have no more insider info than you do!


Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

I expect no further action bar asking us to change the way we value our players 

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but the way we amortise players values over the length of their contract seems to me to a far more accurate value than straight line decreases, if done correctly.

Maybe the EFL will instruct all clubs to adopt our model in future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 867
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No we weren't. Mel was trying to fund a competitive  club. We all rave and sometimes demand success as fans. Mel can't win. Fund the club within its means and be mid table every season or challenge fo

You know why we sold our largest asset to a company under his control so it’s kind of a pointless question. This investigation, if we are completely dismissed without charge will he still have qu

This has been dragging on and on and has hurt our beloved club.  If the club is found guilty of breaching rules, many are expecting a 12 point deduction, and so i propose that it be only fair that if

Posted Images

16 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but the way we amortise players values over the length of their contract seems to me to a far more accurate value than straight line decreases, if done correctly.

Maybe the EFL will instruct all clubs to adopt our model in future.

Depends whether you are carrying brad at 6m all the way through because to properly value him would breach PS. not saying that is the case for the record.  I dislike our method which can lump significant cost into the final year,it is not prudent imo

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Spanish said:

Depends whether you are carrying brad at 6m all the way through because to properly value him would breach PS. not saying that is the case for the record.  I dislike our method which can lump significant cost into the final year,it is not prudent imo

The auditors have clearly been ok with it though, if that method has been in the accounts for a few years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Spanish said:

Depends whether you are carrying brad at 6m all the way through because to properly value him would breach PS. not saying that is the case for the record.  I dislike our method which can lump significant cost into the final year,it is not prudent imo

That's one of the problems though isn't it?

People assume it's some sort of wheeze for P&S reasons, yet applied correctly with realistic values applied, it's actually a more honest way of doing things.

Like yourself, I wouldn't accuse the club of not valuing assets correctly, little point to kicking the can down the road now a rolling average over 3 seasons is the measurement.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, reverendo de duivel said:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but the way we amortise players values over the length of their contract seems to me to a far more accurate value than straight line decreases, if done correctly.

Maybe the EFL will instruct all clubs to adopt our model in future.

If there is a model applied to it, which can be displayed to be reasonable with reference to things done before I think it is fair to use it.

If we are back leading all of the amortisation it is clearly being done for other motives.

The fact that we supposedly extended a few contracts to avoid taking a big FFP hit would lead me to believe it is the latter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

If there is a model applied to it, which can be displayed to be reasonable with reference to things done before I think it is fair to use it.

If we are back leading all of the amortisation it is clearly being done for other motives.

The fact that we supposedly extended a few contracts to avoid taking a big FFP hit would lead me to believe it is the latter.

The assumption we extended contracts to avoid sanction would probably be a more cautious statement.

I know what you mean though.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

The assumption we extended contracts to avoid sanction would probably be a more cautious statement.

I know what you mean though.

I cant believe the auditors would let the club do it to be honest, but I've seen it mentioned by numerous sources.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.