4-0, Top of the League, Hated it.

Millar you are a tw*t of the highest order. Should I support Swansea because I'm from Neath just like our fans from Port Talbot, Maesteg, Porthcawl, Aberdare and maybe Bridgend because they are also relatively close to the 2nd City? If so, how do you think our crowds would then compare to theirs because I'm pretty certain they would be well above us. There's only one wanker and that's you mate.

Hence why I've just schooled you you mean?

Swansea don't have to sacrifice 40% of their income off the bat to satisfy a shortfall and interest payments. They also spend less than they generate and don't have an increasing £100m debt over their heads.

Now in your excellent business Mind where you think running costs in he prem are free.... Can you tell me (for the sixth time of asking) how do you envisage Cardiff to become a sustainable profit making club?

Nobody will think less of you if you just admit that you have no idea

By spending less than we earn, or by tapping in to a billionaire. Still no acknowledgement of your shit maths then. If Cardiff have a similar wage bill to swansea I've no doubt other operating costs won't be dissimilar, if not then tell me why? Only interest!
But of course you don't know do you troll?

Right, now you are forming an opinion.

So how do you envisage we spend less than we receive when we have 40% of our income owed elsewhere (so that's about a £35 million spend)? So still not enough to service the wage bill..... And you do realise that "tapping into a billionaire" is neither a feasible business plan nor a way of generating income.... Just more debt.

So now do you understand how we are not sustainable?

And no my figures are accurate as I proved around 10 posts ago, you just didn't understand it... Unsurprisingly.

40% of our income is owned elsewhere? Utter nonsense. I've asked you why we would be so different to most other clubs but you seem to think our cost base is going to be so much greater. Why? What costs do we incur that are so much more massive than other clubs? Having said that I know you don't know so please don't bother replying.
You post the same crap under your multiple aliases since you can't comment on the playing side with you not being a supporter. It's boring, fictitious trolling rubbish

What are you struggling to understand?

Before we even kick a ball we know we are going to have a shortfall of circa £20 million, similar to that of this season.

That is around 35% of our projected income that year (not including the £5 million projected interest) which only leaves £40 million to spend before we start making a loss.

As we have established, our wage bill would probably be around the £40 million mark.... Meaning in order to spend less than we receive (your brilliant vision) that would mean we spend nothing on transfer fees, decide not to pay our players promotion bonuses, decide not to pay the clubs their contractual promotion transfer fee bonus.... Among many many other things. Other teams (such as Swansea) don't have this handicap so can operate at a profit if they so wish. Where as any losses we make, which we will make, mount on top of the already unserviceable debt to the tune of £20 million + per season.

Now then, which bit are you struggling to cope with?

Millar, who cares where Cardiff fans come from?

Any reason?

Without getting into a big argument mate it just felt totally bizzare to me.

I cant get my head around the red shirts for starters, and then add to that the atmosphere for a team top
of the league was awful.

We were 4-0 up and Ali said the fourth official has indicated 2 minutes of added time, I looked around and the place was half empty, and people were flooding for the exits.

The kid in front of me had a Barcelona top on and most of the people around me spent most of the game on their phones telling each other the scores from the other games.

It honestly felt like I was at the Cinema at times.

The best thing about going there today was bottles of Heineken for a £1. I should be buzzing, top of the League, 4-0 home win but its not there.

I appreciate other people are getting on with it but its not for me, I know Im not alone.

Without getting into an arguement, some City fans hold this club back at times, we've just won 4-0, 3pts clear at the top and I'm reading this?! Sorry pal, you need to man up and get on with it

Yeah mate, Iv held the club right back by going there since 1988 week and week out and continuing to do so even though Im not enjoying it.

We won 4-0 top of the league, its hollow pal.

Portgcawl Bluebirds? why dont you support the Jacks pal, their your local club, got no time for people who dont support the local club so dont give a f**k what you think anyway.

You've just shown us what a dick head you really are by the comments about support your local club you don't half think your special coming from cardiff (if you do)

Forgot to say molar you've just alienated more city fans Roth your stupid remark than the rebrand could ever do

Millar, who cares where Cardiff fans come from?

Exactly. Surely the people from the Cardiff area should be welcoming everyone who travels to watch City play? Not calling us wankers and telling us to go and support Swansea.

I'm absolutely baffled by that attitude and I genuinely hope it isn't the general feeling among supporters who are from the city.

Millar, who cares where Cardiff fans come from?

Exactly. Surely the people from the Cardiff area should be welcoming everyone who travels to watch City play? Not calling us wankers and telling us to go and support Swansea.

I'm absolutely baffled by that attitude and I genuinely hope it isn't the general feeling among supporters who are from the city.

It certainly isn't the general feeling among supporters who are from the city. I'm Cardiff born and bred and have only lived in Neath since 1992. I always loved the fact that people from all over south Wales supported my team - and some from north Wales as well, which I thought was amazing.

Exactly. Surely the people from the Cardiff area should be welcoming everyone who travels to watch City play? Not calling us wankers and telling us to go and support Swansea.

I'm absolutely baffled by that attitude and I genuinely hope it isn't the general feeling among supporters who are from the city.

It certainly isn't the general feeling among supporters who are from the city. I'm Cardiff born and bred and have only lived in Neath since 1992. I always loved the fact that people from all over south Wales supported my team - and some from north Wales as well, which I thought was amazing.

I know that John. Yourself and Steve are both Cardiff lads living in Neath and have been nothing but friendly and welcoming. That has been my experience of following Cardiff, which is why Miller's post left me a bit speechless.

Exactly. Surely the people from the Cardiff area should be welcoming everyone who travels to watch City play? Not calling us wankers and telling us to go and support Swansea.

I'm absolutely baffled by that attitude and I genuinely hope it isn't the general feeling among supporters who are from the city.

It certainly isn't the general feeling among supporters who are from the city. I'm Cardiff born and bred and have only lived in Neath since 1992. I always loved the fact that people from all over south Wales supported my team - and some from north Wales as well, which I thought was amazing.

I know that John. Yourself and Steve are both Cardiff lads living in Neath and have been nothing but friendly and welcoming. That has been my experience of following Cardiff, which is why Miller's post left me a bit speechless.

Very rare to find a Cardiffian who is as insular as that, thankfully. Text me, please, I've lost all my numbers due to another mobi dying on me.

I know that John. Yourself and Steve are both Cardiff lads living in Neath and have been nothing but friendly and welcoming. That has been my experience of following Cardiff, which is why Miller's post left me a bit speechless.

Very rare to find a Cardiffian who is as insular as that, thankfully. Text me, please, I've lost all my numbers due to another mobi dying on me.

OK pal.

If I hated/was embarrassed by something as much as some people do on this forum I would not associate myself with the thing causing these feelings.

I know people are entiltled to their opinions but I am getting a bit tired of the same people saying the same thing!

I am not happy with the rebrand but I follow CCFC - no matter what the colour/atmosphere etc.

So in essence if it upsets you that much - DONT GO!!!

Hence why I've just schooled you you mean?

Swansea don't have to sacrifice 40% of their income off the bat to satisfy a shortfall and interest payments. They also spend less than they generate and don't have an increasing £100m debt over their heads.

Now in your excellent business Mind where you think running costs in he prem are free.... Can you tell me (for the sixth time of asking) how do you envisage Cardiff to become a sustainable profit making club?

Nobody will think less of you if you just admit that you have no idea

By spending less than we earn, or by tapping in to a billionaire. Still no acknowledgement of your shit maths then. If Cardiff have a similar wage bill to swansea I've no doubt other operating costs won't be dissimilar, if not then tell me why? Only interest!
But of course you don't know do you troll?

Right, now you are forming an opinion.

So how do you envisage we spend less than we receive when we have 40% of our income owed elsewhere (so that's about a £35 million spend)? So still not enough to service the wage bill..... And you do realise that "tapping into a billionaire" is neither a feasible business plan nor a way of generating income.... Just more debt.

So now do you understand how we are not sustainable?

And no my figures are accurate as I proved around 10 posts ago, you just didn't understand it... Unsurprisingly.

40% of our income is owned elsewhere? Utter nonsense. I've asked you why we would be so different to most other clubs but you seem to think our cost base is going to be so much greater. Why? What costs do we incur that are so much more massive than other clubs? Having said that I know you don't know so please don't bother replying.
You post the same crap under your multiple aliases since you can't comment on the playing side with you not being a supporter. It's boring, fictitious trolling rubbish

What are you struggling to understand?

Before we even kick a ball we know we are going to have a shortfall of circa £20 million, similar to that of this season.

That is around 35% of our projected income that year (not including the £5 million projected interest) which only leaves £40 million to spend before we start making a loss.

As we have established, our wage bill would probably be around the £40 million mark.... Meaning in order to spend less than we receive (your brilliant vision) that would mean we spend nothing on transfer fees, decide not to pay our players promotion bonuses, decide not to pay the clubs their contractual promotion transfer fee bonus.... Among many many other things. Other teams (such as Swansea) don't have this handicap so can operate at a profit if they so wish. Where as any losses we make, which we will make, mount on top of the already unserviceable debt to the tune of £20 million + per season.

Now then, which bit are you struggling to cope with?

As usual you avoid any questions asked. Tell me why other clubs, such as your beloved Swansea, can make a profit yet we need 20m extra? What cost base do we have that's so different? Also do you have any other interest as opposed to regurgitating this same old tripe under different aliases?

Its not the rebrand thats caused the shite atmosphere. Its been getting steadily worse since
we left NP. Deliberate, calculated and planned by the Stadium Manager and his pathetic
stewards. These fans who spend all game texting or reading the programme or waving to
their mates are the type of supporters City wants to attract. So for the O/Ps point there, I
have my sympathies.

as for the "if your not from Cardiff, do one!" bollocks.

How come Barry qualifies??

As usual you avoid any questions asked. Tell me why other clubs, such as your beloved Swansea, can make a profit yet we need 20m extra? What cost base do we have that's so different? Also do you have any other interest as opposed to regurgitating this same old tripe under different aliases?

Hi again. Your dullness hold no bounds it seems. Have a look at any of my last 4 or 5 posts and you will see I've answered you question quite comprehensively in each.

Swansea can make a profit because they spend what they have, not what they don't. They pay their players what they can afford, not what they can't. Their transfer fees and wage structure match that of a club their size and position in the league. Their employees take modest wages from the club and don't take advantage of it as it is run by the fans.

Cardiff spend what they don't have, they pay more in wages alone than their total yearly income, they vastly overspend both on transfer fees and wages paid and are not proportionate to the size of club or league, the people employed by the club take massive chunks of money in wages, bonuses and in tans case... Interest. It continues to loan money even when in debt 8 times the value of the club.

This is all before the normal running costs of the club which at championship level seem to be about £1.2 million per month. This is the shortfall, this is the handicap, this is the 35% of next years income already earmarked elsewhere, this is why the £100m debt is spiralling out of control, and this is why CCfc is not a viable business promotion or not...... And this is why we win 4-0 and those that understand these things couldn't really give a monkeys.

Please say you have understood this time, at least primary school teachers get paid.

As usual you avoid any questions asked. Tell me why other clubs, such as your beloved Swansea, can make a profit yet we need 20m extra? What cost base do we have that's so different? Also do you have any other interest as opposed to regurgitating this same old tripe under different aliases?

Hi again. Your dullness hold no bounds it seems. Have a look at any of my last 4 or 5 posts and you will see I've answered you question quite comprehensively in each.

Swansea can make a profit because they spend what they have, not what they don't. They pay their players what they can afford, not what they can't. Their transfer fees and wage structure match that of a club their size and position in the league. Their employees take modest wages from the club and don't take advantage of it as it is run by the fans.

Cardiff spend what they don't have, they pay more in wages alone than their total yearly income, they vastly overspend both on transfer fees and wages paid and are not proportionate to the size of club or league, the people employed by the club take massive chunks of money in wages, bonuses and in tans case... Interest. It continues to loan money even when in debt 8 times the value of the club.

This is all before the normal running costs of the club which at championship level seem to be about £1.2 million per month. This is the shortfall, this is the handicap, this is the 35% of next years income already earmarked elsewhere, this is why the £100m debt is spiralling out of control, and this is why CCfc is not a viable business promotion or not...... And this is why we win 4-0 and those that understand these things couldn't really give a monkeys.

Please say you have understood this time, at least primary school teachers get paid.

Ok let me try again with you and your 91m. Your shortfall of 20m includes our current wage bill. If it goes up to 40m as you suggest then part of it (let's say 20m to make it simple for you) is already being paid. So that's an increment of 20m for the wage bill, not an additional 40m, meaning your 91m is over inflated. Once you realise your limitations you'll be much more settled in life.

In your classic terms, apology accepted

As usual you avoid any questions asked. Tell me why other clubs, such as your beloved Swansea, can make a profit yet we need 20m extra? What cost base do we have that's so different? Also do you have any other interest as opposed to regurgitating this same old tripe under different aliases?

Hi again. Your dullness hold no bounds it seems. Have a look at any of my last 4 or 5 posts and you will see I've answered you question quite comprehensively in each.

Swansea can make a profit because they spend what they have, not what they don't. They pay their players what they can afford, not what they can't. Their transfer fees and wage structure match that of a club their size and position in the league. Their employees take modest wages from the club and don't take advantage of it as it is run by the fans.

Cardiff spend what they don't have, they pay more in wages alone than their total yearly income, they vastly overspend both on transfer fees and wages paid and are not proportionate to the size of club or league, the people employed by the club take massive chunks of money in wages, bonuses and in tans case... Interest. It continues to loan money even when in debt 8 times the value of the club.

This is all before the normal running costs of the club which at championship level seem to be about £1.2 million per month. This is the shortfall, this is the handicap, this is the 35% of next years income already earmarked elsewhere, this is why the £100m debt is spiralling out of control, and this is why CCfc is not a viable business promotion or not...... And this is why we win 4-0 and those that understand these things couldn't really give a monkeys.

Please say you have understood this time, at least primary school teachers get paid.

Ok let me try again with you and your 91m. Your shortfall of 20m includes our current wage bill. If it goes up to 40m as you suggest then part of it (let's say 20m to make it simple for you) is already being paid. So that's an increment of 20m for the wage bill, not an additional 40m, meaning your 91m is over inflated. Once you realise your limitations you'll be much more settled in life.

In your classic terms, apology accepted

Errr... No.

Only £3m of the £18m shortfall goes on wages. The rest is the running of the club.

If the wage bill goes up to £40 million for example. Then add that to the £10 million cost of promotion before we even kick a ball and we are at the magical £50 million income figure without spending a penny on players or the running cost of the club.

We know from this season and last that this shortfall after wages are paid is around £15 million, it will be even more in the premiership.

Ergo... We are facing a £20 million shortfall regardless. Now if you don't understand this time you really should enrol back in primary school...

Apology accepted.

Not realy, the opinion of a Cardiff fan who supports his local team I will take on board no problem at all, someone who ignores their local team to support Cardiff nah, no chance, made that clear from day one mate, never had and never will have respect for Neath/Port Talbot Bluebirds, they should be supporting Swansea. If people from Barry/Penarth supported Jacks I would think they were wankers so I have to have the same opinion of Cardiff fans from Neath/Port Talbot otherwise im a hypocrite eh

Who are you to draw boundaries?

Nobody mate.

But Neath and Port Talbot are on Swansea's doorstep, Barry and Penarth are on Cardiffs doorstep.

People from Neath and Port Talbot should support Swansea, People from Barry and Penarth should support Cardiff.

Not saying I am right or looking for people to agree, just my opinion

No offence.

It's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But it's a shit one. I'll never understand why someone has to support the team that is geographically closest to them. If that was the case I'd have to support Alloa f*cking Athletic!

Fair.

Ill keep an eye out for your posts defending all the Man Utd and Liverpool supporters in South Wales next time we get one of those thread then [/quote]

That's a different kettle of fish

But you have to accept, surely, that there are a lot of people who have genuine reasons for supporting teams other than the one which is geographically closest. So, to label all of these people as 'wankers' as you put it, is a bit unfair.[/quote]

Yes of course mate, although I fail to see why anyone from Port Talbot would support Cardiff City when Swansea is on their doorstep.[/quote]

I live in Port Talbot and support City as I was born in Cardiff and have only lived here 4 years. Many different reasons why people from other areas support City mate

As usual you avoid any questions asked. Tell me why other clubs, such as your beloved Swansea, can make a profit yet we need 20m extra? What cost base do we have that's so different? Also do you have any other interest as opposed to regurgitating this same old tripe under different aliases?

Hi again. Your dullness hold no bounds it seems. Have a look at any of my last 4 or 5 posts and you will see I've answered you question quite comprehensively in each.

Swansea can make a profit because they spend what they have, not what they don't. They pay their players what they can afford, not what they can't. Their transfer fees and wage structure match that of a club their size and position in the league. Their employees take modest wages from the club and don't take advantage of it as it is run by the fans.

Cardiff spend what they don't have, they pay more in wages alone than their total yearly income, they vastly overspend both on transfer fees and wages paid and are not proportionate to the size of club or league, the people employed by the club take massive chunks of money in wages, bonuses and in tans case... Interest. It continues to loan money even when in debt 8 times the value of the club.

This is all before the normal running costs of the club which at championship level seem to be about £1.2 million per month. This is the shortfall, this is the handicap, this is the 35% of next years income already earmarked elsewhere, this is why the £100m debt is spiralling out of control, and this is why CCfc is not a viable business promotion or not...... And this is why we win 4-0 and those that understand these things couldn't really give a monkeys.

Please say you have understood this time, at least primary school teachers get paid.

Ok let me try again with you and your 91m. Your shortfall of 20m includes our current wage bill. If it goes up to 40m as you suggest then part of it (let's say 20m to make it simple for you) is already being paid. So that's an increment of 20m for the wage bill, not an additional 40m, meaning your 91m is over inflated. Once you realise your limitations you'll be much more settled in life.

In your classic terms, apology accepted

Errr... No.

Only £3m of the £18m shortfall goes on wages. The rest is the running of the club.

If the wage bill goes up to £40 million for example. Then add that to the £10 million cost of promotion before we even kick a ball and we are at the magical £50 million income figure without spending a penny on players or the running cost of the club.

We know from this season and last that this shortfall after wages are paid is around £15 million, it will be even more in the premiership.

Ergo... We are facing a £20 million shortfall regardless. Now if you don't understand this time you really should enrol back in primary school...

Apology accepted.

Err, no.
Ok one last go as you clearly can't see past your ego and are more intent on trying to use your childish little put downs. A shortfall cannot be broken down into constituent parts. Costs less income is the shortfall, how can you say 3m is wages? So let's use numbers. Lets say income is 20m and costs are 20m plus wages 20m = 40m. Therefore the shortfall is 20m. Now, wages go up to 40m, but as they were already 20m then the increment is 20m, not 40m.

So I'm right, but cars on the table I honestly don't care but do like you extra long posts that I merely skim. The fact is you're trolling your same old scaremongering, as the facts are that past spending is no indication of the future. Also, the Malaysians set the budget based on what they want to spend. We're not the only club to benefit from such backers and if all you do is sit with your calculator panicking then crack on - ill be there supporting my club enjoying a greats season.

Why not just wait and come back if your doomsday prophecy comes true and they you can say "i told you so". Until then you're boring and can't even add up

As usual you avoid any questions asked. Tell me why other clubs, such as your beloved Swansea, can make a profit yet we need 20m extra? What cost base do we have that's so different? Also do you have any other interest as opposed to regurgitating this same old tripe under different aliases?

Hi again. Your dullness hold no bounds it seems. Have a look at any of my last 4 or 5 posts and you will see I've answered you question quite comprehensively in each.

Swansea can make a profit because they spend what they have, not what they don't. They pay their players what they can afford, not what they can't. Their transfer fees and wage structure match that of a club their size and position in the league. Their employees take modest wages from the club and don't take advantage of it as it is run by the fans.

Cardiff spend what they don't have, they pay more in wages alone than their total yearly income, they vastly overspend both on transfer fees and wages paid and are not proportionate to the size of club or league, the people employed by the club take massive chunks of money in wages, bonuses and in tans case... Interest. It continues to loan money even when in debt 8 times the value of the club.

This is all before the normal running costs of the club which at championship level seem to be about £1.2 million per month. This is the shortfall, this is the handicap, this is the 35% of next years income already earmarked elsewhere, this is why the £100m debt is spiralling out of control, and this is why CCfc is not a viable business promotion or not...... And this is why we win 4-0 and those that understand these things couldn't really give a monkeys.

Please say you have understood this time, at least primary school teachers get paid.

Ok let me try again with you and your 91m. Your shortfall of 20m includes our current wage bill. If it goes up to 40m as you suggest then part of it (let's say 20m to make it simple for you) is already being paid. So that's an increment of 20m for the wage bill, not an additional 40m, meaning your 91m is over inflated. Once you realise your limitations you'll be much more settled in life.

In your classic terms, apology accepted

Errr... No.

Only £3m of the £18m shortfall goes on wages. The rest is the running of the club.

If the wage bill goes up to £40 million for example. Then add that to the £10 million cost of promotion before we even kick a ball and we are at the magical £50 million income figure without spending a penny on players or the running cost of the club.

We know from this season and last that this shortfall after wages are paid is around £15 million, it will be even more in the premiership.

Ergo... We are facing a £20 million shortfall regardless. Now if you don't understand this time you really should enrol back in primary school...

Apology accepted.

Err, no.
Ok one last go as you clearly can't see past your ego and are more intent on trying to use your childish little put downs. A shortfall cannot be broken down into constituent parts. Costs less income is the shortfall, how can you say 3m is wages? So let's use numbers. Lets say income is 20m and costs are 20m plus wages 20m = 40m. Therefore the shortfall is 20m. Now, wages go up to 40m, but as they were already 20m then the increment is 20m, not 40m.

Err... No. Shorfall can be broken down and is broken down. These are priority debt and non priority. Priority debts are the tax man and players wages. These can be covered by the income of next season pretty much to the pound after we pay the other priority debts of players bonuses upon promotion. The extra tv money will be a small pot for players transfers, but still under the average spend of a promoted club, then anything over that will be the shortfall.

We have not taken into consideration the running cost of the club for a premiership season which we know to be around £20 million pounds. So my man, maybe eleventh time lucky and you will understand this time.... But this £20 million will be our shortfall. Which tan will have to cover, which then goes on top of the outstanding debt.... And repeat until relegation or champions league, hence why it is not a viable route.

So I'm right, but cars on the table I honestly don't care but do like you extra long posts that I merely skim. The fact is you're trolling your same old scaremongering, as the facts are that past spending is no indication of the future. Also, the Malaysians set the budget based on what they want to spend. We're not the only club to benefit from such backers and if all you do is sit with your calculator panicking then crack on - ill be there supporting my club enjoying a greats season.

You are for from correct and the fact you admit to not reading my posts properly probably goes some way to understanding your stupidity

Why not just wait and come back if your doomsday prophecy comes true and they you can say "i told you so". Until then you're boring and can't even add up

it is not a doomsday prophecy it is a statement of facts on historical and current figures. Your just too thick to understand it, painfully so.

As usual you avoid any questions asked. Tell me why other clubs, such as your beloved Swansea, can make a profit yet we need 20m extra? What cost base do we have that's so different? Also do you have any other interest as opposed to regurgitating this same old tripe under different aliases?

Hi again. Your dullness hold no bounds it seems. Have a look at any of my last 4 or 5 posts and you will see I've answered you question quite comprehensively in each.

Swansea can make a profit because they spend what they have, not what they don't. They pay their players what they can afford, not what they can't. Their transfer fees and wage structure match that of a club their size and position in the league. Their employees take modest wages from the club and don't take advantage of it as it is run by the fans.

Cardiff spend what they don't have, they pay more in wages alone than their total yearly income, they vastly overspend both on transfer fees and wages paid and are not proportionate to the size of club or league, the people employed by the club take massive chunks of money in wages, bonuses and in tans case... Interest. It continues to loan money even when in debt 8 times the value of the club.

This is all before the normal running costs of the club which at championship level seem to be about £1.2 million per month. This is the shortfall, this is the handicap, this is the 35% of next years income already earmarked elsewhere, this is why the £100m debt is spiralling out of control, and this is why CCfc is not a viable business promotion or not...... And this is why we win 4-0 and those that understand these things couldn't really give a monkeys.

Please say you have understood this time, at least primary school teachers get paid.

Ok let me try again with you and your 91m. Your shortfall of 20m includes our current wage bill. If it goes up to 40m as you suggest then part of it (let's say 20m to make it simple for you) is already being paid. So that's an increment of 20m for the wage bill, not an additional 40m, meaning your 91m is over inflated. Once you realise your limitations you'll be much more settled in life.

In your classic terms, apology accepted

Errr... No.

Only £3m of the £18m shortfall goes on wages. The rest is the running of the club.

If the wage bill goes up to £40 million for example. Then add that to the £10 million cost of promotion before we even kick a ball and we are at the magical £50 million income figure without spending a penny on players or the running cost of the club.

We know from this season and last that this shortfall after wages are paid is around £15 million, it will be even more in the premiership.

Ergo... We are facing a £20 million shortfall regardless. Now if you don't understand this time you really should enrol back in primary school...

Apology accepted.

Err, no.
Ok one last go as you clearly can't see past your ego and are more intent on trying to use your childish little put downs. A shortfall cannot be broken down into constituent parts. Costs less income is the shortfall, how can you say 3m is wages? So let's use numbers. Lets say income is 20m and costs are 20m plus wages 20m = 40m. Therefore the shortfall is 20m. Now, wages go up to 40m, but as they were already 20m then the increment is 20m, not 40m.

Err... No. Shorfall can be broken down and is broken down. These are priority debt and non priority. Priority debts are the tax man and players wages. These can be covered by the income of next season pretty much to the pound after we pay the other priority debts of players bonuses upon promotion. The extra tv money will be a small pot for players transfers, but still under the average spend of a promoted club, then anything over that will be the shortfall.

We have not taken into consideration the running cost of the club for a premiership season which we know to be around £20 million pounds. So my man, maybe eleventh time lucky and you will understand this time.... But this £20 million will be our shortfall. Which tan will have to cover, which then goes on top of the outstanding debt.... And repeat until relegation or champions league, hence why it is not a viable route.

So I'm right, but cars on the table I honestly don't care but do like you extra long posts that I merely skim. The fact is you're trolling your same old scaremongering, as the facts are that past spending is no indication of the future. Also, the Malaysians set the budget based on what they want to spend. We're not the only club to benefit from such backers and if all you do is sit with your calculator panicking then crack on - ill be there supporting my club enjoying a greats season.

You are for from correct and the fact you admit to not reading my posts properly probably goes some way to understanding your stupidity

Why not just wait and come back if your doomsday prophecy comes true and they you can say "i told you so". Until then you're boring and can't even add up

it is not a doomsday prophecy it is a statement of facts on historical and current figures. Your just too thick to understand it, painfully so.

Ooh somebody's rattled. Go read your original 91m post and come back and apologise. I notice you're now trying to change it around and add in other costs to get to your magic number. Fact is you simply added 40m wages to the current wage bill. Another fundamental flaw in your nonsense is that the Malaysians are pulling the strings and if they are happy with our budget then so be it. Do Chelsea or man city fans panic like you? And your historical figures are still no indicator of the future so who do I put my faith in? A jack in disguise or the billionaires?

And so the shortfall. You're mixing up operating expenditure with debts, P&L vs balance sheet. Yes debts have a ranking, but a shortfall is costs less income. You don't hold off paying your electricity bill because you owe someone a secured debt. All costs in the P&L contribute to the shortfall. Likewise if you pay the taxman yet fail to pay suppliers, they can equally apply to the courts. Ranking operating costs is rubbish - your effectively saying we wait all year to pay players and tax and then pay all our other bills . I'm not disputing there may be a shortfall, but your method of adding 40m to the wage bill was nonsense. Can you big enough to admit it?

Like I said come back when your doomsday prophecy comes true. Can't you see it's a win-win? If you're right you get the thrill you so desperately seek in life. If you're wrong we never have to put up with your tedious posts again

Ooh somebody's rattled. Go read your original 91m post and come back and apologise. I notice you're now trying to change it around and add in other costs to get to your magic number. Fact is you simply added 40m wages to the current wage bill. Another fundamental flaw in your nonsense is that the Malaysians are pulling the strings and if they are happy with our budget then so be it. Do Chelsea or man city fans panic like you? And your historical figures are still no indicator of the future so who do I put my faith in? A jack in disguise or the billionaires?

Why rattled? Because I answered you? I didn't add the 40m to the 20m... You did. I was quite aware of the creditors that require payment urgently and the ones that don't. We can afford to pay the ones that do and need to borrow to pay the ones that don't and this is to the tune of £20m plus whatever extra players we want. This isn't difficult to understand. Neither however am I using historical figures to indicate the future. I'm using current figures that are known to the world and adapting them to the costs we will incur in the premiership should we get there, again these figures are known to the world and again aren't difficult to work out. It's there in black and white. Oh and he is not a billionaire, far from it. Just saying.

And so the shortfall. You're mixing up operating expenditure with debts, P&L vs balance sheet. Yes debts have a ranking, but a shortfall is costs less income. You don't hold off paying your electricity bill because you owe someone a secured debt. All costs in the P&L contribute to the shortfall. Likewise if you pay the taxman yet fail to pay suppliers, they can equally apply to the courts. Ranking operating costs is rubbish - your effectively saying we wait all year to pay players and tax and then pay all our other bills . I'm not disputing there may be a shortfall, but your method of adding 40m to the wage bill was nonsense. Can you big enough to admit it?

I didn't add 40m to the wage bill at any point, you did. I stated our wage bill will go to 40m, after we pay the cost of promotion our priority debts will be £50m earmarked for that year. That leaves the extra sky money that clubs will earn as part of the new del next season for players, but still not enough to spend what most clubs do when they are promoted and then the running cost of the club which is £20 million. This figure is unaccounted for and will be the shortfall. We will have to loan this off tan which then adds to the clubs debt. I have no reason why you are tying the debt and the p&l together it makes no sense.

Like I said come back when your doomsday prophecy comes true. Can't you see it's a win-win? If you're right you get the thrill you so desperately seek in life. If you're wrong we never have to put up with your tedious posts again

again it's not a doomsday prophecy it's me telling you what the income of the club will be next year and making the pretty clear observation that we will be spending more than that. When you owe more than your total income you either have to borrow it or face a court case. I assume we will borrow it from tan which means e clubs debt rises again and again and again. It really isn't hard to understand.

Ooh somebody's rattled. Go read your original 91m post and come back and apologise. I notice you're now trying to change it around and add in other costs to get to your magic number. Fact is you simply added 40m wages to the current wage bill. Another fundamental flaw in your nonsense is that the Malaysians are pulling the strings and if they are happy with our budget then so be it. Do Chelsea or man city fans panic like you? And your historical figures are still no indicator of the future so who do I put my faith in? A jack in disguise or the billionaires?

Why rattled? Because I answered you? I didn't add the 40m to the 20m... You did. I was quite aware of the creditors that require payment urgently and the ones that don't. We can afford to pay the ones that do and need to borrow to pay the ones that don't and this is to the tune of £20m plus whatever extra players we want. This isn't difficult to understand. Neither however am I using historical figures to indicate the future. I'm using current figures that are known to the world and adapting them to the costs we will incur in the premiership should we get there, again these figures are known to the world and again aren't difficult to work out. It's there in black and white. Oh and he is not a billionaire, far from it. Just saying.

And so the shortfall. You're mixing up operating expenditure with debts, P&L vs balance sheet. Yes debts have a ranking, but a shortfall is costs less income. You don't hold off paying your electricity bill because you owe someone a secured debt. All costs in the P&L contribute to the shortfall. Likewise if you pay the taxman yet fail to pay suppliers, they can equally apply to the courts. Ranking operating costs is rubbish - your effectively saying we wait all year to pay players and tax and then pay all our other bills . I'm not disputing there may be a shortfall, but your method of adding 40m to the wage bill was nonsense. Can you big enough to admit it?

I didn't add 40m to the wage bill at any point, you did. I stated our wage bill will go to 40m, after we pay the cost of promotion our priority debts will be £50m earmarked for that year. That leaves the extra sky money that clubs will earn as part of the new del next season for players, but still not enough to spend what most clubs do when they are promoted and then the running cost of the club which is £20 million. This figure is unaccounted for and will be the shortfall. We will have to loan this off tan which then adds to the clubs debt. I have no reason why you are tying the debt and the p&l together it makes no sense.

Like I said come back when your doomsday prophecy comes true. Can't you see it's a win-win? If you're right you get the thrill you so desperately seek in life. If you're wrong we never have to put up with your tedious posts again

again it's not a doomsday prophecy it's me telling you what the income of the club will be next year and making the pretty clear observation that we will be spending more than that. When you owe more than your total income you either have to borrow it or face a court case. I assume we will borrow it from tan which means e clubs debt rises again and again and again. It really isn't hard to understand.

You don't prioritise operating costs in the way you suggest. A shortfall is a total figure, not the bit left after wages and tax as you imply. Like I said, do we not pay our bills until the end of the year once all wages and tax have been paid? No! So you claiming that operating costs are ranked is nonsense and you seem to be confusing it with debt ranking - hence your confusion between the P&L and balance sheet. Accept your limitations with accountancy so won't continue to try and educate pork.

Let's assume we hit the prem league and join you jacks. You've stated our wage bill will be 40m plus transfers etc etc, so how does our whole cost base differ from other prem league clubs. Or is it only Cardiif that need 20m a year extra? If so what's behind it? Think carefully now.

Any reason?

Without getting into a big argument mate it just felt totally bizzare to me.

I cant get my head around the red shirts for starters, and then add to that the atmosphere for a team top
of the league was awful.

We were 4-0 up and Ali said the fourth official has indicated 2 minutes of added time, I looked around and the place was half empty, and people were flooding for the exits.

The kid in front of me had a Barcelona top on and most of the people around me spent most of the game on their phones telling each other the scores from the other games.

It honestly felt like I was at the Cinema at times.

The best thing about going there today was bottles of Heineken for a £1. I should be buzzing, top of the League, 4-0 home win but its not there.

I appreciate other people are getting on with it but its not for me, I know Im not alone.

I feel your pain Brother

You don't prioritise operating costs in the way you suggest. A shortfall is a total figure, not the bit left after wages and tax as you imply. Like I said, do we not pay our bills until the end of the year once all wages and tax have been paid? No! So you claiming that operating costs are ranked is nonsense and you seem to be confusing it with debt ranking - hence your confusion between the P&L and balance sheet. Accept your limitations with accountancy so won't continue to try and educate pork.

Even if you did believe that, you would see there will be a £20 m descrepancy along the way. Whether we have no borrow £1.7 a month to pay the shortfall or the whole £20 million at the end of the season makes no difference what so ever. At the moment you see, to a Celt there will be a shortfall in this region and are arguing the toss over who gets the money we earn and the money we have to borrow. In other words your talking twaddle.

Let's assume we hit the prem league and join you jacks. You've stated our wage bill will be 40m plus transfers etc etc, so how does our whole cost base differ from other prem league clubs. Or is it only Cardiif that need 20m a year extra? If so what's behind it? Think carefully now.

this has been answered countless times. We need £1.2 m investment every month to survive. Actually that was before all the new spending, so why don't Blackpool need this investment?

You don't prioritise operating costs in the way you suggest. A shortfall is a total figure, not the bit left after wages and tax as you imply. Like I said, do we not pay our bills until the end of the year once all wages and tax have been paid? No! So you claiming that operating costs are ranked is nonsense and you seem to be confusing it with debt ranking - hence your confusion between the P&L and balance sheet. Accept your limitations with accountancy so won't continue to try and educate pork.

Even if you did believe that, you would see there will be a £20 m descrepancy along the way. Whether we have no borrow £1.7 a month to pay the shortfall or the whole £20 million at the end of the season makes no difference what so ever. At the moment you see, to a Celt there will be a shortfall in this region and are arguing the toss over who gets the money we earn and the money we have to borrow. In other words your talking twaddle.

Let's assume we hit the prem league and join you jacks. You've stated our wage bill will be 40m plus transfers etc etc, so how does our whole cost base differ from other prem league clubs. Or is it only Cardiif that need 20m a year extra? If so what's behind it? Think carefully now.

this has been answered countless times. We need £1.2 m investment every month to survive. Actually that was before all the new spending, so why don't Blackpool need this investment?

That's now, I asked why we will be so different to other clubs in the prem, bearing in mind you've already given us the average 40m wage bill. So what else?

And so now I've proved you wrong about the ranking of operating cost nonsense we are suddenly arguing the toss and I'm talking twaddle? You couldn't make it up

You don't prioritise operating costs in the way you suggest. A shortfall is a total figure, not the bit left after wages and tax as you imply. Like I said, do we not pay our bills until the end of the year once all wages and tax have been paid? No! So you claiming that operating costs are ranked is nonsense and you seem to be confusing it with debt ranking - hence your confusion between the P&L and balance sheet. Accept your limitations with accountancy so won't continue to try and educate pork.

Even if you did believe that, you would see there will be a £20 m descrepancy along the way. Whether we have no borrow £1.7 a month to pay the shortfall or the whole £20 million at the end of the season makes no difference what so ever. At the moment you see, to a Celt there will be a shortfall in this region and are arguing the toss over who gets the money we earn and the money we have to borrow. In other words your talking twaddle.

Let's assume we hit the prem league and join you jacks. You've stated our wage bill will be 40m plus transfers etc etc, so how does our whole cost base differ from other prem league clubs. Or is it only Cardiif that need 20m a year extra? If so what's behind it? Think carefully now.

this has been answered countless times. We need £1.2 m investment every month to survive. Actually that was before all the new spending, so why don't Blackpool need this investment?

That's now, I asked why we will be so different to other clubs in the prem, bearing in mind you've already given us the average 40m wage bill. So what else?

And so now I've proved you wrong about the ranking of operating cost nonsense we are suddenly arguing the toss and I'm talking twaddle? You couldn't make it up

You haven't proven me wrong at all, for the purpose of the debate I allowed you to continue on the path to how you thought was the way it was done to show you that either way the point remains that we make a £20m loss.

When in reality if you want to go off topic and discuss business then I will tell you how spectacularly wrong you are. The majority of the operating costs of a football club are done on an annual contractors basis, hence why you get police wanting their money at the end of a season and disputes over payments. Likewise this often happens on other non priority payees like the Scottish club we recently had a dealing with. It is better to pay late than on time Ann many instances as you get to keep the money earning interest for as long as possible. But this is another debate all together as we have established that either way, we will lose £20m at least.

Glad you now understand.

You don't prioritise operating costs in the way you suggest. A shortfall is a total figure, not the bit left after wages and tax as you imply. Like I said, do we not pay our bills until the end of the year once all wages and tax have been paid? No! So you claiming that operating costs are ranked is nonsense and you seem to be confusing it with debt ranking - hence your confusion between the P&L and balance sheet. Accept your limitations with accountancy so won't continue to try and educate pork.

Even if you did believe that, you would see there will be a £20 m descrepancy along the way. Whether we have no borrow £1.7 a month to pay the shortfall or the whole £20 million at the end of the season makes no difference what so ever. At the moment you see, to a Celt there will be a shortfall in this region and are arguing the toss over who gets the money we earn and the money we have to borrow. In other words your talking twaddle.

Let's assume we hit the prem league and join you jacks. You've stated our wage bill will be 40m plus transfers etc etc, so how does our whole cost base differ from other prem league clubs. Or is it only Cardiif that need 20m a year extra? If so what's behind it? Think carefully now.



this has been answered countless times. We need £1.2 m investment every month to survive. Actually that was before all the new spending, so why don't Blackpool need this investment?

That's now, I asked why we will be so different to other clubs in the prem, bearing in mind you've already given us the average 40m wage bill. So what else?

And so now I've proved you wrong about the ranking of operating cost nonsense we are suddenly arguing the toss and I'm talking twaddle? You couldn't make it up

You haven't proven me wrong at all, for the purpose of the debate I allowed you to continue on the path to how you thought was the way it was done to show you that either way the point remains that we make a £20m loss.

When in reality if you want to go off topic and discuss business then I will tell you how spectacularly wrong you are. The majority of the operating costs of a football club are done on an annual contractors basis, hence why you get police wanting their money at the end of a season and disputes over payments. Likewise this often happens on other non priority payees like the Scottish club we recently had a dealing with. It is better to pay late than on time Ann many instances as you get to keep the money earning interest for as long as possible. But this is another debate all together as we have established that either way, we will lose £20m at least.

Glad you now understand.

Oh I see. And the utility companies will also wait for their money will they? Utter rubbish. Why you persist in trying to allocate a shortfall to specific cost lines is laughable.

Now answer the question. If we are prem league and have a 40m wage bill plus other costs as you suggest, why will be so different from other prem league clubs? What costs will we have so massively different to other clubs?

Utilities?

Yeah a swelec bill for £20 mill you really are clueless.

So you now accept we will lose this money right?

Utilities?

Yeah a swelec bill for £20 mill you really are clueless.

So you now accept we will lose this money right?

Never said utilities would account for 20m, merely an example of how you can't hold off paying suppliers until you've covered all your wage bill. Fool.

Answer the question...........

Utilities?

Yeah a swelec bill for £20 mill you really are clueless.

So you now accept we will lose this money right?

Never said utilities would account for 20m, merely an example of how you can't hold off paying suppliers until you've covered all your wage bill. Fool.

Answer the question...........

So you'd also realise that the £20 million shortfall probably doesn't relate itself to the electricity bill and more the annual contracts the club has, which I pointed out 2 posts ago of course. But continue to take us of on tangents to avoid admitting what you have already aknowledged.... We will lose an awful lot of money whether promoted or not.

As for how swans make a profit, that's something you will have to ask the chairman, it's not of my concern.