Huw Jenkins... you might hate him?

I really can't understand what's being argued. Bellamy is on £1m promotion bonus alone for gods sake.

Swansea made a 600k profit the previous year and £8.2 loss the year everything was triggered on promotion. I think the Sinclair from Chelsea deal was triggered too wasn't it? Think that was an extra million alone.

What's argued is you made a sweeping statement which is clearly rubbish and have now tried to back it up by an article about Blackpool which we were all aware of and now a supposition about 1 player.

Then also you throw in a stupid statement about transfer fees, like you are trying to teach us all something, but you don't understand yourself.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Every team that gets promoted will have to pay these fees, they will all be around the £10m mark. Ours will be far higher. Blackpool and Swansea both had to pay circa £8m and they were the lowest spenders and payers to be promoted in recent history.

If anyone is failing to understand things then its you. This couldn't be simpler.

Ok, first example - Norwich. £0.5m profit in their promotion season.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986

You don't know what I'm talking about because you are onto a subject which you clearly don't understand.

What is that proving exactly?

We are discussing promotion bonuses and transfer fee triggers are we not?

Rather than pay £1 for the accounts, why not pay 5p in the £1... Used to that at Swansea aren't you?!

You do realise Sam is being offered £10m of the £32m he's owed don't you?

For goodness sake - it was a joke, which NJ took in the way that was intended.

f**k off Roath Magic.

Rather than pay £1 for the accounts, why not pay 5p in the £1... Used to that at Swansea aren't you?!

You do realise Sam is being offered £10m of the £32m he's owed don't you?

For goodness sake - it was a joke, which NJ took in the way that was intended.

f**k off Roath Magic.

Mine too.

Push the button

Push the button

"I can't debate, get rid" boo hoo

I really can't understand what's being argued. Bellamy is on £1m promotion bonus alone for gods sake.

Swansea made a 600k profit the previous year and £8.2 loss the year everything was triggered on promotion. I think the Sinclair from Chelsea deal was triggered too wasn't it? Think that was an extra million alone.

What's argued is you made a sweeping statement which is clearly rubbish and have now tried to back it up by an article about Blackpool which we were all aware of and now a supposition about 1 player.

Then also you throw in a stupid statement about transfer fees, like you are trying to teach us all something, but you don't understand yourself.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Every team that gets promoted will have to pay these fees, they will all be around the £10m mark. Ours will be far higher. Blackpool and Swansea both had to pay circa £8m and they were the lowest spenders and payers to be promoted in recent history.

If anyone is failing to understand things then its you. This couldn't be simpler.

Ok, first example - Norwich. £0.5m profit in their promotion season.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986

You don't know what I'm talking about because you are onto a subject which you clearly don't understand.

£4m loss actually despite a turnover of £11m higher than us.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1091088

Push the button

"I can't debate, get rid" boo hoo

How do you know what that even means, thought you were new?

You're tripping yourself up, you weird and odious little creep.

Last edited by Barry Chuckle on Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I really can't understand what's being argued. Bellamy is on £1m promotion bonus alone for gods sake.

Swansea made a 600k profit the previous year and £8.2 loss the year everything was triggered on promotion. I think the Sinclair from Chelsea deal was triggered too wasn't it? Think that was an extra million alone.

What's argued is you made a sweeping statement which is clearly rubbish and have now tried to back it up by an article about Blackpool which we were all aware of and now a supposition about 1 player.

Then also you throw in a stupid statement about transfer fees, like you are trying to teach us all something, but you don't understand yourself.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Every team that gets promoted will have to pay these fees, they will all be around the £10m mark. Ours will be far higher. Blackpool and Swansea both had to pay circa £8m and they were the lowest spenders and payers to be promoted in recent history.

If anyone is failing to understand things then its you. This couldn't be simpler.

Ok, first example - Norwich. £0.5m profit in their promotion season.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986

You don't know what I'm talking about because you are onto a subject which you clearly don't understand.

£4m loss actually despite a turnover of £11m higher than us.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1091088

I have no idea why he is banging on about profits for, and he can't even get that right.

Push the button

"I can't debate, get rid" boo hoo

How do you know what that even means, thought you were new?

You're tripping yourself up, you weird and odious little creep.

You only discovered this board 4 months ago then? 1700 posts? Really?

NJ is correct, I'm not sure what you are arguing about. Every club that goes up will have to pay £10 million + after the final whistle in wembley (or final game of season if promoted automatically). These are due to contractual sums being triggered as a result of the promotion. They come in two forms:-

1) payments to players and staff in terms of a promotion bonus, written into every players contract in the league.
2) payments to clubs. Many clubs sell players to good championship clubs with a promotion fee written into it.

In the accounts following promotion these payments are included but are out up against the income of a championship club (around £12-£15m) so as a result will always show a net loss. However these in reality are offset by the the money brought in as a result of promotion, especially for a club operating at break even or at a profit as Swansea showed with a £14m profit after signing £13m worth of players and only recieving £5m for their manager and back room staff.

In the next set of accounts will show the money received for Joe Allen and Scott Sinclair which is £22m so should show another staggering profit.

Every club £10m what a load of bollox..... It will vary considerably from club to club and player to player.

NJ has the accounts, yet won't state the precise figures from them. I wonder why ?? He really is being a bit of a knob with his 'I've got a secret, which you can get off Companies House' - as if anyone could arsed.

This has all been gone over before, time and time again.

From your statement you also seem not to understand how football clubs deal with transfer fees in the accounts, or anything about amortisation or depreciation. Transfer fees paid out will be written off over the length of the players contracts, so only about £3-£4m of the transfer fees would have gone to your P & L

Why do so many half-wits quote financial stuff when they haven't got a clue how to read accounts.

Oh ffs I'm really being a knob by saying that all the info is there for anyone to access for a £1. It takes far less effort than any of the posts in this thread.

If anyone was that interested, just do it.

Of course you are , and its even worse if you can't see it. it would be no effort for you to copy and paste the important lines, just like I've done for you on articles in the past. To get it someone would have to register, put their credit card details in, wiat for it to download, go back to the sight, trawl through to find the relevant figures etc.. even I can't be arsed, its like work.

It's a PDF file. Try copying and pasting one onto here.

As I said, if the guy querying the figures was THAT interested, he'd look it up for himself. If that makes me a knob in your eyes, so be it.

Have you tried it yet?

Copy text using Nuance reader 'select text', to Word and voila...

Extract from an order sent to me by pdf today...

This Line For Delivery by

Copy text using Nuance reader 'select text', to Word and voila...

Extract from an order sent to me by pdf today...

This Line For Delivery by

Well I haven't got "Nuance reader". And downloading it, installing it and copying text etc seems like far more hard work than just getting the accounts for yourself.

If you or the other poster are that interested, you know what to do. You can even pay by paypal as long as you've got that spare £1.

I really can't understand what's being argued. Bellamy is on £1m promotion bonus alone for gods sake.

Swansea made a 600k profit the previous year and £8.2 loss the year everything was triggered on promotion. I think the Sinclair from Chelsea deal was triggered too wasn't it? Think that was an extra million alone.

What's argued is you made a sweeping statement which is clearly rubbish and have now tried to back it up by an article about Blackpool which we were all aware of and now a supposition about 1 player.

Then also you throw in a stupid statement about transfer fees, like you are trying to teach us all something, but you don't understand yourself.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Every team that gets promoted will have to pay these fees, they will all be around the £10m mark. Ours will be far higher. Blackpool and Swansea both had to pay circa £8m and they were the lowest spenders and payers to be promoted in recent history.

If anyone is failing to understand things then its you. This couldn't be simpler.

Ok, first example - Norwich. £0.5m profit in their promotion season.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986

You don't know what I'm talking about because you are onto a subject which you clearly don't understand.

£4m loss actually despite a turnover of £11m higher than us.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1091088

I have no idea why he is banging on about profits for, and he can't even get that right.

'The club made a normalised operating profit of £0.5m (a loss of £1.7m in 2010 and a loss of £4.3m in 2009).'

Turnover is turnover.

'Normalised' means 'excluding exceptional costs' -adjusted probably for their stadium upgrade expenditure etc... and is the more comparable figure.

Copy text using Nuance reader 'select text', to Word and voila...

Extract from an order sent to me by pdf today...

This Line For Delivery by

Well I haven't got "Nuance reader". And downloading it, installing it and copying text etc seems like far more hard work than just getting the accounts for yourself.

If you or the other poster are that interested, you know what to do. You can even pay by paypal as long as you've got that spare £1.

Its worth getting, its a very useful tool and is easier and quicker than downloading accounts

FFS all that free advice and you are still whinging.

So back to the topic....

The loss was mainly due to the cost of promotion. A cost that every promoted club has to bear.

So back to the topic....

The loss was mainly due to the cost of promotion. A cost that every promoted club has to bear.

Who do you support then? Swansea or Cardiff?

'The club made a normalised operating profit of £0.5m (a loss of £1.7m in 2010 and a loss of £4.3m in 2009).'

Turnover is turnover.

'Normalised' means 'excluding exceptional costs' -adjusted probably for their stadium upgrade expenditure etc... and is the more comparable figure.

Did you not read the lines that said

The figures up to the year ending May 31 2011 showed a £4m loss.

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

And those bonuses were from a team new to the Championship and not one who had finished in the top 8 for the previous two seasons.

I really do fail to see the point you are trying to make here.

So back to the topic....

The loss was mainly due to the cost of promotion. A cost that every promoted club has to bear.

Who do you support then? Swansea or Cardiff?

Stop trolling, stick to the topic. You are moaning in the other thread that people shouldn't ask or want to know personal details.

hardly a personal detail, asking what team you support..

:lol: hardly a personal detail, asking what team you support..

I have no idea why it would concern you. Stop trolling.

:lol: hardly a personal detail, asking what team you support..

I have no idea why it would concern you. Stop trolling.

Well, this is a football forum. Would help.

:lol: hardly a personal detail, asking what team you support..

I have no idea why it would concern you. Stop trolling.

Well, this is a football forum. Would help.

Not a thread regarding who we all support is it

If your interested in personal details then pm me, stop trying to ruin threads. Ill await your pm.

I really can't understand what's being argued. Bellamy is on £1m promotion bonus alone for gods sake.

Swansea made a 600k profit the previous year and £8.2 loss the year everything was triggered on promotion. I think the Sinclair from Chelsea deal was triggered too wasn't it? Think that was an extra million alone.

What's argued is you made a sweeping statement which is clearly rubbish and have now tried to back it up by an article about Blackpool which we were all aware of and now a supposition about 1 player.

Then also you throw in a stupid statement about transfer fees, like you are trying to teach us all something, but you don't understand yourself.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Every team that gets promoted will have to pay these fees, they will all be around the £10m mark. Ours will be far higher. Blackpool and Swansea both had to pay circa £8m and they were the lowest spenders and payers to be promoted in recent history.

If anyone is failing to understand things then its you. This couldn't be simpler.

Ok, first example - Norwich. £0.5m profit in their promotion season.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986

You don't know what I'm talking about because you are onto a subject which you clearly don't understand.

What is that proving exactly?

We are discussing promotion bonuses and transfer fee triggers are we not?

You seriously don't understand that ??

Norwich went up, AND made a profit. Do you think they were expecting a £10m profit if they hadn't ? Their total 'football expenditure' was £14m, with total wage bill of £16m do you really think £10m was bonuses ?

Puts a bit of a hole in your 'every club will pay £10m promotion bonus theyear they go up'.

If you want to see the other side -have a look at QPR

:lol: hardly a personal detail, asking what team you support..

I have no idea why it would concern you. Stop trolling.

Well, this is a football forum. Would help.

Not a thread regarding who we all support is it

If your interested in personal details then pm me, stop trying to ruin threads. Ill await your pm.

No thanks. Id rather poke pins in my eyes.

You seriously don't understand that ??

Norwich went up, AND made a profit. Do you think they were expecting a £10m profit if they hadn't ? Their total 'football expenditure' was £14m, with total wage bill of £16m do you really think £10m was bonuses ?

Puts a bit of a hole in your 'every club will pay £10m promotion bonus theyear they go up'.

If you want to see the other side -have a look at QPR

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

£4.3m in player and staff bonuses. This doesn't include fees owed to clubs due to transfer clauses.

I'd say it will be pretty damn close

You seriously don't understand that ??

Norwich went up, AND made a profit. Do you think they were expecting a £10m profit if they hadn't ? Their total 'football expenditure' was £14m, with total wage bill of £16m do you really think £10m was bonuses ?

Puts a bit of a hole in your 'every club will pay £10m promotion bonus theyear they go up'.

If you want to see the other side -have a look at QPR

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

£4.3m in player and staff bonuses. This doesn't include fees owed to clubs due to transfer clauses.

I'd say it will be pretty damn close

Tick-tock.

'The club made a normalised operating profit of £0.5m (a loss of £1.7m in 2010 and a loss of £4.3m in 2009).'

Turnover is turnover.

'Normalised' means 'excluding exceptional costs' -adjusted probably for their stadium upgrade expenditure etc... and is the more comparable figure.

Did you not read the lines that said

The figures up to the year ending May 31 2011 showed a £4m loss.

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

And those bonuses were from a team new to the Championship and not one who had finished in the top 8 for the previous two seasons.

I really do fail to see the point you are trying to make here.

I'd already moved on to this link

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986


The accounts were adjusted to show a £0.5m loss


That £4m bonus just shows what rubbish your mate was spouting. It makes no odds whether they had just come up or not.
He said everyone pays £10m - I proved that's not true.

Of course you would avoid seeing that.

You seriously don't understand that ??

Norwich went up, AND made a profit. Do you think they were expecting a £10m profit if they hadn't ? Their total 'football expenditure' was £14m, with total wage bill of £16m do you really think £10m was bonuses ?

Puts a bit of a hole in your 'every club will pay £10m promotion bonus theyear they go up'.

If you want to see the other side -have a look at QPR

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

£4.3m in player and staff bonuses. This doesn't include fees owed to clubs due to transfer clauses.

I'd say it will be pretty damn close

My arse. Like who ??

Look at the rest of the lines of their accounts - where the hell could they have hidden another £6m.

'The club made a normalised operating profit of £0.5m (a loss of £1.7m in 2010 and a loss of £4.3m in 2009).'

Turnover is turnover.

'Normalised' means 'excluding exceptional costs' -adjusted probably for their stadium upgrade expenditure etc... and is the more comparable figure.

Did you not read the lines that said

The figures up to the year ending May 31 2011 showed a £4m loss.

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

And those bonuses were from a team new to the Championship and not one who had finished in the top 8 for the previous two seasons.

I really do fail to see the point you are trying to make here.

I'd already moved on to this link

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986


The accounts were adjusted to show a £0.5m loss


That £4m bonus just shows what rubbish your mate was spouting. It makes no odds whether they had just come up or not.
He said everyone pays £10m - I proved that's not true.

Of course you would avoid seeing that.

As it seems you are unable to see that "normalised profit" excludes the "exceptional costs" of the promotion bonuses to players of £4.5m as stated in my link. Try clicking on the table underneath the graph on your link.

Of course it makes a difference if you have just come up or not. Many Norwich players would have still been on the same contract as they were in League one. What sort of promotion to the Premier League clause do you think you would have had in that ffs?

And that figure does not include transfer clauses such as the one we had to pay for Chelsea for Sinclair.

'The club made a normalised operating profit of £0.5m (a loss of £1.7m in 2010 and a loss of £4.3m in 2009).'

Turnover is turnover.

'Normalised' means 'excluding exceptional costs' -adjusted probably for their stadium upgrade expenditure etc... and is the more comparable figure.

Did you not read the lines that said

The figures up to the year ending May 31 2011 showed a £4m loss.

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

And those bonuses were from a team new to the Championship and not one who had finished in the top 8 for the previous two seasons.

I really do fail to see the point you are trying to make here.

I'd already moved on to this link

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986


The accounts were adjusted to show a £0.5m loss


That £4m bonus just shows what rubbish your mate was spouting. It makes no odds whether they had just come up or not.
He said everyone pays £10m - I proved that's not true.

Of course you would avoid seeing that.

As it seems you are unable to see that "normalised profit" excludes the "exceptional costs" of the promotion bonuses to players of £4.5m as stated in my link. Try clicking on the table underneath the graph on your link.

Of course it makes a difference if you have just come up or not. Many Norwich players would have still been on the same contract as they were in League one. What sort of promotion to the Premier League clause do you think you would have had in that ffs?

And that figure does not include transfer clauses such as the one we had to pay for Chelsea for Sinclair.

Quote from the accounts analysis...
'The loss is almost entirely down to the club having to pay out more than £5m in bonuses to players and staff as a result of this year’s promotion to the Premier League - plus £1.3m in “incremental” payments to clubs from which the Canaries bought players, and which had clauses that demanded more money if promotion followed.'

There you go... total cost £6.3m.

Thats nowhere near £10m and that was monkey's figure.

Try to spin it how you want -he's wrong.


By the way, I saw the table - where does it state the exceptional costs were promotion bonuses -there was a hell of a lot else going on there. Not saying they weren't but there would have been adjustments up and down for many of the items listed in the article.

Were they treated as 'exceptionals' in Swansea's accounts ?

'The club made a normalised operating profit of £0.5m (a loss of £1.7m in 2010 and a loss of £4.3m in 2009).'

Turnover is turnover.

'Normalised' means 'excluding exceptional costs' -adjusted probably for their stadium upgrade expenditure etc... and is the more comparable figure.

Did you not read the lines that said

The figures up to the year ending May 31 2011 showed a £4m loss.

But that was down to the welcome situation of the club having to pay out more than £4.3m in player and staff bonuses when promotion to the Premier League was achieved.

And those bonuses were from a team new to the Championship and not one who had finished in the top 8 for the previous two seasons.

I really do fail to see the point you are trying to make here.

I'd already moved on to this link

http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-ci ... _1_1090986


The accounts were adjusted to show a £0.5m loss


That £4m bonus just shows what rubbish your mate was spouting. It makes no odds whether they had just come up or not.
He said everyone pays £10m - I proved that's not true.

Of course you would avoid seeing that.

As it seems you are unable to see that "normalised profit" excludes the "exceptional costs" of the promotion bonuses to players of £4.5m as stated in my link. Try clicking on the table underneath the graph on your link.

Of course it makes a difference if you have just come up or not. Many Norwich players would have still been on the same contract as they were in League one. What sort of promotion to the Premier League clause do you think you would have had in that ffs?

And that figure does not include transfer clauses such as the one we had to pay for Chelsea for Sinclair.

Quote from the accounts analysis...
'The loss is almost entirely down to the club having to pay out more than £5m in bonuses to players and staff as a result of this year’s promotion to the Premier League - plus £1.3m in “incremental” payments to clubs from which the Canaries bought players, and which had clauses that demanded more money if promotion followed.'

There you go... total cost £6.3m.

Thats nowhere near £10m and that was monkey's figure.

Try to spin it how you want -he's wrong.


By the way, I saw the table - where does it state the exceptional costs were promotion bonuses -there was a hell of a lot else going on there. Not saying they weren't but there would have been adjustments up and down for many of the items listed in the article.

Were they treated as 'exceptionals' in Swansea's accounts ?

Where did I say the figure of £10m was right? Although I do think it's a fairly reasonable benchmark.

That £6.3m figure is just under £1m short of ours despite the fact we'd had an extra 2 years in the Championship where we had to renegotiate contracts.

Again I ask, what is your point?

And as a secondary I ask this, what do you think CCFC's loss will be if you get to the Premier League?