Jump to content


Photo

Efc Accounts


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Romey 1878

Romey 1878

    Mildo

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 44,122 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 11:01

http://www.toffeeweb...ews/071115a.asp
  • 0

#2 gaz efc

gaz efc

    Lee Carsley

  • Members
  • 88 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 11:59

lookin bleek
  • 0

#3 Blue 250

Blue 250

    Bob Latchford

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,473 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 13:14

For Everton!....Read just about every other football club!

Some....a very few!Will have at the moment much more healthy balance sheets!Loads of dosh that has been invested by new ownwers.They will buy expencive stadiums, they will buy very expencive players who want big wages.....what if they DON'T win things!A big percentage of the new owners money could have been borrowed in the first place.....and interest rates COULD go sky high!!!!!!leaving them in BIG shit!

I wonder if Vaughan hadn't got injured pre-season, would we have spent that £11.5million on Yakubu(who has started showing signs of his talent).....that money plus what must be a pretty big wage can't help the balance sheet.

Let's just hope Vaughan and Anicnebe can save us a fortune in the next couple of years.
  • 0

#4 Romey 1878

Romey 1878

    Mildo

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 44,122 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 13:52

So you're not concerned in the slightest that we're £66million in debt? You can go on about other teams being in debt and needing to win things but so do we with debt like that. Im worried about where this club is heading with the current management of the club (not Moyes but Billy Bullshit and his side kick Pie Man). We have fuck all investment and we're sinking further into the red.
  • 0

#5 Bobbyj

Bobbyj

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 191 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 14:35

66 mil does sound alot when we are lacking a full strength squad and offering players on large money even larger money to stay.
  • 0

#6 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,402 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 14:43

We've been here before. Individuals, companies, countries and any organisation in between that uses money operate using debt. If it's properly structured and you know what you're doing then it's a completely sensible way to do business....if you don't know what you're doing and just keep borrowing because people offer it (bit like one of my daughters :( ) then eventually (sooner rather than later) you're fucked.

No idea what category Everton fall into because I'm not an accountant. Can one of you that is (or who understands) explain the principle of "amortisation of player regs" to me? I've read what it means (and I did A level economics, admittedly thirty years ago), but I'm still struggling. Whatever it is it cost us £9m.

(I know it's "an annual charge made in a company's profit and loss account to reduce the value of an intangible asset to zero over a period of years," but charge made by who?)

Edited by MikeO, 15 Nov 2007 - 14:44.

  • 0

#7 CraccerC

CraccerC

    Simão Sabrosa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,251 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 15:01

i think it's contract issues, wages and signings fees, bonuses etc for the players. and it's money to balance those costs
  • 0

#8 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,610 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 15:18

The club has to pay the transfer fee to the selling club. In the club accounts it then has to report how much it views each player's worth has declined each year. So for example Yakubu for £11.5m on a four year contract costs the club 11.5/4 = £2.875m per year. This is what is reported as 'amortisation' in the club accounts. At the end of the contract the player can just leave on a 'free' so he is viewed as potentially no worth to the business after that.

This only covers the costs for players bought in. So Tony Hibbert, for example, does not have any effect on the amortisation costs of the club, as he was never bought from another club. Also once a player has finished his initial contract he stops being counted. So Mikel Arteta, Andy Johnson and Tim Cahill for example has no effect.

Call me a cynic but that could be the real reason for the players to sign new deals... if you don't look into too much details it looks like we are saving £9million this year in comparison to last..
  • 0

#9 Blue 250

Blue 250

    Bob Latchford

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,473 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 15:18

66 mil does sound alot when we are lacking a full strength squad and offering players on large money even larger money to stay.

There my friend is more than half of our problem....and plenty of other teams!

We all love AJ, Cahill, Arteta and co....and we want Vaughan and Anichebe to stay with us! but they are not going to do that for a few hundred pounds a week!

We could sell AJ, Yakubu, Cahill, Arteta, Vaughan, Anichebe, Lescott and Yobo = £70million.....
there we go!!.....£4million in the black :) Problem solved!

So you're not concerned in the slightest that we're £66million in debt? You can go on about other teams being in debt and needing to win things but so do we with debt like that. Im worried about where this club is heading with the current management of the club (not Moyes but Billy Bullshit and his side kick Pie Man). We have fuck all investment and we're sinking further into the red.

Concerned in the slightest!......YEP! Going to lose sleep over it tonight.....NOPE!
I wont let "Billy Bullshit and the Pie Man"..........or "Fat Raffa" or any England manager who can't get our team to major compotitions impact on my life.

Sorry if my lack of concern over Evertons finances upsets you!......nothing I can do about it and
Everton FC is my passion and hobby.....NOT MY LIFE!!

Maybe to talk of other clubs problems don't help ours.....but it makes me feel better.
Before I could guage the real depths of Evertons financial problems I would like to see the TRUE
accounts for teams like Villa, Portsmouth, Newcastle.....even Arsenal!Weren't they in real terms
actually in debt?......In fact just about every team...the TRUE figures!!

Were actually hanging in in cup compotitions....in Europe....Bloody hard to beat...a young
squad (which will help with finance).....good manager....a top six club.....average home gates of about 36/37,000!Those are things that other clubs WHO are also way in debt can't say, and they may help us turn the corner or attract a GOOD investor.
  • 0

#10 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,402 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 15:28

Thanks for that Louis. Can't see why it only counts on the initial contract though, surely the financial implication of someone leaving on a free is the same however many contracts they've had :huh: . But anyway as it's not real money it seems a bit ridiculous to me. Actually all economics is ridiculous....think we went wrong when we moved away from bartering in the village marketplace personally :D .

Edited by MikeO, 15 Nov 2007 - 15:28.

  • 0

#11 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,610 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 15:29

I thought you still could in Devon!?
  • 0

#12 CraccerC

CraccerC

    Simão Sabrosa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,251 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 15:46

The club has to pay the transfer fee to the selling club. In the club accounts it then has to report how much it views each player's worth has declined each year. So for example Yakubu for £11.5m on a four year contract costs the club 11.5/4 = £2.875m per year. This is what is reported as 'amortisation' in the club accounts. At the end of the contract the player can just leave on a 'free' so he is viewed as potentially no worth to the business after that.

This only covers the costs for players bought in. So Tony Hibbert, for example, does not have any effect on the amortisation costs of the club, as he was never bought from another club. Also once a player has finished his initial contract he stops being counted. So Mikel Arteta, Andy Johnson and Tim Cahill for example has no effect.

Call me a cynic but that could be the real reason for the players to sign new deals... if you don't look into too much details it looks like we are saving £9million this year in comparison to last..


surely it won't make any difference whether we offer a new deal or not, if we agree to pay 8.6 for aj for example, we'll still have to pay it over the initial set years.
  • 0

#13 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,402 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 16:03

I thought you still could in Devon!?


Not since Tesco opened their new farming and cider press supplies hypermarket Louis, they've started taking Groats :o ! Tried to pay with a sheep the other day but they had no chickens for my change (no flu-free ones anyway...I blame 250).

Edited by MikeO, 15 Nov 2007 - 16:06.

  • 0

#14 Bill

Bill

    Alex. Top player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,484 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 16:26

surely it won't make any difference whether we offer a new deal or not, if we agree to pay 8.6 for aj for example, we'll still have to pay it over the initial set years.

............

It does make a difference once the original transfer fee has been paid over the 4 or 5 years, if after 4/5 he signs a new 5 year contract no additional transfer fee has been paid, so he just becomes another wage to add into the pay structure.

"amortisation" ......... The final payment and completion of a financial deal.

Its the last installment of a Hire Purchase agreement.
  • 0

#15 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,402 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 16:34

Can be Bill..."Amortization (business), the allocation of a lump sum amount to different time periods, particularly for loans and other forms of finance, including related interest or other finance charges."...but not in this context.

It's a fairly convoluted (as far as I can tell) method of accounting for the depreciation of "intangible assets" (players).
  • 0

#16 CraccerC

CraccerC

    Simão Sabrosa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,251 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 16:47

............

It does make a difference once the original transfer fee has been paid over the 4 or 5 years, if after 4/5 he signs a new 5 year contract no additional transfer fee has been paid, so he just becomes another wage to add into the pay structure.

"amortisation" ......... The final payment and completion of a financial deal.

Its the last installment of a Hire Purchase agreement.


but louis mentioned johnson, surely it won't make a difference, even though he's signed a new deal, its still within the original set number of years, so surely we'll still be paying for that duration?
  • 0

#17 Bill

Bill

    Alex. Top player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,484 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 20:27

Yes, but other players are'nt MikeG, Arteta and Cahill i think originaly signed on 3 maybe 4 year deals and have now been payed for, but have now signed on longer 5 year contracts without any transfer fees being involved, Amortization of players Registrations.



MikeO... Can be Bill..."Amortization (business), the allocation of a lump sum amount to different time periods, particularly for loans and other forms of finance, including related interest or other finance charges."...but not in this context.

yeah Mike .... A HIRE PURCHASE AGREEMENT, It always costs you interest to buy on the weekly or in Evertons case Annually. Unlike a Cash up front Deal.

Free Dictionary.... Amortization is also used to describe the repayment of a debt in instalments, where each instalment is part principal and part interest.
  • 0

#18 Blue 250

Blue 250

    Bob Latchford

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,473 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 21:44

! Tried to pay with a sheep the other day but they had no chickens for my change (no flu-free ones anyway...I blame 250).


Blue 250......IS the cause of Bird Flu!!!!!!!!.........Look I swear I was only very good friends with that Goose :rolleyes:....Anyway if anyone wants a cheap Turkey for christmas, my mate down the roads got a few!!

Me!....I'm having pork this year!
  • 0

#19 MikeO

MikeO

    Scars are tattoos with better stories.

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,402 posts

Posted 15 Nov 2007 - 21:48

Will have to agree to differ on this Bill. My understanding is that the amortisation in this context is in place to cover depreciation against the possibility of the player leaving on a free at the end of his contract and has nothing whatever to do with the payment terms. Even if we'd paid cash in full up front for Yakubu his value would be offset over the term of his contract and would appear on the accounts as amortisation.

The Newcastle site explains it also...

The club has to pay the transfer fee to the selling club. In the club accounts it then has to report how much it views each player's worth has declined each year. So for example Michael Owen for £16m on a four year contract costs the club 16/4 = £4m per year. This is what is reported as 'amortisation' in the club accounts. At the end of the contract the player can just leave on a 'free' so he is viewed as potentially no worth to the business after that.

Edited by MikeO, 15 Nov 2007 - 21:50.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users