Palfy

They will but equally I think we will be as well, Ferguson won’t let them roll over and die this is going to be a battle.

I was born in Newcastle made in Swindon, I would love to live up north but unfortunately my Mrs is a southern softy and having none of it.

Oh dear I’ve obviously hit a raw nerve, it’s not my fault you never got a vote on the EU referendum yet you love to crow your a winner, and the people on here who voted to remain you took great pleasure branding them as losers. Also it’s not my fault you don’t get a vote in the General Election, yet you claim your a winner of that as well, have you never heard the phrase you need to be in it to win it, and you weren’t. Now you look after your British passport you never know you might need to come scuttling back here with your tail between your legs one day. I sincerely hope not for everyone’s sake.

And if there policies and beliefs are equally as bad as their character then you have a Donald Trump in the making. Purely out of interest if someone was condoning Trump as a good leader and making a case for his policies and actions, would you feel compelled to challenge their argument or just ignore it.

I agree I’ve got myself involved in something I haven’t got a scooby do about, come to think about it what’s new.

That’s freedom of speech and my right to express my opinion, just because it doesn’t suit your agenda tough. Now I’m sticking you back on ignore because you’re boring me again.

I have three businesses doesn’t make me more knowledgeable than someone who doesn’t have a business, but I have a good accountant so hopefully he’s earning the money I pay him, but the truth is I wouldn’t really have a clue I just have to take his word for it when he says he’s saving me thousands. And no I don’t want to talk about Gana the moods low enough as it is

When it comes down to the facts of the matter, you’re just a spectator in British politics your not a contributor, you don’t have a vote or say on the future direction of the country, so again what’s with the we business.

What’s with the royal we you weren’t in it anyway, getting above your station again.

that takes the biscuit you win

brilliant. If he could it would be far better than anyone else.

Yes and no, accounts wise players cost not value depreciates. And they still use his value whilst he’s at the club to add to the valuation of what the club is worth who wants a beer I’m buying.

I think we are all confusing each other

I have said that, but that doesn’t effect his value as an asset to the club. The player isn’t a depreciating asset his cost depreciates over the time of his contract, but until he leaves he will be an asset to business based on what he cost. Im starting to get a head ache now I’m clad I’m not an accountant, I’d forgotten how boring it must be

No but they could if they wish force the club to sell its assets, I’m not saying they would but stranger things have happened, most financial commentators who have written about our situation have agreed that we have got ourselves in a very perilous situation, and for any club to owe one individual so much money is not a good situation to find it’s self in, and I very much tend to agree.

But as usual from different directions, anyway I think that’s why good charted accountants are better off than us

But that doesn’t affect his value, his wages are a separate entity to his value, his wages bare no resemblance to his value, his value forms part of the worth of the business and is part of the value of the business, his wages are entered into the accounts as an overhead to the business, Eriksen leaving early saves the business on going over heads for that player, but that wouldn’t make a difference to the value of the player. Well that’s how I understand it, when a player is bought for 25 million that is the value entered into the accounts that won’t change until the player leaves, is value doesn’t depreciate on a rolling scale, but the cost of his purchase price will go against the profit and loss of the business not the value of the assets which players form part of.

Would that be because they weren’t purchased.

But he still has to have a value and that value would be shown as part of the clubs assets, you seem to be confusing how his cost is removed from the accounts, and not how value is an asset. From what I’ve read if a player cost 25 million it will be entered in the business accounts as an asset, which would then form part of the businesses value, and that figure will remain the same until that asset is no longer with the club.

So the cost of the player doesn’t form the valuation of the asset to the business.

So are you saying that each year he has a write down in the clubs accounts as a proportion of his cost divided over the term of his contract So we buy someone for 50 million on a 4 year contract and offset our profits by 12.5 million a year on based on the depreciation value of that player as a loss and profit right down, then if we sell at any time and if we make more money or don’t lose as much as we had on our write down we adjust our loss and profit figures accordingly.

But what is his value as an asset as entered in the clubs accounts.

I think you might find it works different to that, we paid say £25 million for Schneiderlin in the years he’s been here has his value as a club asset decreased or increased as entered in last years accounts, a players wage has nothing to do with his value, all wages go down as over head cost to the business.

Haf have a cold shower mate you’re getting far to excited