| 38m profit 19:07 - Sep 1 with 11608 views | magicdaps10 |
Over 700k a week plus other revenue from this season.
What a bunch of robbing gits, wont be long before it goes national to our greedy barsteward owners and the sell outs.
They will be pushed against the wall in no time, results keep going this way and the eyes will be firmly on them. |  |
| |  |
| 38m profit on 21:39 - Sep 4 with 1041 views | majorraglan |
Previously the Premier League have diverted payments destined for a club to other clubs who are owed money re outstanding transfer payments and I think they can be diverted to pay players wages.
The club have “sold” outstanding balances of transfer fees previously, they may have done something similar with TV payments, but as has been said 2 years of parachute payments (roughly £65m) is a lot of cash, especially when the surplus from the transfer window is taken in to account.
IF and it’s a big IF this is true, then it’s a worry and questions have to be asked re what’s as happened and what is going on. [Post edited 4 Sep 2018 21:42]
|  | | |
| 38m profit on 21:43 - Sep 4 with 1023 views | _ |
| 38m profit on 21:39 - Sep 4 by majorraglan |
Previously the Premier League have diverted payments destined for a club to other clubs who are owed money re outstanding transfer payments and I think they can be diverted to pay players wages.
The club have “sold” outstanding balances of transfer fees previously, they may have done something similar with TV payments, but as has been said 2 years of parachute payments (roughly £65m) is a lot of cash, especially when the surplus from the transfer window is taken in to account.
IF and it’s a big IF this is true, then it’s a worry and questions have to be asked re what’s as happened and what is going on. [Post edited 4 Sep 2018 21:42]
|
It's not FFS
Its a standard practice the Club has agreed with Barclays every bloody year |  |
| |
| 38m profit on 21:51 - Sep 4 with 1000 views | majorraglan |
| 38m profit on 21:43 - Sep 4 by _ |
It's not FFS
Its a standard practice the Club has agreed with Barclays every bloody year |
They may well have done business with Barclays on an annual basis which is fair enough as it appears to be standard operating practice, but the poster said 2 years has been “sold” which, if true causes me a concern.
If next seasons payments are being “used” now, how will the club manage next year because the PL may not allow the final years payment to be sold as they may want to hold it to ensure Swansea City settles any outstanding balances it may have with other clubs and wages etc.
Caution is the watchword. | | | |
| 38m profit on 21:59 - Sep 4 with 985 views | NeathJack |
| 38m profit on 21:43 - Sep 4 by _ |
It's not FFS
Its a standard practice the Club has agreed with Barclays every bloody year |
It is not standard practice to loan against NEXT years income. That should be a massive concern to every Swans fan.
How exactly is next year going to be funded if the parachute money for that year has already gone? |  | | |
| 38m profit on 22:03 - Sep 4 with 975 views | _ |
| 38m profit on 21:59 - Sep 4 by NeathJack |
It is not standard practice to loan against NEXT years income. That should be a massive concern to every Swans fan.
How exactly is next year going to be funded if the parachute money for that year has already gone? |
Then why have we done the same thing for the last god knows how many years? | |
| |
| 38m profit on 22:13 - Sep 4 with 954 views | NeathJack |
| 38m profit on 22:03 - Sep 4 by _ |
Then why have we done the same thing for the last god knows how many years? |
We haven't. We've borrowed against the current years tv payment which as has been stated, is fairly common practice to assist cash flow. We have not borrowed against future years tv income.
This is Cardiff under Ridsdale territory when they borrowed against the following years ST money in order to pay a tax bill. | | | |
| 38m profit on 22:18 - Sep 4 with 941 views | _ |
| 38m profit on 22:13 - Sep 4 by NeathJack |
We haven't. We've borrowed against the current years tv payment which as has been stated, is fairly common practice to assist cash flow. We have not borrowed against future years tv income.
This is Cardiff under Ridsdale territory when they borrowed against the following years ST money in order to pay a tax bill. |
Have you actually read the flings pal? I suggest you do and you will see we do the same thing EVERY YEAR.
 | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| 38m profit on 22:21 - Sep 4 with 933 views | NeathJack |
| 38m profit on 22:18 - Sep 4 by _ |
Have you actually read the flings pal? I suggest you do and you will see we do the same thing EVERY YEAR.
|
Yes I have and as I said, at no point in time have we borrowed against 2 years income. 1 year yes, 2 years no.
If you can post a filing that states otherwise, fine. | | | |
| 38m profit on 22:24 - Sep 4 with 925 views | NeathJack |
That isn't a link to a filing, that's just a link to every document filed. Do you have a link to a specific filing showing us borrowing money against two years income? | | | |
| 38m profit on 22:26 - Sep 4 with 915 views | _ |
| 38m profit on 22:24 - Sep 4 by NeathJack |
That isn't a link to a filing, that's just a link to every document filed. Do you have a link to a specific filing showing us borrowing money against two years income? |
Well go through them FFS, around the same time every year. | |
| |
| 38m profit on 22:29 - Sep 4 with 899 views | longlostjack |
Let’s see if Wales Online is prepared to report this after their trip to Washington. |  |
| |
| 38m profit on 22:30 - Sep 4 with 893 views | NeathJack |
| 38m profit on 22:26 - Sep 4 by _ |
Well go through them FFS, around the same time every year. |
So you can't then.
Do you know why that is? It's because it hasn't happened before.
As I said, 1 year yes. 2 years, absolutely not.
Hugely concerning. | | | |
| 38m profit on 22:36 - Sep 4 with 868 views | NeathJack |
Aye, none of those links work. | | | |
| 38m profit on 22:39 - Sep 4 with 860 views | _ |
| 38m profit on 22:36 - Sep 4 by NeathJack |
Aye, none of those links work. |
Oh FFS
28 Aug 2018 Registration of charge 001234140032, created on 24 August 2018
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140032, created on 24 August 2018 - link opens in a new window - 27 pages (27 pages)
10 Aug 2017 Registration of charge 001234140029, created on 8 August 2017
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140029, created on 8 August 2017 - link opens in a new window - 28 pages (28 pages)
30 Aug 2016 Registration of charge 001234140026, created on 22 August 2016
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140026, created on 22 August 2016 - link opens in a new window - 27 pages (27 pages)
17 Jul 2015 Registration of charge 001234140025, created on 15 July 2015
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140025, created on 15 July 2015 - link opens in a new window - 24 pages (24 pages)
02 Aug 2014 Registration of charge 001234140024
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140024 - link opens in a new window - 27 pages (27 pages)
I'm sure you can the links if you look for the above | |
| |
| 38m profit on 23:01 - Sep 4 with 820 views | _ |
| 38m profit on 22:30 - Sep 4 by NeathJack |
So you can't then.
Do you know why that is? It's because it hasn't happened before.
As I said, 1 year yes. 2 years, absolutely not.
Hugely concerning. |
He's done a runner
| |
| |
| 38m profit on 23:06 - Sep 4 with 814 views | KrisP |
| 38m profit on 22:39 - Sep 4 by _ |
Oh FFS
28 Aug 2018 Registration of charge 001234140032, created on 24 August 2018
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140032, created on 24 August 2018 - link opens in a new window - 27 pages (27 pages)
10 Aug 2017 Registration of charge 001234140029, created on 8 August 2017
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140029, created on 8 August 2017 - link opens in a new window - 28 pages (28 pages)
30 Aug 2016 Registration of charge 001234140026, created on 22 August 2016
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140026, created on 22 August 2016 - link opens in a new window - 27 pages (27 pages)
17 Jul 2015 Registration of charge 001234140025, created on 15 July 2015
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140025, created on 15 July 2015 - link opens in a new window - 24 pages (24 pages)
02 Aug 2014 Registration of charge 001234140024
View PDF Registration of charge 001234140024 - link opens in a new window - 27 pages (27 pages)
I'm sure you can the links if you look for the above |
Have you actually read them? I've been with you on a few things recently but I don't think you're correct here. All the previous years assigned only the upcoming year's worth of Central Payments, with a guarantee on year two should we be in some way unable to pay.
EDIT: I originally thought we had assigned two years of payments to the bank. It does actually appear to assign only the first installment of next year's payment to them (along with this year as usual). While this is a change from last year, it is the same structure as used in 2015 and earlier. You can see this difference below. The top is last year's filing. The bottom is the 2016 one. 2017 is the same as 2016 so this year is a change, though not overly concerning as we have done this previously.
 [Post edited 5 Sep 2018 0:46]
| | | |
| 38m profit on 23:08 - Sep 4 with 810 views | NeathJack |
| 38m profit on 23:01 - Sep 4 by _ |
He's done a runner
|
No he hasn't
It certainly appears that similar action has indeed been taken in the past and I humbly admit I got that wrong (see how that's done?), although the 2016 document is strange in that it also mentions funding from 2014/15 & 2015/16.
Either way though, I guess they had to find some way of funding your kickback  | | | |
| 38m profit on 23:21 - Sep 4 with 784 views | _ |
| 38m profit on 23:08 - Sep 4 by NeathJack |
No he hasn't
It certainly appears that similar action has indeed been taken in the past and I humbly admit I got that wrong (see how that's done?), although the 2016 document is strange in that it also mentions funding from 2014/15 & 2015/16.
Either way though, I guess they had to find some way of funding your kickback |
No worries
Cheers  | |
| |
| 38m profit on 23:29 - Sep 4 with 771 views | KrisP |
| 38m profit on 23:22 - Sep 4 by majorraglan |
I am not an expert on this subject, but from reading the above it seems that all of this seasons payment has been assigned to Barclays, which will be approximately £40m. I believe that payments are made to clubs in instalments, so based on my understanding (but I may be wrong) the first instalment of the 2019/2020 seasons Parachute Payment has also been assigned to Barclays.
It’s not the whole seasons payment, but it is concerning never the less, questions need to be asked. |
Yeah, that reading of it would make sense. | | | |
| 38m profit on 23:33 - Sep 4 with 760 views | TheResurrection |
| 38m profit on 23:29 - Sep 4 by KrisP |
Yeah, that reading of it would make sense. |
Which is what I said at 21.26? |  |
| |
| 38m profit on 23:48 - Sep 4 with 746 views | KrisP |
| 38m profit on 23:33 - Sep 4 by TheResurrection |
Which is what I said at 21.26? |
Yes, but you also claimed that it's standard practice and we agree it every year. We don't, it's a significant change. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
