Lost our identity, thanks to parish
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 the silurian  The garden of England.(not really) 02 Sep 17 5.04pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
I might well ask why do you find it so hard to understand what has been written rather than what you think has been written or what you wish had been written. The point that he was making was nothing to do with wages as he was asking, and I quote, "Too many people blaming SP for not getting rid of the deadwood" to which I responded "I haven't seen anyone blaming SP for not managing to get rid of the players that you mentioned as we are all aware of the situation regarding contracts." Ok so if you dont get rid of the deadwood, you still have to pay their wages dont you? Maybe SP has a bottomless pit of cash that he can use to pay off their contracts or their wages while still complying with FFP
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
Den1923  02 Sep 17 5.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by the silurian
Ok so if you dont get rid of the deadwood, you still have to pay their wages dont you? Maybe SP has a bottomless pit of cash that he can use to pay off their contracts or their wages while still complying with FFP It is not uncommon in any walk of life to negotiate an ending of a contract by mutual consent, yes it will cost you money but you can write that cost off in the books straightaway and it only effects the accounts for that accounting period. Then you can start from scratch, we are not saying its easy but it is possible and happens all the time!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 02 Sep 17 5.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by the silurian
Ok so if you dont get rid of the deadwood, you still have to pay their wages dont you? Maybe SP has a bottomless pit of cash that he can use to pay off their contracts or their wages while still complying with FFP I don't suppose that it's easy for you to understand plain English if you really are a Silurian but I'll have one last try You said that people are blaming SP for not getting rid of the deadwood and I said that no-one is blaming him as we all understand the contractual situation.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| rikz Croydon 02 Sep 17 5.45pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by grumpymort
Parish inexperience is what is hindering the club he should just be owner and let others who know what they are doing run the club the guys too hands on Just pay off the rest of the contract, with what ? Do you understand how contracts and a wage budget works ? our current wage bill is about 85 million a year probably more now with sakho. Paying someones contract off doesn't just free up space for more money to be used on someone else. That money has already been accounted for, once it's gone it's gone. Players like sako, mutch and Lee will never get offered anything like the amount of money they're on here so they will just sit out their contract, the amount they would be willing to get brought out for, it wouldn't be worth it you might aswell just keep them. Like adebayor at Tottenham, do you think that was down to leavys inexperience was why they couldn't get him off the books ? No it was because he was on a huge contract that no one would match so decided to sit on it and Tottenham couldn't do a thing.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| rikz Croydon 02 Sep 17 6.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Den1923
It is not uncommon in any walk of life to negotiate an ending of a contract by mutual consent, yes it will cost you money but you can write that cost off in the books straightaway and it only effects the accounts for that accounting period. Then you can start from scratch, we are not saying its easy but it is possible and happens all the time! So let's get this right we have a player like sako who is on 2.5 mill a year and a current wage bill of 85 million. Firstly as a commodity we would value him at maybe 10 mill, so paying up his contract you've already lost 10 million on top of 2.5 mill a year over 2 years that's potentially 15 you've lost there. okay no one will buy him his now worth zero but costs us 2.5 million a year, let's buy his contract up at once. Obviously as it's upfront as a lump sum we will offer the half amount of his full contract so now he only has to find a club willing to pay him 25k a week over the next 2 years to see him no worse off. If this happens we have saved ourselves 2.5 million over 2 years but have still hit our transfer budget of 85 million this year. So that's cost us 2.5 million, weve still got a budget of 85 million and a like for like replacement takes it straight upto 87.5 without a transfer fee. Parish has no chance with fans like you who seem to think we have an open cheque book. Yeah great we get a gaurenteed 100 million a year from sky, not really that much when 85% goes straight on players wages.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Painter Croydon 02 Sep 17 6.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Den1923
It is not uncommon in any walk of life to negotiate an ending of a contract by mutual consent, yes it will cost you money but you can write that cost off in the books straightaway and it only effects the accounts for that accounting period. Then you can start from scratch, we are not saying its easy but it is possible and happens all the time! Basic economics not your strong point, I see.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| the silurian The garden of England.(not really) 02 Sep 17 6.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
I don't suppose that it's easy for you to understand plain English if you really are a Silurian but I'll have one last try You said that people are blaming SP for not getting rid of the deadwood and I said that no-one is blaming him as we all understand the contractual situation. and be assured that I realise that, you as a midlander, finds English hard to understand and also that talking to you is like talking to porridge so I'll leave you to it ! Farewell, enjoy your Saturday night!!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Dangermouse Hastings 02 Sep 17 7.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Den1923
you have got your posts mixed up with different subscribers on this thread, Parish has to be indirectly responsible for everything that happens at the club as he is the current Chairman and leader. The poor home form is due in the main to having far to many managers in the period, playing different system and players in various positions that often do not suite them. Consistency in Management will produce better results as the player are settled, know the system and perform much better. Steve Parish is responsible for Management appointments, so if they do not work out then it is him and him alone who has made the wrong choice. He also dabbles in deciding the style of football he wants to see which is often not matched by the money available to get the players who can play that way. The same can be said about transfers he finds decision making hard, he prevaricates far too much over decisions and we often lose out because he cannot make his mind up quick enough or we run out of time. The time taken to appoint the current manager was madness and in the end we were restricted to what was left available rather than having a choice of the best available. I cannot tell who should replace him as I'm just a concerned fan, I do not have any shareholding and it is only the club directors and shareholders who can decide who their next leader should be. Managers that don't work out are his fault. No problem with that. Now tell me who are the ones that didn't work out? Ollie got us up, then quit when he couldn't handle it. Pulis walked out. Pardew worked for a while then went tits up, so Parish at fault, no problem. Sam retired, totally unexpectedly. FdB we don't know yet. Our home form has been crap since we came back up and bar a handful of games we've played the same soak it up counter attack style regardless of manager.
That's Life |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Petereagle Brockley 02 Sep 17 11.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Dangermouse
Managers that don't work out are his fault. No problem with that. Now tell me who are the ones that didn't work out? Ollie got us up, then quit when he couldn't handle it. Pulis walked out. Pardew worked for a while then went tits up, so Parish at fault, no problem. Sam retired, totally unexpectedly. FdB we don't know yet. Our home form has been crap since we came back up and bar a handful of games we've played the same soak it up counter attack style regardless of manager. This feature summarises the situation quite well. As to whether Parish sacks him immediately, I guess its a question of whether FdB shows himself to be flexible, and whether he's lost the dressing room or not. In any case if he stays on and loses badly against Burnley, he's gone. [Link]
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Den1923 02 Sep 17 11.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by rikz
So let's get this right we have a player like sako who is on 2.5 mill a year and a current wage bill of 85 million. Firstly as a commodity we would value him at maybe 10 mill, so paying up his contract you've already lost 10 million on top of 2.5 mill a year over 2 years that's potentially 15 you've lost there. okay no one will buy him his now worth zero but costs us 2.5 million a year, let's buy his contract up at once. Obviously as it's upfront as a lump sum we will offer the half amount of his full contract so now he only has to find a club willing to pay him 25k a week over the next 2 years to see him no worse off. If this happens we have saved ourselves 2.5 million over 2 years but have still hit our transfer budget of 85 million this year. So that's cost us 2.5 million, weve still got a budget of 85 million and a like for like replacement takes it straight upto 87.5 without a transfer fee. Parish has no chance with fans like you who seem to think we have an open cheque book. Yeah great we get a gaurenteed 100 million a year from sky, not really that much when 85% goes straight on players wages. you really have a problem understanding all this no one was talking about Sakho contract we are talking about the smaller contracts for fringe players who no longer feature in your plans. you negotiate come to an agreement and then release them to seek paid positions elsewhere, the cost is a one off write down in that years accounts and can be offset against any corporation tax you have to pay. No one is talking about open cheque books thats your understanding or lack of it in the commercial world. There are other costs you save as well such as the cost of a car, healthcare, national insurance, pension contributions, housing cost etc etc.. clearly it has to be a win win for everyone!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 02 Sep 17 11.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Den1923
you really have a problem understanding all this no one was talking about Sakho contract we are talking about the smaller contracts for fringe players who no longer feature in your plans. you negotiate come to an agreement and then release them to seek paid positions elsewhere, the cost is a one off write down in that years accounts and can be offset against any corporation tax you have to pay. No one is talking about open cheque books thats your understanding or lack of it in the commercial world. There are other costs you save as well such as the cost of a car, healthcare, national insurance, pension contributions, housing cost etc etc.. clearly it has to be a win win for everyone! It's good you have thought this all through. Does it affect our FFP status? Do we have enough cash flow? Amazing that Phil Alexander is the longest serving CEO in the English football leagues yet hasn't spotted this obvious opportunity.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Den1923 02 Sep 17 11.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Dangermouse
Managers that don't work out are his fault. No problem with that. Now tell me who are the ones that didn't work out? Ollie got us up, then quit when he couldn't handle it. Pulis walked out. Pardew worked for a while then went tits up, so Parish at fault, no problem. Sam retired, totally unexpectedly. FdB we don't know yet. Our home form has been crap since we came back up and bar a handful of games we've played the same soak it up counter attack style regardless of manager. I think the record says it all, the last four and a bit seasons have hardly covered us in glory more managers than most if not all in PL, poor results at home, always in or around the drop zone, club not attractive to the best PL players, emphasis on ground improvements before we have the team results that would support it, more players coming in with sick notes in their pockets, not a bad performance for some and not good enough for others, you have to set your own standards!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.