Somerset Blue
Player Valuation: £8m
OK so I'm setting myself up to be shouted down here...but are these high interest loans we have been taking out for operating and stadium costs not going to come back and bite on the balance sheet pretty soon?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In the appeal report, para 221. It says £53m a couple of paragraphs later, not sure why.Where has it been said that the figures were £55m and £10m in the previous periods?
I also don't understand how our trend has likely worsened in 22/23 when as far as I know we sold Richarlison and Gordon within that period? The last 2 Januarys we haven't bought anyone as well.
So what could have caused such a significant loss in 22/23?
Not a fan of people getting hounded off Twitter, even massive bellends, but I'd be delighted if he wasHe also said we wouldn’t get any points back & said how well the original commission performed.
Obviously knows his stuff but he knows as much as the rest of us when it comes to Everton which is [Poor language removed] all
This is GOT! no more words necessaryI've been out for 2 hours... have things deteriorated that badly since then?!?
Yes, they will. Although from a PSR perspective you’d like to think we’re now being much more careful about what is and isn’t directly for the stadium.OK so I'm setting myself up to be shouted down here...but are these high interest loans we have been taking out for operating and stadium costs not going to come back and bite on the balance sheet pretty soon?
I imagine they will punish us for 1/3 ratio of the crime based on 2 years already being punished.How can double jeopardy come into mitigation and then they do us anyway, that makes no sense to me.
Where has it been said that the figures were £55m and £10m in the previous periods?
I also don't understand how our trend has likely worsened in 22/23 when as far as I know we sold Richarlison and Gordon within that period? The last 2 Januarys we haven't bought anyone as well.
So what could have caused such a significant loss in 22/23?
Yep. If we’d have carried on spending recklessly and been as purposely obtuse as possible about it, it arguably would’ve served us better, as we’d still have some of our best players and not living on a shoestring for the past x years. (This is ignoring the fact our owner is now skint, but you get my drift).That third point is really key - battering someone for cooperating and working to correct errors is incredibly corrosive to a wider group, it removes the motivation for all to be open and transparent and the drivers to do the right thing.
I had an exchange with him a while ago about Chelsea’s 23/24 numbers . He was making claims re our the sums spent by us in the first two windows of the new owners tenure he hadn’t delved into Chelsea’s accounts for 22/23 where there was a statement detailing post activity where the sums paid in those two windows were around £200 million less than the likes of Transfermarket were reporting from that he estimated that Chelsea’s 22/23 amortisation would grow to £200 million pa.He's had it out for us since the beginning for some reason. Even got quite uppity yesterday when the appeal verdict was announced, as if he was pissed off that we got anything back at all.
But there are in the EFL rules. And this is what the appeals commission have put in their report:The Man City legal bod on talksport earlier said there is no Double Jeopardy in the Premier lge rules.
Whilst there are clear and obvious differences between the Premier League and
the Football League, the Football League scheme for profitability and sustainability
is structurally similar to that of the Premier League, and the EFL Guidelines for
sanction in this area are the closest available benchmark.
I think we have done too poorly in recent seasons with bringing the wage bill down. If nothing else, this whole fiasco should be a bit more of a wake up call for those handling wages. We have been rather generous with our wages. Not saying players like Tarks shouldn't be on 100k a week, but Holgate on 70k? Just to sit on the bench with Keano and gomes, who will also receive a disproportionate whack for what they bring in. Reckon it'll be an opportunity to invest resource in our youth players when some of the higher earners are off the books.Still doesn’t make sense when you consider how much we have cut the wage bill by, how few players we have purchased and how many we have sold.
This can’t be right can it?
The two years going on to the 23 calculation are 55m and 10m. “Capping” it at 70m would actually be 5m worse?