Latest Takeover Rumour. The Moores / Noell one

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

The more money being pumped into clubs through media, the more money the top players are asking for to come and play in the prem, surely sooner or later it's going to go tits up.

 

[mlyons]

The more money being pumped into clubs through media, the more money the top players are asking for to come and play in the prem, surely sooner or later it's going to go tits up.

Why does it have to go tits up, though? Why can't it just find an equilibrium and stabilize there?

 

[SerenityNigh]

It will be when they can sell it for nearer 400/500 10 years later.

Plus, they know they can get there money back easily if it goes up the swanny.

Double in 10 years? That's a terrible ROI. I seriously hope they expect more.

 

[Pacman]

Funny thing is we are currently one of the most vulnerable clubs should said TV bubble burst. Clubs like City and Chelsea with their sugar daddy owners and Utd and Liverpool with their glory hunting funded brands will be safe.

 

[ijjysmith]

Double in 10 years? That's a terrible ROI. I seriously hope they expect more.

What have Ireland got to do with it?

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Funny thing is we are currently one of the most vulnerable clubs should said TV bubble burst. Clubs like City and Chelsea with their sugar daddy owners and Utd and Liverpool with their glory hunting funded brands will be safe.

Even the RS, Spurs and maybe Arsenal would be all be vulnerable if the money train stops, the others like ourselves would be in trouble also. We're less vulnerable than about 4 other other clubs but no more than anyone else.

 

[kithnou]

Not being funny lad, but ive supported Everton longer than the 5minutes you have, just a thought.

Not being funny lad, but ive supported Everton longer than the 5minutes you have, just a thought.

The old "saying it twice makes it more believable trick"

 

[SerenityNigh]

Are they going to make the players eat ham on Christmas?

Beans on toast to be replaced with crispy bacon is what I heard

 

[mezzrow]

Ricky Bobby nods in agreement...

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

Why does it have to go tits up, though? Why can't it just find an equilibrium and stabilize there?

Just think the more money, the more greedier people get, you only have to look at the ridiculous amounts agents are commanding.

 

[Goat]

@MoutsGoat
Let's assume that hey are asset strippers and sell Barkley for 40mil, Lukaku for 50 mil and Stones for 60mil after the Euro's and for cash, no add-ons. All of these circumstances are unlikely
How much can they extract from the 150 mil?
Rom's net book value would be 60% of 28mil so take 16.8mil off. This assumes all 28 mil is on the books as there were no add ons.
Barkley is probably only on the books at a couple of mil so take 2 mil off
Stones is probably on at no more than 4 mil even after his new deal costs so take 4 mil off.
So the player profit in the accounts is now 127.8 mil.
Barnsley owed minimum 10% of profit on sell on so take a further 5.6mil off.
Player profit is now 122.2 mil.
But there's Corporation tax to pay on about 110 mil of the 122.2 mil die to tax losses b/fwd being about 12 mil from memory. So CT@ 20% = 22mil, so 100mil profit to reserves.
But the deficit on the P&L reserve was 42 mil from memory, so the distributable amount is about 58mil or 92 mil less than you reckon they could take out.
This assumes break even on ordinary trading.
Re-think of your theory needed perhaps?

You must be a right laugh at family Monopoly.

 

[ilikecheese]

Beans on toast to be replaced with crispy bacon is what I heard

Excellent decision! I like this ownership group already.

 

[Brennan]

@MoutsGoat
Let's assume that hey are asset strippers and sell Barkley for 40mil, Lukaku for 50 mil and Stones for 60mil after the Euro's and for cash, no add-ons. All of these circumstances are unlikely
How much can they extract from the 150 mil?
Rom's net book value would be 60% of 28mil so take 16.8mil off. This assumes all 28 mil is on the books as there were no add ons.
Barkley is probably only on the books at a couple of mil so take 2 mil off
Stones is probably on at no more than 4 mil even after his new deal costs so take 4 mil off.
So the player profit in the accounts is now 127.8 mil.
Barnsley owed minimum 10% of profit on sell on so take a further 5.6mil off.
Player profit is now 122.2 mil.
But there's Corporation tax to pay on about 110 mil of the 122.2 mil die to tax losses b/fwd being about 12 mil from memory. So CT@ 20% = 22mil, so 100mil profit to reserves.
But the deficit on the P&L reserve was 42 mil from memory, so the distributable amount is about 58mil or 92 mil less than you reckon they could take out.
This assumes break even on ordinary trading.
Re-think of your theory needed perhaps?

Merry Christmas

 

[hibbo'sclass]

You must be a right laugh at family Monopoly.

I am the life and soul of everything I participate in tbh.
But thanks for noticing.

 

[hibbo'sclass]

Merry Christmas

Thank you. I hope you and yours had a good one too.