urban fox

Yeah right, like that ever happens. They are not called the Inland Robbery for nothing

Yeah basically put me out of business. Pay higher rate tax, with none of the benefits of a salaried employee, no longer able to claim travel or accommodation expenses, or become a salaried emoyee on half the money. The bit about having set up a UK company hints at this. Also does the old year+ a day rule still apply? If he returns to UK hmrc may want to claim UK tax on his foreign earnings for last year as well as him paying higher rate here than in Turkey for the current year. None of this is the clubs fault. We make an offer that we can afford, if he doesn't want to pay his tax then that is his decision. It would be foolish for us to make him our highest earner as a loan player

So its all gone Pete tong just because there has been no fanfare yet? Fab and Percy have both said it's practically done. I know there can always be last minute changes of heart from both sides but that does not make it automatically the club or Rudkins fault. When will people on here realise that contracts take time to be drafted, checked by lawyers etc, and signed. There are HR processes, inductions, relocation logistics, etc, to sort before any official announcements. Nobody moves jobs just like that without consulting family etc. If it happens it happens, no point in wetting the bed just cos five minutes have passed by since the last twitter post.

If he is here for less than a full Calender year he will pay tax in the country where he is employed. He will still be an employee of the parent club so effectively non-dom in the uk for tax purposes

Yeah. It was late but you get the drift

Apparently under Greek tax rules professional athletes only pay a flat rate 20% tax. In order that we don't have to gross up his wages to cover the extra tax he would pay in UK he will continue being paid by gala with us paying an enhanced loan fee to cover it.

This. I have no idea why so many seem to think we are skint. We have more than enough for at least a couple of decent signings. KP have never been stingy when it comes to splashing the cash, although we still need to be cautious re psr etc. Obviously we are not going to bid for every player we get linked with, and more than likely somebody will arrive out of the blue with little or no previous noise. I tend to think that most of the links are speculation and agent stories simply to push a players profile/price up and, in most cases we have no legitimate interest but are happy that it provides smokescreen for our real targets.

So we make public bids on ten other players, what happens if they are all accepted? We can't sign them all so we back out and look like idiots which no clubs or players would want to deal with in the future. That said I am pretty sure we have scoped out a few other potential deals which we may or may not pursue further. Why do you think we like to do our business quietly? To avoid just this situation and avoid getting into bidding wars.

Last posted in March. Not looking good. He will be sorely missed

It boils down to whether or not Roma can, or are willing to, stump up with a better offer than ours. Juve will prefer not to sell to a competitor but money talks. There is probably some truth in that the player may well prefer to stay in Italy, rather than move to another new country, culture and language.

Was just about to say this could be a ruse to make them think twice about holding out if they think we have other targets lined up. Wouldn't mind this lad if juve won't play.

Only been on here for about 5 years after flirting with the talking balls forum for a brief while. Great site, easy to navigate for an old git like me, and generally informative. Been on a few different forums, not just footy related, and this is definitely one of the best ones. Well done to those behind the scenes who put in the time and effort to make it what it is. Shout out too to all the members, past and present, who regularly contribute, whether I agree with their viewpoint or not. There have been some memorable threads.

Don't think we were ever seriously interested. Just media/agent talk linking us with him. Bullet dodged as he is not PL quality, and from what I have heard/read has some attitude issues

The boy is as mad as a box of frogs but you just gotta love him. His enthusiasm is infectious

We know their asking price and I am pretty sure the club would be prepared to meet it if necessary if he is a prime target. Of course we will stick in for a bit, while Juve, and no doubt the players agent, will also be in no rush in case any better offers come in. Roma talk could be maneuvering to try and force our hand. This won't be done quick.

My thoughts exactly. If you don't like the shirt, the sponsors, or their logo, and the prices being charged then don't buy one. Anyone who buys a knock off job is simply funding illegal sweatshops exploiting kids, and also diverting sales away from the club. These same people then moan about a lack of ability to raise revenues for bringing in new players or failing psr

If clubs are being forced into selling off academy prospects to avoid the ridiculous psr rules, where does that leave them in respect to eufa home grown squad quotas? Obviously, won't massively effect the big clubs who can afford to keep their home grown talent. Another back door way to keep the status quo for the cartel and their mates

Was thinking the same just yesterday. He was not sounding too good in his last couple of posts. If he has finally succumbed he will be missed on here

The general consensus seems to be that potter turned us down. I would say more likely that, after interviews etc he was our preferred choice but his wage demands (still being paid by chelsea) were such that the club wouldn't meet them so went for their second choice. Not the same as potter turning us down, ie didn't want the job, more that he would only take it if we paid him over the odds. In other words the clubs choice.

Doesn't work like that. If you buy an asset for say £15m and amortise/write down the value over say 5 years that is, as you say, £3m per year. BUT, if you sell that asset after two years, it's book value is £9m (15-(2x3)=9). If you receive £10m, then that is £1m profit against book value. You cannot continue to amortise or claim depreciation for an asset that you no longer own, hence you deduct the full outstanding value from the sale price. This is why it is important not to sell at a loss against book value, as the whole loss goes into that years accounts. The fact that you may still be paying for the asset in instalments is purely cash flow, not profit and loss.

If VK has a good tournament it may just bring in a few decent offers, presuming he doesn't want to come back. If he stays and plays under a new manager then still good. Win win for us if he shines

A deal spread over three years on a reduced basic does give him the opportunity to earn more in the longer term with appearance and loyalty bonuses even if the basic works out the same. Also if his basic is spread over three rather than two years there may be tax advantages

This has to be my favourite memory of the guy. Just realising what had just happened and drinking in the fact that he had won the fa cup. Same feeling that most of us fans had at that moment

We need this to be in this years accounts, Chelsea will want it in next seasons, both for PSR reasons

Precedent is a principle or rule established in a legal case that becomes authoritative to a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar legal issues or facts.The legal doctrine stating that courts should follow precedent is called stare decisis. whilst the independent commission is not necessarily bound by the legal system as such, i am pretty sure our lawyers will be citing previous decisions and claiming precedent if the PL try to do us over with anything more than Everton or Forest got. If, as has been suggested by some experts our breach , after allowable deductions, was around the £25M mark then this would be commensurate with those other clubs. In addition, we can surely claim mitigation in that we gained no sporting, or financial advantage (we were relegated and lost millions as a result). Anyone looking for doom and gloom headlines or reasons why we should be treated any more harshly than previously obviously has no understanding of the way these things MUST be governed in order to ensure fairness. Should the PL try and do us over, not only can we cite precedence, but i am pretty sure the lawyers will also be pointing out that any seeming unfairness (and unwillingness to tackle the Man city/Chelsea issues in a timely manner) will be highlighted as a reason why the football authorities are not fit for purpose and that as a club we will petition govt. to bring in the proposed regulator which the PL and co. are desperate to avoid, (which is partly why they hit Everton and Forest in the first place). We have a much stronger hand than many realise. We will get 4-6 points deducted and take it on the chin. However, i do think that as a result of our previous successful actions against them we will see a rule change allowing reciprocal agreements such that future sanctions can be passed between the leagues