Jump to content
Neil G

Go fuck yourselves FSG

Recommended Posts

Daisy obviously had builders in during the lockdown to get the new extension done. Well, the roads were clear, no parking issues, so it's alright, innit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aRdja said:

Not really a distraction, it’s just bog standard stuff. If you want to recognise the transfer fees over the period of the contracts then you’d be foolish to ignore depreciation and amortisation costs. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.  How much is D&A it if you don’t mind me asking? I want to understand if that’d help bridge this £174m gap you’re trying to explain.

I'm not trying to explain anything, I'm asking the same question I have for I don't know how many posts, where's the money go? I don't think there's clarity enough in the accounts for anyone to explain that (I haven't ready this year's in detail, but I have with other years), which is why I find it astonishing people defend the accounts. The bottom line is, we're 5th in the world rich list. We're always skint and barely give the manager a penny to spend. We somehow have a wage bill that is 15% higher than Manchester United, yet we don't ever seem to be able to compete on wages with them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

I'm not trying to explain anything, I'm asking the same question I have for I don't know how many posts, where's the money go? I don't think there's clarity enough in the accounts for anyone to explain that (I haven't ready this year's in detail, but I have with other years), which is why I find it astonishing people defend the accounts. The bottom line is, we're 5th in the world rich list. We're always skint and barely give the manager a penny to spend. We somehow have a wage bill that is 15% higher than Manchester United, yet we don't ever seem to be able to compete on wages with them. 

I’m just trying work it out with you. You mentioned turnover was £500m and salary was £326m, and you don’t think the there isn’t enough clarity to explain the £174m gap. My hypothesis is depreciation and amortisation would explain a fair chunk. Do you know how much that is? Even from the previous year would be ok as a placeholder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Daisy said:

Amortisation is likely to be includee in the 171m administration expenses. 

 

Amortisation for 2020 was £115m.

 

Like for like comparisons below

 

Arsenal main costs

 

Cost of sales = 0

Player amortisation = 129

Staff costs = 234

Other = 78

 

Total = 441

 

Liverpool main Costs

 

Cost of sales = 63

Player amortisation = 115

Staff costs = 325

Other operating = 56

 

Total = 559

 

We are spending considerably more money than Arsenal on something outside of wages and player purchases. 

 

Approx 40 million more

 

119 million (63 + 56) vs 78 million 

 

 

 

Sorry I missed this, so basically the main variance driver is higher remuneration costs c.£100m. Given the state of our squad and management vs theirs and the fact the period covered us winning the CL finishing second in the league with the resulting incentive payments, it’s not that outrageous IMO. The rest is basically offsetting with net impact of £18m higher costs. We pay higher agent fees than most clubs so perhaps that’s one of the drivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aRdja said:

Sorry I missed this, so basically the main variance driver is higher remuneration costs c.£100m. Given the state of our squad and management vs theirs and the fact the period covered us winning the CL finishing second in the league with the resulting incentive payments, it’s not that outrageous IMO. The rest is basically offsetting with net impact of £18m higher costs. We pay higher agent fees than most clubs so perhaps that’s one of the drivers.

No the cost difference is outside of renumeration 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Daisy said:

No the cost difference is outside of renumeration 

Just from your numbers you posted above, we spent c.£118m more than Arsenal, and salary cost is c.£100m higher, no? Or have you posted the numbers wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, aRdja said:

Just from your numbers you posted above, we spent c.£118m more than Arsenal, and salary cost is c.£100m higher, no? Or have you posted the numbers wrong?

No I havent posted them wrong read it again. We have 40 million extra costs on top of wages and player amortisation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Daisy said:

No I havent posted them wrong read it again. We have 40 million extra costs on top of wages and player amortisation. 

Okay let’s do it properly. We spent £118m higher than Arsenal which £91m can be explained by higher rem costs. Is your concern the rem costs being too high to be realistic or that we incurred £27m higher costs again outside of rem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aRdja said:

Okay let’s do it properly. We spent £118m higher than Arsenal which £91m can be explained by higher rem costs. Is your concern the rem costs being too high to be realistic or that we incurred £27m higher costs again outside of rem?

See now that's a classic way of twisting figures to suit an argument. 

 

I clearly said if you remove wages and amortisation from the picture then our like for like costs are £40 million higher. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Daisy said:

See now that's a classic way of twisting figures to suit an argument. 

 

I clearly said if you remove wages and amortisation from the picture then our like for like costs are £40 million higher. 

 

I have no position in this. I’m trying to confirm what yours is. So you’re okay with their amortisation costs being bigger than ours, and you’re fine with salary costs being significantly higher than theirs, but you’re annoyed that when you ringfence salary and amortisation (not sure why you would), outside of that we incurred £40m higher costs than Arsenal? What’s your hypothesis there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aRdja said:

I have no position in this. I’m trying to confirm what yours is. So you’re okay with their amortisation costs being bigger than ours, and you’re fine with salary costs being significantly higher than theirs, but you’re annoyed that when you put salary and amortisation aside, we incurred £40m higher costs than Arsenal?

You a management accountant mate? You seem very keen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aRdja said:

I have no position in this. I’m trying to confirm what yours is. So you’re okay with their amortisation costs being bigger than ours, and you’re fine with salary costs being significantly higher than theirs, but you’re annoyed that when you ringfence salary and amortisation (not sure why you would), outside of that we incurred £40m higher costs than Arsenal? What’s your hypothesis there?

It's not a hypothesis, they are plain numbers easy to see. 

 

We are a similar size club to arsenal, we should have similar operating expenses outside of paying staff and transfers. Yet ours are considerably more 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Daisy said:

It's not a hypothesis, they are plain numbers easy to see. 

 

We are a similar size club to arsenal, we should have similar operating expenses outside of paying staff and transfers. Yet ours are considerably more 

But that’s not the case right? Looks like we pay higher salaries than them. They probably have higher D&As because of their newer and larger stadium. They probably earn higher income per game as a result, but we probably earn higher overall turnover due to more game playing more total games, more CL games, and higher prize money, etc. There are loads of different factors. What was Arsenal’s bottom line I’m the same period out of interest? 

 

Just humour me for a minute, but what’s your theory behind this mysterious £40m higher costs Daisy?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×