Stoke show RFC how to run a Real Football Club

[floyd__streete]

They were offered Gary Cahill for £3.5million but Coppell said himself he didn't think he was worth that - Whoops. At the time though this lad was nowhere near Villa's side and had just been on loan at SHeff Utd so you could understand the resentment to pay that sort of fee. Easy in hindsight but I thought even then that was a big mistake. He'd have been better even then than all of Reading's centre backs.

He didn't think Matt Taylor or Gary O Neil would be better than he had, he was offered both. Again mistake. Both of them would have been better than Hunt/Harper.

COPPELL OUT.

I said this in 2003 when we lost 3 games in a row 3-0. They did not listen they're not listening stil. Perhaps they never will.

[floyd__streete]

As the far from veiled accusations as to the moral standing of our Chairman float around would it be reasonable to observe that the tax saved by being non-domicile for a year or 2 has been reinvested in the UK creating jobs, tax revenues etc. etc.?

Only by a kow-towing, subservient individual like you.

[Svlad Cjelli]

Absolutely - this is only a personal view on the morality of tax avoidance. I'm not casting any doubts upon the legality of it, and I recognise that you don't become a millionaire without taking advantage of opportunities like this.

[Royal Rother]

As the far from veiled accusations as to the moral standing of our Chairman float around would it be reasonable to observe that the tax saved by being non-domicile for a year or 2 has been reinvested in the UK creating jobs, tax revenues etc. etc.?

Only by a kow-towing, subservient individual like you.

Yep, that's me to the proverbial tee.

[RoyalBlue]

As the far from veiled accusations as to the moral standing of our Chairman float around would it be reasonable to observe that the tax saved by being non-domicile for a year or 2 has been reinvested in the UK creating jobs, tax revenues etc. etc.?

It might or it might not. However, regardless of any savings those individuals might make through tax 'holidays', would they still not invest money in creating jobs etc., in order to increase wealth their worth still further? Furthermore, I suspect there are already some tax incentives available to encourage them to do so in certain circumstances.

It could also be argued that some individuals/companies might also donate some of their tax savings to charitable or other organisations for the greater public good. However, might those same organisations not receive better state funding in the first place, if UK PLC's revenue from business and personal tax was greater?

[Arch]

From today's Guardian, one of the reasons Stoke is able to throw money at football is because of a tax dodge by Bet365 :

Stoke City's manager Tony Pulis frequently plays the underdog card. But as his team stand just one place off a Champions League berth and have put Tottenham Hotspur out of the Carling Cup, it is time to debunk the myth.

In the 2009-10 season, the most recent for which accounts are available, Stoke's turnover was £58.98m, the Premier League's 14th highest. Yet Stoke are afforded many luxuries unavailable to their peers, thanks to being a subsidiary of an organisation with a turnover of £5.4bn a year. Stoke belong to bet365, and in the 2009-10 season were given a parent-company subsidy of £15.42m, serving as bet365's tax write-off – the company has been applauded, however, for keeping its entire betting operation in the UK, whereas most of its competitors' online and telephone-betting departments are offshore to avoid all tax.

It means Pulis was able to invest £20.58m, net, in new players in 2009-10 as the Potters spent £12.2m more than they earned that season, making their total subsidised expenditure £71.2m. Indeed, Stoke's parent-company structure gives them another great advantage: access to interest-free finance. That season Stoke's bank debt was a negligible £175,000, costing them £6,000 in interest fees. Everton, by contrast, must foot an annual interest bill of close to £4.5m – equivalent to two players earning £43,000 a week.

The available figures are dated, but there are no signs that bet365's investment has abated. Over the year to May 2010 Stoke's wage bill was a relatively modest £45m. But, in addition to another round of net transfer investment exceeding £20m last summer (and a few millions more in the previous one), salary costs have been swelled by the arrivals of well-paid players such as the England internationals Peter Crouch, Matthew Upson and Jonathan Woodgate.

Dogged, Stoke City most certainly are, but underdogs? Not any more.

Out of interest, how would you describe the situation where wealthy individuals remain out of the country for a defined period of time, in order to reduce the amount of UK tax that they have to pay? Beware of pots and kettles!

Drop pots, kettles, and moral judgments out of it. Stoke have a massive financial advantage that most clubs roughly their size, including Reading, don't have.

[Pseud O'Nym]

COPPELL OUT.

I said this in 2003 when we lost 3 games in a row 3-0. They did not listen they're not listening stil. Perhaps they never will.

Feck but you're so vain I'll bet you think this club is about you, don't you?

[RobRoyal]

Way too boring for another new thread about money, but this is in today's Grauniad:

When Reading's owner put his club up for sale, he did so using language unbecoming of a knight of the realm. "If some rich bastard wants to buy it they can. They have to be billionaire status," Sir John Madejski said. That will no doubt come as a big disappointment to all mere millionaire rich bastards who might have been eyeing Reading as a potential investment opportunity. For Reading, unlike many Championship clubs, is a bit of a cash cow.

The net cash profits after player trading aggregated over the two seasons following their relegation from the Premier League in 2008 were a little under £7.5m. Due to the high level of booked accounting charges, the club got to keep it all since there was no exposure to tax. After forcing down ongoing costs, such as wages, from £31m in the Premier League to £18.1m in 2010, that is a pretty good return.

Considering this was achieved while delivering on HSBC's demands that Reading repay their £6m-plus overdraft, the picture is hugely complimentary. Even when the Premier League parachute payments ran out in 2010, costing the club £12.4m in broadcasting income, there are signs that Reading could break even. It is harder to read Reading's fortunes in 2010-11 since no books are publicly available. But assumptions suggest that, with the sale of Shane Long to West Bromwich driving about £6m in net profit on player trading, the club made a comfortable cash profit last season.

Potential buyers should not be deterred by what the accounts state is a total squad value of £3.3m, since players such as the Wales internationals Hal Robson-Kanu and Simon Church are worth more than that on their own. They say football investment is one way to make rich men poor, but – although they sit only 15th in the Championship – Reading is one club that could buck the trend.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011 ... ki-reading

[M-U-R-T-Y]

Potential buyers should not be deterred by what the accounts state is a total squad value of £3.3m, since players such as the Wales internationals Hal Robson-Kanu and Simon Church are worth more than that on their own.

[melonhead]

by the end of the season maybe
probably are now, if lumped together

[FiNeRaIn]

by the end of the season maybe
probably are now, if lumped together

Shut up. Just shut up.

[melonhead]

i bloody wont!

[SouthDownsRoyal]

lok at stoke now

[Avon Royal]

Way too boring for another new thread about money, but this is in today's Grauniad:

When Reading's owner put his club up for sale, he did so using language unbecoming of a knight of the realm. "If some rich bastard wants to buy it they can. They have to be billionaire status," Sir John Madejski said. That will no doubt come as a big disappointment to all mere millionaire rich bastards who might have been eyeing Reading as a potential investment opportunity. For Reading, unlike many Championship clubs, is a bit of a cash cow.

The net cash profits after player trading aggregated over the two seasons following their relegation from the Premier League in 2008 were a little under £7.5m. Due to the high level of booked accounting charges, the club got to keep it all since there was no exposure to tax. After forcing down ongoing costs, such as wages, from £31m in the Premier League to £18.1m in 2010, that is a pretty good return.

Considering this was achieved while delivering on HSBC's demands that Reading repay their £6m-plus overdraft, the picture is hugely complimentary. Even when the Premier League parachute payments ran out in 2010, costing the club £12.4m in broadcasting income, there are signs that Reading could break even. It is harder to read Reading's fortunes in 2010-11 since no books are publicly available. But assumptions suggest that, with the sale of Shane Long to West Bromwich driving about £6m in net profit on player trading, the club made a comfortable cash profit last season.

Potential buyers should not be deterred by what the accounts state is a total squad value of £3.3m, since players such as the Wales internationals Hal Robson-Kanu and Simon Church are worth more than that on their own. They say football investment is one way to make rich men poor, but – although they sit only 15th in the Championship – Reading is one club that could buck the trend.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011 ... ki-reading

Ain't that the truth!

[Royal With Cheese]

Way too boring for another new thread about money, but this is in today's Grauniad:

When Reading's owner put his club up for sale, he did so using language unbecoming of a knight of the realm. "If some rich bastard wants to buy it they can. They have to be billionaire status," Sir John Madejski said. That will no doubt come as a big disappointment to all mere millionaire rich bastards who might have been eyeing Reading as a potential investment opportunity. For Reading, unlike many Championship clubs, is a bit of a cash cow.

The net cash profits after player trading aggregated over the two seasons following their relegation from the Premier League in 2008 were a little under £7.5m. Due to the high level of booked accounting charges, the club got to keep it all since there was no exposure to tax. After forcing down ongoing costs, such as wages, from £31m in the Premier League to £18.1m in 2010, that is a pretty good return.

Considering this was achieved while delivering on HSBC's demands that Reading repay their £6m-plus overdraft, the picture is hugely complimentary. Even when the Premier League parachute payments ran out in 2010, costing the club £12.4m in broadcasting income, there are signs that Reading could break even. It is harder to read Reading's fortunes in 2010-11 since no books are publicly available. But assumptions suggest that, with the sale of Shane Long to West Bromwich driving about £6m in net profit on player trading, the club made a comfortable cash profit last season.

Potential buyers should not be deterred by what the accounts state is a total squad value of £3.3m, since players such as the Wales internationals Hal Robson-Kanu and Simon Church are worth more than that on their own. They say football investment is one way to make rich men poor, but – although they sit only 15th in the Championship – Reading is one club that could buck the trend.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011 ... ki-reading

Was that in the small ads section?

[RoyalBlue]

Way too boring for another new thread about money, but this is in today's Grauniad:

When Reading's owner put his club up for sale, he did so using language unbecoming of a knight of the realm. "If some rich bastard wants to buy it they can. They have to be billionaire status," Sir John Madejski said. That will no doubt come as a big disappointment to all mere millionaire rich bastards who might have been eyeing Reading as a potential investment opportunity. For Reading, unlike many Championship clubs, is a bit of a cash cow.

The net cash profits after player trading aggregated over the two seasons following their relegation from the Premier League in 2008 were a little under £7.5m. Due to the high level of booked accounting charges, the club got to keep it all since there was no exposure to tax. After forcing down ongoing costs, such as wages, from £31m in the Premier League to £18.1m in 2010, that is a pretty good return.

Considering this was achieved while delivering on HSBC's demands that Reading repay their £6m-plus overdraft, the picture is hugely complimentary. Even when the Premier League parachute payments ran out in 2010, costing the club £12.4m in broadcasting income, there are signs that Reading could break even. It is harder to read Reading's fortunes in 2010-11 since no books are publicly available. But assumptions suggest that, with the sale of Shane Long to West Bromwich driving about £6m in net profit on player trading, the club made a comfortable cash profit last season.

Potential buyers should not be deterred by what the accounts state is a total squad value of £3.3m, since players such as the Wales internationals Hal Robson-Kanu and Simon Church are worth more than that on their own. They say football investment is one way to make rich men poor, but – although they sit only 15th in the Championship – Reading is one club that could buck the trend.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011 ... ki-reading

How come there's no mention of recurring black holes? Did they not study the accounts and realise that we lose loads of money each season and have to sell our best players to survive?

[brendywendy]

holes or not we are making multi million pound profits year on year, very few teams can say that in english football.
not that the fans will care massively about that. but potential buyers may(although only as a way for them to make(take) money out of us.

[mr_number]

TBH, much as I love the Guardian, and I think they make a reasonable point about profit generation, the idea that Hal or Church is worth over £3m is laughable and invalidates everything they say in that article.

[Svlad Cjelli]

They're the sort of players who are internationals and everyone inside football rates as great prospects, so journalists also know about them.

Similar to the way Sidwell was the only one any journos had ever heard of at the start of the 106 season.

[Hampshire Royal]

Way too boring for another new thread about money, but this is in today's Grauniad:

When Reading's owner put his club up for sale, he did so using language unbecoming of a knight of the realm. "If some rich bastard wants to buy it they can. They have to be billionaire status," Sir John Madejski said. That will no doubt come as a big disappointment to all mere millionaire rich bastards who might have been eyeing Reading as a potential investment opportunity. For Reading, unlike many Championship clubs, is a bit of a cash cow.

The net cash profits after player trading aggregated over the two seasons following their relegation from the Premier League in 2008 were a little under £7.5m. Due to the high level of booked accounting charges, the club got to keep it all since there was no exposure to tax. After forcing down ongoing costs, such as wages, from £31m in the Premier League to £18.1m in 2010, that is a pretty good return.

Considering this was achieved while delivering on HSBC's demands that Reading repay their £6m-plus overdraft, the picture is hugely complimentary. Even when the Premier League parachute payments ran out in 2010, costing the club £12.4m in broadcasting income, there are signs that Reading could break even. It is harder to read Reading's fortunes in 2010-11 since no books are publicly available. But assumptions suggest that, with the sale of Shane Long to West Bromwich driving about £6m in net profit on player trading, the club made a comfortable cash profit last season.

Potential buyers should not be deterred by what the accounts state is a total squad value of £3.3m, since players such as the Wales internationals Hal Robson-Kanu and Simon Church are worth more than that on their own. They say football investment is one way to make rich men poor, but – although they sit only 15th in the Championship – Reading is one club that could buck the trend.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011 ... ki-reading

How come there's no mention of recurring black holes? Did they not study the accounts and realise that we lose loads of money each season and have to sell our best players to survive?

That's true, not a word about black holes, the only mention was of £6 million overdraft having to be paid back and a loss of £12.4 million when the parachute payments ran out.
Madejski out