Jump to content

Clapham Saint

Members
  • Posts

    1,804
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Clapham Saint's Achievements

  1. Have you never heard of a "six pointer"?
  2. Clapham Saint

    Russia

    Somebody who doesn't care how many people die...
  3. Without seeing the contract we'll never know but the obvious solution would be for these buy back clauses to have an expiration date - which I presume that they do. That protects clubs in Saints' position by preventing clauses being used 10 (or however many) years later after multiple new contracts but also protects the club in Chelsea's position from having teh clause invalidated by a new contract.
  4. Basically - if you need to draw lines to be able to tell then it is automatically onside. Sounds doable to me.
  5. Whilst technically yes, tourists visit Auchwitz, calling it tourist attraction suggests, to me at least, a very different place/experience than is actually the case. I challenge even the most liberal amongst us to visit Auchwitz and not have it make an impact upon their outlook on life and make them reflect on how they view people who are different from themselves.
  6. Took me a second read to realise what you meant by "take care of it". Thought you were referring to some sort of orphanage at first...
  7. Interest is accruing though. The repayments not starting until 2025 doesn't mean that it isn't a good idea to reduce the balance before then (which we may or may not be able to do under the terms).
  8. Congrats on the new job. One note of caution though. No matter how aggrieved person A might be it is rarely a good idea to "let rip" in an exit interview - although that isn't what you said that you were intending to do, it sounds as though you might be considering it. By all means let them know that you felt undervalued but I would try to avoid burning bridges unless there is no other option. Congrats again. B
  9. I won't claim to be an expert. Some experience from the employers' side but that's all so happy to defer. My reasoning was that it sounds from the OP as though person A was seconded elsewhere - which implies that they would (in theory at least) be returning. If they were to return then there are now two people and only one role. Hence why I suggested that they might be both asked to reapply for the role as part of a process. N.B. Posts where people question why another poster said that they are wrong can often come across as unnecessarily aggressive. I hope this doesn't come across this way - I'm genuinely interested in why this doesn't work.
  10. Sorry to say this if SO16 is Person A but I think Weston's assessment is correct. Even if Person A has over 2 years experience I would have thought that if there was a redundnacy process and Person A and Person B were both asked to apply for the only remaining post then it would be reasonably easy for the employer to select Person B becuase the end client has asked that Person A not work in that role. I hope it isn't you SO16 but good luck to Person A in either event.
  11. You are correct that if his value is £6.2m and he left now then we would show a cost of £6.2m (plus whatever fees), and so would need to sell for at least that much to avoid showing a loss on the transaction in this year's accounts. However, I wouldn't get too hung up on the amortisation value. It is a short term accounting entry and makes no difference to the medium term profit/loss or cash. Whatever value his contract has in the balance sheet will be written down to zero when he leaves, whether that be in 2 years on a free or being sold, and this can't be avoided. By way of example: If we were to sell him for £1m now, then (ignoring agents fees and loyalty payments for simplicity), we would show a loss of £5.2m on the transaction in this year's accounts. If we keep him to the end of his contract then we show an amortisation cost of £3.1m this year and an amortisation cost of £3.1m next year = total cost £6.2m. We'd also have the cost of whatever his wages are if he does not end up out on loan. When evaluating what we "need to sell for" the key number isn't the profit or loss in this year (£5.2m loss in this example), but the total cash flow over the course of the contract. In this example we're £1m plus his wages (£6.2m - £5.2m), better off by taking the £1m now despite the fact that it would increase costs in this year's accounts by £2.1m (£5.2m - £3.1m). You can make the example more complicated by adding in figures for wages, loan fees, agents fees and assigning a value that we would "gain" from any games which he actually were to actually play for us before he leaves - but the principle that the amortisation value isn't something to get hung up on stays the same. I hope that makes sense....
  12. Um. I think I can see a link. [emoji6] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  13. Watching in the app on a Samsung. So far it has been flawless (hope i haven’t jinxed it) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})