You disagree. That’s fine. I’m not lambasting the owners over this - I’m just saying it shouldn’t be waved through as being okay just because other clubs have done it. Those other clubs aren’t owned by the same people and I don’t think you have explained at all why that shouldn’t be a concern.[/quote] I think you've got it backwards. If you want to raise a concern about something that's a perfectly normal way of doing things in the business, you need to illustrate why. Thus far, no one has done that. I see no reason to be concerned about something the vast majority of other clubs do. For me, the only thing even worth questioning here is whether or not we got real market value for the players. Given that an asset is only worth what someone is willing to pay, and to the best of anyone's knowledge no one else was willing to pay anything, I'm not sure there's a lot of conversation to be had there. We managed to get around 20 million in a market where practically no one was buying (and apparently no one wanted our players), and the deal was structured in a way that wouldn't produce immediate or lasting financial damage for either club. That's as much of a win as I think you can get under the circumstances. The fact remains, however, that it's perfectly normal business practice in football. I just don't see any more to it than that. If we'd have been relegated a season earlier things would have been different, but we weren't. We had a crappy hand and we had to play it out in the least crappy way. Until someone presents a credible alternative solution this seems just about the best outcome that could have come from a terrible market. As it stands, all I see is the owners managed to come up with a way to get two highly paid players off our books, get us 20 million of income in an environment where no one was buying, and secure a loan against pending payments to allow us to strengthen ahead of the coming season. Here's a question for consideration, though: why would a club of Udinese's financial resources stump up around 20 million in one lump sum in the middle of a pandemic, given that during times of extreme economic hardship having cash reserves to meet business obligations is highly important?[/QUOTE] As I say, it’s fine to disagree. I appreciate the detail you’ve gone into but I haven’t read anything within that I hadn’t already considered. You think this is a normal deal irrespective of the fact it’s between two clubs owned by the same people and all the same caveats can still be applied as if the clubs were separate entities. I disagree. You’ve stated a lot of stuff as fact however that you simply can’t know without our finances being published. I’ve done the same in some posts most likely, admittedly! If you want to wave things through as being normal that’s fine, I have no issue with your viewpoint. I think others, including myself, feel the finances need scrutinising when they arrive to an extent that some don’t want to. Anyway, happy to debate this further come Monday but frankly the weather is nice and I’m gonna go back to enjoying it with family!
I think you make a lot of good points here, but I would add that I have concerns about the Pussetto business as well. We basically paid for their most expensive signing in recent history (save for Mandragora who they had a dodgy deal with Juve for) and got absolutely nothing out of it. They may well pay us back in the future but as it stands, the £7-15m we spent on him would have been bloody useful when we got relegated.
This one puzzles me, I'm certain he was just a favour to Udinese (I almost hope he was, because it puzzles me how generally smart football people could think he'd survive in English football!), but why do some reports say £7m and some say £15m? £7m...eh, I can kind of live with it, but £15m on a player with the physicality of a wet paper bag?! That'd genuinely be worse than the Gray and Success deals!
Well, the only answers to those questions that might satisfy us would be from the only people who know the true situation - the owners. And they don’t feel the need to tell us. And even if they did, there are those on the forum who would not believe them, even if they did make the statement. Which sort of renders the whole thread pointless.
So by that deduction, you could equally say that if they came out and painted a bleak picture, there are those on the forum who would deny that reality? It works both ways as much as anyone on either side wants to deny it doesn’t.
I don’t see why it would work both ways ? I don’t see too many on the thread saying our finances are brilliant. Just some saying they are terrible and we should be deeply concerned, and others saying we don’t have access to the current status, current plans and cashflow forecasts so no reason not to trust the owners are doing the best thing for their investment.
The club need to drop a million into AMC shares, is a no brainer at this point and will easily be worth one hundred times that amount soon, just hodl.
Where have I once claimed or suggested anyone is saying our finances are ‘brilliant’? Moreover, I don’t see anyone claiming that we are heading for financial Armageddon either. Just some fans who are concerned. Why overstate peoples concerns and comments but not allow the other side of the argument to do the same if that’s the road you want to go down?
I didn't say that you had claimed or suggeted that anyone is saying our finances are ‘brilliant’? I haven't overstated peoples concerns. No need to create conflict where there is none I've simply said that no-one is saying they are brilliant. Some like Jumbo and Moog are very concerned about what is going on, others like myself, and Jon G are less concerned as we don't have the full facts and know that the decision-makers do.
When you ‘accuse’ me of creating conflict where there is none.....what were you trying to achieve when you said there were people saying our finances are ‘terrible and we should be deeply concerned’? People have asked questions and think the nature of some of the deals stink. The club obviously don’t think they stink. Bit they have a history of acting in both the clubs positive and negative interests. So what’s the problem in people querying the negative? But there’s a sea of difference between that and what you have said so perhaps it wasn’t me that was ‘creating conflict’. I’m a bit bored of this now really so my overriding viewpoint is this....Promotion to the PL doesn’t mean we have free reign to start/continue/repeat poor business practices. And yes, it worries me that some fans think the handbrake has been taken off because of promotion. So if there’s a financial deal that’s done that looks iffy or sketchy in the detail, I’ll question it. But that’s doesn’t mean for one minute that I think it’s 100% dodgy. As is the case with this loan. I’d like to know/see more but reserve the right to ask questions before accounts etc are released.
Here we go again. Where have I said there's a problem in people querying the negative ? I haven't. I'm very happy for them to. I respect their opinion. Is that ok ?
Every man and his dog knew that the Andre Gray finance was a disaster in the making . Who signed that one off ? However Doucoure Sarr Pedro Richarlison etc outweigh by some extent the Andre Gray signing .
Accounts for the relegation season have landed: https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/19412419.watford-operate-35million-loss-relegation-season/ I’ll leave it up to those who know their onions to provide some analysis.
Loss of £36m in the season that we were still in the prem, largely due to Covid. Wonder what additional loss we made in the last 12m with parachute payments and minimal gate/hive receipts ? Thank **** for promotion. "....with the sales of Dodi Lukebakio, Dimitri Foulquier and Obbi Oulare bringing in £18.1m". I'm hearing that Obbi made up £12.3m of this sum.
Anyone know where the Observer are getting this info from? Nothing seems to have been filed at Companies House for either the club or the parent company. Guessing they've filed the accounts with the league?
The accounts are on the club website. https://www.watfordfc.com/storage/40495/2020-Financial-Report.pdf
Hooray! It's that time of year where the athletic football experts take a back seat and let the obese accountants have their moment in the spotlight. Can't wait to read their forensic analysis of these accounts. Go beancounters!
Thats a year ago so before the impact of relegation/reduced champ tv revenues plus covid still ongoing so almost no matchday revenues. Last year will be worse.....
One of the biggest items is revaluation of Land and Buildings from £35m to £97m to bolster the balance sheet. Really? Also, we have valued player registrations on our books at £111m - judge for yourself whether you could get anywhere near that number by adding them up. Edit - Does that figure include Doucouré; Delefeou; Pereyra?
Its for FY ending June 2020 so assets would include players on the books on that date, calculated according to their depreciation not any actual transfer value days or weeks after
No idea, are players straight line or reducing do you think? Other than that would imagine purchase price over contract years
Would have to be straight line over contract, otherwise there would be residual value to write off when they got to Bosman.
