20 Nov 2015 12:10:56
Just seeing some interviews to be played at AGM online.
What caught my attention was the following.
Living Wage. No, but most permanent employees on £7.85 but LOSE their bonuses
Ian Bankier on Ronnie. he has done well domestically, but underachieved in europe (good they noticed that)
on Player investment. all profits made are invested back in team (really show the fans where)
Lawwell on Ronnie. a young manager who needs time, some disappoiting results in europe (no, your'e kidding, really? )
on Player investment. same as Bankier all monies made reinvested, all us fans must be missing all these great players coming in.
I smell Rafael Schite.
20 Nov 2015 12:22:40
No sign of Dermot, There's a shock.
20 Nov 2015 12:59:48
So we can expect to see £12-13m put into the side in january then. Because that's how much we made/saved over the summer with transfers.
20 Nov 2015 16:51:22
Wish that was true Jim but sadly we all know that is not going to happen Saying that not in any way defending the board but they will say that is an overall figure cost of all wages overall running and maintenance travel to and from grounds and all other expenses to the amount that the club brings in gate money sail ofplayers and other money the club brings in subtsubtract one from the other and that is the money we have to spend on players.
20 Nov 2015 17:06:40
Not necessary Jim Tim, the club can spend considerably less than £10m and still be correct that all the money they receive on transfers are invested back in team . It is highly possible that all other money Celtic receive in the season doesn't cover the club's expenses and so some of the £10 m goes on existing wages and some on new players and their wages .
20 Nov 2015 18:15:14
Where does 10m come from? Doubt any transfer is fully paid up front?
20 Nov 2015 18:23:22
In many cases the actual figure quoted on a transfer is not paid as a lump sum. So arguably they do spend what actually comes in on the day but the additional payments to achieve the agreed sum do not get invested (does that make sense? )
20 Nov 2015 19:00:02
Oh so that's their trick! Agree 13m for Virgil. But we'll have a fiver now, the rest in installments. That way we can say that all transfer fees are reinvested. How silly of me.
20 Nov 2015 20:35:29
Jim Tim the way it works is this. Let's say we agree £10m to sell a player. He gets a contract over 4 years. We agree a deal maybe at £2.5 mill a year back to us to cover the £10mill. In the accounts however we take that £10 mill as being paid even though we have only received £2.5 mill. Same when we buy. We agree say £2mill but maybe pay it over 2 years. We won't be able to write that £2 mill off as the player is an asset so he sits on the books at £2mill till he is sold and he generates a profit or a loss. If Celtic don't sell players then we generate losses so there is no £12 mill lump of cash from VVD sitting there to be reinvested.
21 Nov 2015 04:17:50
I get how it works. Still doesn't mean enough is reinvested. Can we not just assume we'll be getting that 13m and go out and spend it?