foreveryoung Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Faulkner gets away with murder on these forums. Does anyone realise what a CEO's remit is while the owner is not here. And who hired him? Who continues to employ him? Kinda agree where your going! But to be fair, he should have been sacked after the O'Neil debarcle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Faulkner gets away with murder on these forums. Does anyone realise what a CEO's remit is while the owner is not here. The first man to go for me would be Faulkner. I think a new man in who knows the technical side of football and not just the marketing and finance, would improve the club no end................!! We could possibly move on with 20 million per season transfers and Lerner. We can't move on with a CEO who thinks employing (weather agreeing or overseeing) McLeish was a great idea! I would have thought that the priority should be to hire a team manager who knows the technical side of football, because the present one clearly doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacketspuds Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Faulkner gets away with murder on these forums. Does anyone realise what a CEO's remit is while the owner is not here. The first man to go for me would be Faulkner. I think a new man in who knows the technical side of football and not just the marketing and finance, would improve the club no end................!! We could possibly move on with 20 million per season transfers and Lerner. We can't move on with a CEO who thinks employing (weather agreeing or overseeing) McLeish was a great idea! I would have thought that the priority should be to hire a team manager who knows the technical side of football, because the present one clearly doesn't. I think a proven track record in business is also very important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted February 27, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted February 27, 2014 I think a proven track record in business is also very important. Nah - even Doug had one of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Faulkner gets away with murder on these forums. Does anyone realise what a CEO's remit is while the owner is not here. And who hired him? Who continues to employ him? Kinda agree where your going! But to be fair, he should have been sacked after the O'Neil debarcle. which debacle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Seen on twitter that apparently the most recent financial results are due on the 28th of this month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Seen on twitter that apparently the most recent financial results are due on the 28th of this month. thats today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 They are due today. They were late last year though, so wouldn't hold your breath. I've got my Companies House account set to let me know when they are avilable though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 They will be interesting reading for us fans. Shame we cant get this years half year accounts too so we have an up to date picture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 They will be interesting reading for us fans. Shame we cant get this years half year accounts too so we have an up to date picture Fear not, young sir, because they will at the very least tell us what has been spent last summer and this January transferwise in the Post Balance Sheet Events note. Which should help put to bed some of the arguments over the costs of players, at least as a total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Oh that's good then, happy with that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I'm no financial whizzkid but do enjoy having a browse of the figures to see the state of play. Risso will these figures show us what our annual wage bill is now at and what it is in relation to our turnover or do we get that in the summertime? That's what I'm most interested in really, just to see if this eternal costcutting will ever stop. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 The figures will show the turnover and all expenses up to 31 May 2013, so yes the wages to turnover ratio for last year can be calculated. This year's accounts to 31 May 2014 will be out this time next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_c Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 They will be interesting reading for us fans. Shame we cant get this years half year accounts too so we have an up to date picture Fear not, young sir, because they will at the very least tell us what has been spent last summer and this January transferwise in the Post Balance Sheet Events note. Which should help put to bed some of the arguments over the costs of players, at least as a total. Unless we agreed to pay previous years transfers in installments and those costs are still coming out of our accounts. I doubt we stumped all the money up front for Bent, for example, but how many installments and over what period there were is anyone's guess. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) They will be interesting reading for us fans. Shame we cant get this years half year accounts too so we have an up to date picture Fear not, young sir, because they will at the very least tell us what has been spent last summer and this January transferwise in the Post Balance Sheet Events note. Which should help put to bed some of the arguments over the costs of players, at least as a total. Unless we agreed to pay previous years transfers in installments and those costs are still coming out of our accounts. I doubt we stumped all the money up front for Bent, for example, but how many installments and over what period there were is anyone's guess. Sorry. That's not how accounts work. The cost is agreed up front, and that is the figure in the accounts. When the amounts are spread over a certain length of time, that's included in creditors due less than and greater than one year. The only thing the transfer figure won't contain is any contingent liabilities that haven't yet kicked in. The PBSE notes states what the club is committed to pay, and the fact that this might be in installments is irrelevant to the information. Sorry. Edited February 28, 2014 by Risso Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 If I had a pound for every time this issue had come up, about treating payments by instalments in the accounts, I could buy the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 If I had a pound for every time this issue had come up, about treating payments by instalments in the accounts, I could buy the club. It's really very simple. If a player is bought for £1m, that's the cost refelected in the accounts. That amount might be spread over a certain number of years, but it doesn't affect the cost of the player. If additional amounts become payable as a result of an uncertain future activity (say, playing 50 games or gaining an international cap) then that doesn't get reflected in the costs initially, and would be reflected as a contingent liability. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_c Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Realise that aside made me sound like a Dick there, didn't mean, I am right so there, sorry. Meant it's something that people will still argue about, sorry. Does seem like it would somewhat askew the financial figures (as in money actually leaving the club) from year to year. Not as much with Villa, but with some of the bigger spending clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 No more excuses after these accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 how do you mean bj? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts