New signings

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monaco_Totty

Difficult to get across what PSR is but
it's critical to understand that cash flows & profits are different - as my Mum would say "Revenue is vanity, profit is sanity but cash is king.” ��

Profits indicate the income remaining after all expenses, cash flows indicate the net flow of cash in & out of a business.
So the intrinsic value of any business is derived from the cash flows it can expect to generate.

Cash flows are generally considered a more robust metric to assess an entity’s financial performance as compared to profits which can be affected by accounting policies or “creative practices" - so enter PSR ! ��

The Leeds Board desire to include the sale of Gray into their 2023/24 accounts season suggests the club were off setting particular PSR rules which cover all figures accountable on our balance sheets for that periods requirements.

As clubs can only lose £15m of their own money across 3 years, that's no more than £15m extra on outgoings like "transfer fees owed", "player wages" & in lots of clubs cases paying off Coaches - all then compared to their income from TV payments, Season tickets revenue, selling players etc, etc.

So anything above that up to the £105m barrier "must be guaranteed" by their owner(s) buying up shares, known as 'secure funding', so essentially bankrolling the club, mmm.

The leagues require clubs to submit their "financial-plans" for the next 2 seasons providing info into how they're going to avoid overstepping the mark.
So of course any "newly aquired" outside investment would be most welcome, as was the case for Leeds who publicly announced (coincidently) via Red Bull on 2nd July 2024.��

Transfer Payments owed & Wages out were the main issue - no matter what Kinnears latest PR press skirt "squeeze" suggests.

You'll recall Leeds turned down the Brentford offer for Gray basically over their payment schedules offered not being accepted !

As our owners were under pressure to report the Gray deal in last accounts (for which the deadline passed on June 30th 2024) to cover the whole 23/24 PSR period & ensure we stayed within all financial rules within that deadline including all our transfer payments legal obligations being met.

Although the Gray transfer concluded on July 2nd 2024 it is believed the club were able to provide the basic required remit paperwork allowable to the relevant authorities (PL & EFL) into allowing them to backdate said transfer to Spurs within the 2023/24 accounting period rules.
As i previously alluded nothing strange about release clauses for players nowadays which the club was happy to also publicly state as they knew fans would be upset.

Whilst this would probably be reported by club PR as mere “near miss mitigation" it would have also been assessed as a defo breach of PSR if indeed it was filed in the FY24/25.
So it is generally believed the transfer was actually accounted for in the FY23/24 period & therefore "no breach" for all scheduled transfer repayment obligations which were subsequently met on time.

Stefan Borson (Group CEO Watchstone Group plc Easteigh) regularly comments on football finances on X-Twitter, particularly Leeds Utd, which of late he's also suggested that our Board had to act in the "creative way" to circumnavigate PSR within the fee's owed schedule rules.
Likewise @KieranMaguire the football finance wiz too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kieran_Maguire

I understand Leeds actually turned down a solid £30m offer for Rutter after the Gray deal had concluded with sources in France stating it was Brighton who'd put said bid in & that both Lyon & Marseille were interested too, with the latter also still keen on Meslier. ��

That recent offer refused would suggest that the Gray deal money was indeed set within an installment plan that can provide no need to sell our better players on the cheap to satisfy PSR rules now.

Finally, now the PSR's rules deadline has passed, all clubs can re-assess their purchasing power for the remainder of the window leaving us to have a list for in's if our stars release clauses are triggered & if they wish to go of course. ��

Just saying

---

You've certainly done your homework MT very helpful to lazy tosspots like me lol!

MT,
If it wasn’t such an offensive concept I’d suggest you would make a great journo. However you do too much research and actually state facts. You would have to lower your standards and practice parroting whatever you are told to print to become one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monaco_Totty

Difficult to get across what PSR is but
it's critical to understand that cash flows & profits are different - as my Mum would say "Revenue is vanity, profit is sanity but cash is king.” 😅

Profits indicate the income remaining after all expenses, cash flows indicate the net flow of cash in & out of a business.
So the intrinsic value of any business is derived from the cash flows it can expect to generate.

Cash flows are generally considered a more robust metric to assess an entity’s financial performance as compared to profits which can be affected by accounting policies or “creative practices" - so enter PSR ! 🙂

The Leeds Board desire to include the sale of Gray into their 2023/24 accounts season suggests the club were off setting particular PSR rules which cover all figures accountable on our balance sheets for that periods requirements.

As clubs can only lose £15m of their own money across 3 years, that's no more than £15m extra on outgoings like "transfer fees owed", "player wages" & in lots of clubs cases paying off Coaches - all then compared to their income from TV payments, Season tickets revenue, selling players etc, etc.

So anything above that up to the £105m barrier "must be guaranteed" by their owner(s) buying up shares, known as 'secure funding', so essentially bankrolling the club, mmm.

The leagues require clubs to submit their "financial-plans" for the next 2 seasons providing info into how they're going to avoid overstepping the mark.
So of course any "newly aquired" outside investment would be most welcome, as was the case for Leeds who publicly announced (coincidently) via Red Bull on 2nd July 2024.😉

Transfer Payments owed & Wages out were the main issue - no matter what Kinnears latest PR press skirt "squeeze" suggests.

You'll recall Leeds turned down the Brentford offer for Gray basically over their payment schedules offered not being accepted !

As our owners were under pressure to report the Gray deal in last accounts (for which the deadline passed on June 30th 2024) to cover the whole 23/24 PSR period & ensure we stayed within all financial rules within that deadline including all our transfer payments legal obligations being met.

Although the Gray transfer concluded on July 2nd 2024 it is believed the club were able to provide the basic required remit paperwork allowable to the relevant authorities (PL & EFL) into allowing them to backdate said transfer to Spurs within the 2023/24 accounting period rules.
As i previously alluded nothing strange about release clauses for players nowadays which the club was happy to also publicly state as they knew fans would be upset.

Whilst this would probably be reported by club PR as mere “near miss mitigation" it would have also been assessed as a defo breach of PSR if indeed it was filed in the FY24/25.
So it is generally believed the transfer was actually accounted for in the FY23/24 period & therefore "no breach" for all scheduled transfer repayment obligations which were subsequently met on time.

Stefan Borson (Group CEO Watchstone Group plc Easteigh) regularly comments on football finances on X-Twitter, particularly Leeds Utd, which of late he's also suggested that our Board had to act in the "creative way" to circumnavigate PSR within the fee's owed schedule rules.
Likewise @KieranMaguire the football finance wiz too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kieran_Maguire

I understand Leeds actually turned down a solid £30m offer for Rutter after the Gray deal had concluded with sources in France stating it was Brighton who'd put said bid in & that both Lyon & Marseille were interested too, with the latter also still keen on Meslier. 😬

That recent offer refused would suggest that the Gray deal money was indeed set within an installment plan that can provide no need to sell our better players on the cheap to satisfy PSR rules now.

Finally, now the PSR's rules deadline has passed, all clubs can re-assess their purchasing power for the remainder of the window leaving us to have a list for in's if our stars release clauses are triggered & if they wish to go of course. 👀

Just saying

---

Not quite sure I can square what you say above withe the detailed analysis included in post #26 of the "Gray FMR" thread, where you demonstrated quite succinctly why FSR implications NEED not have played a part in the sale pf Gray. I stress the word NEED. The club, from what you detailed in that post and the one above, had a choice. To sell a player who has wanted to leave the club for at least the last two seasons, but for a slightly lower sales value, or to sell a Leeds Academy player who has consistently expressed a desire to remain at the club and see it prosper. Our owners appear to have chosen the latter, and for reasons that neither of your posts would support (as they omit the implications of the dates of various transfer fee payments which were due), as there was no NEED for the club to do either to meet FSR requirements.

We are left with several players who have made it quite clear (contemporaneously and historically) that they don't wish to be with the club, and a number of returnees who are equally disinclined to be LUFC players . At the same time we are now bereft of the services of a true star in the making and a great advert for the quality of what the LUFC Academy can produce. Some result! :mad::mad::mad:

Ok the euros are over. Who are we signing then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyni

Ok the euros are over. Who are we signing then?

---

Good question.

Depend who’s in the “middle of Lidl” aisle

The blunts have set a price for Bogle so would be good to get him in. Similarly, we suddenly seem to be linked very strongly with Jack Clarke.

Both of those would be fantastic additions.

Sad that we sold Clarke in the first place

Clarke is a better player than he would have been. He has had to carry some heavy load over the years since he was sold. Have a feeling he'd have spent a lot of time on the pine like Shackleton or Cresswell. We seem to be really hard on home grown talent from our youth system. Gray was an exception. Just too big of a name and too good to sit.

Bogle really looks good on paper. Probably too much to hope for that we'd actually get a true Right back.

Good points Spaldy

Add to that list of players who had to leave to develop

Max Dean
Leif Davis
Huggins
Hjelde
Drameh

All looking decent and will be interesting to see how Lief goes in the prem