Richards Part Exchange

[opinions4u]

Paert exchange going to a tribunal is a nightmare scenario.

 

For example, £12m Lescott and £8m Richards change clubs (my valuations, for the sake of argument).

 

Everton say Lescott's worth £6m and City value Richards at £2m.

 

Everton and City agree the valuations.

 

Everton and Man City save a fortune in VAT.

 

Latics lose out on £1.6m and end up with £400k.

 

 

 

 

[Guest FyldeBlue]

Paert exchange going to a tribunal is a nightmare scenario.

 

 

Edited June 10, 2009 by FyldeBlue

[Guest FyldeBlue]

I suppose for arguments sake it's Ok to guess what we think players are worth, your quoted example does not work and is not the way the Tribunal would see it, in fact they would see it as quite a blatant attempt to fiddle something or somebody and in particular Micah Richards and Lescott.

 

Everton woul not sell Lescott for a fee for the amount you quote, in fact they don't want to sell him at all, the difference is if Arsenal are involved, Mr Venger only buys players on the basis that their worth will increase and thereby when they get fed up or whatever he tries to and usually make a profit from his dealings in the long term.

 

I suspect that Mr Venger has already seen the great potential in Micah Richards, though he is now nothing like the player he was before Mark Hughes came on the scene !.....Micah has undoubted great potential and qualities and if anyone is capable of bringing them out again - Arsene Venger is the man...so he may be looking to get rid of one of his aging players and see Micah as the potential replacement in time !

 

This is similar to the Crewe Director of Football, Dario Grady - he has been at Crewe for over 20 years and has it in his contract that he gets 10% of the value of any players sold on by the club, I'm not suggesting Arsenal have the same arrangement with Mr Venger but I'm fairly sure there will be something in which he benefits from the club making profit.

 

It does not make any sense to suggest that clubs manipulate transfer values, that is why there is a Tribunal, I'm not suggesting that there could not be any attempt to fiddle us because it has happened in the past with those beloved Reds and their OAP (lost it Manager) and I remember the case of David Brown whom I believe may still be playing at Accrington.

 

We had David Brown poached and those Reds had to pay a fine of £50,000 and also had to pay us £500,000 of any of his future value... what did they do ?....gave him away I think if my memory serves me right, no doubt someone on here will jump in to correct me.

 

We will just have to hope that we are treated fairly and I'm sure Mr Corney has his head screwed on the right way.

[opinions4u]

Everton woul not sell Lescott for a fee for the amount you quote

The figures are very much an example. As is the involvement of Lescott or Everton. It could easily be different clubs, different players etc based on the latest newspaper you read.

 

The point being that if the two clubs involved in a part excahnge agree to lower valuations (with the same differential of £xxm cash as a makeweight) it leaves the door open for

 

- Latics to get hammered

- Both clubs to benefit from a lower VAT bill

 

A tribunal deciding on their values will take in to account how mch both clubs involved say the players are worth. The potential for a stitch up here is significant.

[singe]

 

I have received this email from the Football League.Seems we will be the victims of a stitch up!

 

Dear Mark

Thank you for your email. I cannot speak for Manchester City in terms of Richards’ value but I would be confident that, if sold to another club, the fee would be agreed between the parties and not subject to a tribunal. Any money then due to Oldham as part of a sell-on clause would be forwarded by the Football League to the club, when confirmation is received at our office.

 

Kind Regards

 

 

Nick Jones

Customer Services Department

The Football League Ltd

 

Email njones@football-league.co.uk

www.football-league.co.uk

 

 

 

 

[millsy82]

I have received this email from the Football League.Seems we will be the victims of a stitch up!

 

Dear Mark

Thank you for your email. I cannot speak for Manchester City in terms of Richards’ value but I would be confident that, if sold to another club, the fee would be agreed between the parties and not subject to a tribunal. Any money then due to Oldham as part of a sell-on clause would be forwarded by the Football League to the club, when confirmation is received at our office.

 

Kind Regards

 

 

Nick Jones

Customer Services Department

The Football League Ltd

 

Email njones@football-league.co.uk

www.football-league.co.uk

 

Well thats not a nice thought!

 

Surely we would have some course of action to complain if we were dupped out of any money owed to us. The mere fact that Micah Richards is an England international would put his value closer to £10 million rather than £5 million. Also the if the swap deal was done with Lescott then we would almost definatley be able to prove that he is worth £15 million as an established England international (he makes almost every squad these days), so City would have to value Richards quite high to avoid paying more money to Everton.

 

Out of intrest who was the last England defender to make a transfer and how much did they leave for? Glen Johnson wasn't in the England team when he signed for Pompey nor was Matthew Upon upon his move to West Ham. I'm stuggling to think of any others?

 

[LaticsPete]

Well thats not a nice thought!

 

Surely we would have some course of action to complain if we were dupped out of any money owed to us. The mere fact that Micah Richards is an England international would put his value closer to £10 million rather than £5 million. Also the if the swap deal was done with Lescott then we would almost definatley be able to prove that he is worth £15 million as an established England international (he makes almost every squad these days), so City would have to value Richards quite high to avoid paying more money to Everton.

 

Out of intrest who was the last England defender to make a transfer and how much did they leave for? Glen Johnson wasn't in the England team when he signed for Pompey nor was Matthew Upon upon his move to West Ham. I'm stuggling to think of any others?

 

 

Wayne Bridge cost Man City £10m in January.

[Stitch_KTF]

I have received this email from the Football League.Seems we will be the victims of a stitch up!

 

Dear Mark

Thank you for your email. I cannot speak for Manchester City in terms of Richards’ value but I would be confident that, if sold to another club, the fee would be agreed between the parties and not subject to a tribunal. Any money then due to Oldham as part of a sell-on clause would be forwarded by the Football League to the club, when confirmation is received at our office.

 

Kind Regards

 

 

Nick Jones

Customer Services Department

The Football League Ltd

 

Email njones@football-league.co.uk

www.football-league.co.uk

 

 

But that ignores the scenario of a swop?

 

 

 

 

Well thats not a nice thought!

 

Surely we would have some course of action to complain if we were dupped out of any money owed to us. The mere fact that Micah Richards is an England international would put his value closer to £10 million rather than £5 million. Also the if the swap deal was done with Lescott then we would almost definatley be able to prove that he is worth £15 million as an established England international (he makes almost every squad these days), so City would have to value Richards quite high to avoid paying more money to Everton.

 

Out of intrest who was the last England defender to make a transfer and how much did they leave for? Glen Johnson wasn't in the England team when he signed for Pompey nor was Matthew Upon upon his move to West Ham. I'm stuggling to think of any others?

 

 

Richards is only worth what somebody is prepared to pay for him, regardless of his credentials. Of course credentials like this ought to be considered in the event of a swop deal valuation.

[singe]

I do agree his comment ignored my question, typical.

Howevr, I cannot beleive Everton would simply swap Lescott for Richards.

It just doesn't make much sense.

I cannot recall many straight swaps for England level players.

 

[Guest FyldeBlue]

But that ignores the scenario of a swop?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Richards is only worth what somebody is prepared to pay for him, regardless of his credentials. Of course credentials like this ought to be considered in the event of a swop deal valuation.

 

[Guest FyldeBlue]

If this suggested swap happened which I very much doubt would take place, without careful intervention by the F.A. and F.L. but if as you say a straight swap took place, the value of each player is considered and a market figure would be established based on numerous facts.

 

If say the the authorities valued Lescott and Richards at £10m - £15m I think you will find that we are still entitled to the 20% cut on the values, so for £10m we would get £2m and for £15m we would get £3m.

Edited June 10, 2009 by FyldeBlue

[real]

Paert exchange going to a tribunal is a nightmare scenario.

 

For example, £12m Lescott and £8m Richards change clubs (my valuations, for the sake of argument).

 

Everton say Lescott's worth £6m and City value Richards at £2m.

 

Everton and City agree the valuations.

 

Everton and Man City save a fortune in VAT.

 

Latics lose out on £1.6m and end up with £400k.

 

 

And the Taxman sits back and does nothing whilst looking at the governments liabilities in the financial sector? No.

 

I would reckon on the Taxman having a fair bit to say if the deal was not set at a realistic valuation. I'm sure that all sorts of businesses try this sort of trick, but I bet they don't often get away with it. High profile businesses have even less chance.

[laticsrblue]

If this suggested swap happened which I very much doubt would take place, without careful intervention by the F.A. and F.L. but if as you say a straight swap took place, the value of each player is considered and a market figure would be established based on numerous facts.

 

If say the the authorities valued Lescott and Richards at £10m - £15m I think you will find that we are still entitled to the 20% cut on the values, so for £10m we would get £2m and for £15m we would get £3m.

 

If it isn't a straight swap though then according to the email a tribunal is not needed to determine the value of the players and therefore it doesn't need to be at market price so long as it is agreed between the parties involved " ...the fee would be agreed between the parties and not subject to a tribunal."

So as Singe says we would be screwed, unless Latics can claim to be an involved party seeing as we have an interest in the outcome?

 

[Guest FyldeBlue]

If it isn't a straight swap though then according to the email a tribunal is not needed to determine the value of the players and therefore it doesn't need to be at market price so long as it is agreed between the parties involved " ...the fee would be agreed between the parties and not subject to a tribunal."

So as Singe says we would be screwed, unless Latics can claim to be an involved party seeing as we have an interest in the outcome?

 

 

Of course we are an involved party, this deal was set up when Micah was either 14 or 15 and is in writing, it's understandable that some City officials may have claimed to know "nowt about it"....half the time the officials are changed more often than the towels in the Toilets.

 

Why not ask Mr Alan Hardy to clarify this subject for the sake of everyone worried or concerned about something we will end up knowing very little about anyway, though if it does happen there is a possibility that Mr Penney will have some more funds, but don't forget we are governed by the regulations regarding wages related to income no matter how much money the Directors have or have not.

 

The only way that the Directors can fund the club in additional ways is by making financial gifts to the club, exactly as Chris Moore did, but of course everyone forgot about that because it suited, when in fact the guy left B.P. and his £4.5m was exchanged for just £1.00 which Sean Jarvis and Neil ????? the Club Accountant paid him for ownership of OAFC.

[Corporal_Jones]

The only way that the Directors can fund the club in additional ways is by making financial gifts to the club, exactly as Chris Moore did, but of course everyone forgot about that because it suited, when in fact the guy left B.P. and his £4.5m was exchanged for just £1.00 which Sean Jarvis and Neil ????? the Club Accountant paid him for ownership of OAFC.

 

 

 

Is it a gift or an investment when you've purchased a football club and committed yourself to funding it?

 

Nobody in their right mind would buy a club at this level and not expect to have to make 'gifts' to it. Couldn't you say TTA are making regular 'gifts' by covering the wek-by-week losses the club makes?

Edited June 10, 2009 by Corporal_Jones

[real]

Of course we are an involved party, this deal was set up when Micah was either 14 or 15 and is in writing, it's understandable that some City officials may have claimed to know "nowt about it"....half the time the officials are changed more often than the towels in the Toilets.

 

Why not ask Mr Alan Hardy to clarify this subject for the sake of everyone worried or concerned about something we will end up knowing very little about anyway, though if it does happen there is a possibility that Mr Penney will have some more funds, but don't forget we are governed by the regulations regarding wages related to income no matter how much money the Directors have or have not.

 

The only way that the Directors can fund the club in additional ways is by making financial gifts to the club, exactly as Chris Moore did, but of course everyone forgot about that because it suited, when in fact the guy left B.P. and his £4.5m was exchanged for just £1.00 which Sean Jarvis and Neil ????? the Club Accountant paid him for ownership of OAFC.

 

 

1. I'm fairly sure the salary cap is voluntary.

 

2. CM didn't "gift" anything - he put all his money in as loans to the club (probably for tax / investment safeguard reasons) - he just wrote off the loans when SJ and NJ bought the club for a quid.

[manshaw]

so the bottom line is- Only sell to the big clubs for the price agreed. Be wary of the sell on clause to avoid the little club being screwed over after they have had their (deposit) monies worth

[Guest FyldeBlue]

Is it a gift or an investment when you've purchased a football club and committed yourself to funding it?

 

Nobody in their right mind would buy a club at this level and not expect to have to make 'gifts' to it. Couldn't you say TTA are making regular 'gifts' by covering the wek-by-week losses the club makes?

 

 

Agreed no one in their right mind would buy a football club, but remember this one fact - as a "Business" Oldham Athletic are probably a far more financially solid concern than say "Those Reds" or Liverpool FC...each of whom owes HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS.... the OT crowd owes something around £700m and Liverpool around £550m, whereas Latics as a business owes hardly anything, this due to the careful nad shrewd control of the owners (the TTA)

 

As owners they have to comply with Business Rules and Regulations and I have little doubt that the TTA do exactly that, the facts that they are funding the day to day running of the club by covering the losses could I suppose be construed as making gifts, but in their case I think you'll find that whatever comes in and that includes Transfer fees goes directly into the club account and whatever some might think, "not into Simon Corney's pocket"...and at the end of the season we either make a profit or a loss, in the latter case the losses are covered from the owners pockets and it is a risk they are taking.

 

However should the development of Boundary park grounds and the club take place(which I'm sure it will eventually) the TTA will be looking to make profit on the whole deal, therefore long term their financial interest in OAFC etc... is seen by them as an investment.

 

There is nothing in Football League rules which stops Directors/Owners from making gifts and should one of them suddenly go a bit haywire and decide to make a gift of £100,000 or £500,000 to the Football Club it is acceptable but has to be notified to the Football authorities.......so if one of them decided to give the other half a million as a birthday present and the other one gave it to the club.... that is OK and is shown as donations or gifts.

 

Can't see anything like that happening but be sure.... OUR CLUB is in safe hands - for now !

[Guest FyldeBlue]

1. I'm fairly sure the salary cap is voluntary.

 

2. CM didn't "gift" anything - he put all his money in as loans to the club (probably for tax / investment safeguard reasons) - he just wrote off the loans when SJ and NJ bought the club for a quid.

 

 

Whatever REAL....I was not in the process of arguing the point of Chris Moore...just trying to clarify a situation, however you make it sound as if Chris Moore did nowt......whereas in fact he gave the club £4.5m less £1.00, how, where, why, or for what or from whom it came is irrelevant, he would have HAD to account for it at some later date, as his business was subjected to serious fraud investigations at a later date..... and we all know the outcome !

 

I believe you will find that that figure was shown as a figure from his personal funds - how he got them or how they got into his bank account is something we can only guess at now Torex has some chequered history !

[Stitch_KTF]

Agreed no one in their right mind would buy a football club, but remember this one fact - as a "Business" Oldham Athletic are probably a far more financially solid concern than say "Those Reds" or Liverpool FC...each of whom owes HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS.... the OT crowd owes something around £700m and Liverpool around £550m, whereas Latics as a business owes hardly anything, this due to the careful nad shrewd control of the owners (the TTA)

 

I would say United is a sounder business than Latics, maybe.

[De_La_Vega]

Chris Moore went down for fraud did he? I didn't know that one...

 

Glad to see somebody sticking up for CM a bit, because despite him leaving the club in the :censored: I always felt that we rather glossed over the fact that he lost a lot of money with it, in order that we could call him names.

 

Interesting stuff.

[Laticsbiffo]

This is usually quite a straightforward process, depending on what Arsenal value their player at ?... is it more or less than Micah Richards ?...I don't know and have seen dozens of values quoted up to £25m at one point.

 

In this present situation and in particular in the Premiership I cannot see City or anyone else selling Micah Richards for less than £10m.

 

If for example Arsenal value their player at £15m and City value Richards at £12m, City will pay Arsenal £3m and Latics will still be entitled to a 20% cut of the Richards value regardless, so in this case we would get £2.4m

 

However there are other situations when players decide they want to leave and I doubt either of these players want to leave either club and it may be paper talk once again, Micah was reported to have had a pay rise and new 4 year deal only about 1 year ago and it is claimed he is now on £60k per week.

 

But if both players want to leave and both Clubs agree to let them go and can't agree any fees it will then go to a Tribunal who will put a value on both players and we will again get our 20% of the valuation of Micah Richards, so even if City are prepared (for saving themselves money) to accept just £6m for Richards as far as I am aware of the ruling we will still be entitled to £1.2m from City and no doubt City would try to engineer something whereby Arsenal paid the fee we are entitled to.

The other point is has Micah asked for a Transfer ?.....it makes a massive difference because if he has not asked to go he will be entitled to a 10% cut of the final fee that he is valued at, so if City try to undervalue him it will only work against them as is true value comes down to the Tribunal... who are usually with it when it comes to the Premiership.

 

Clear as mud that eh !!!

 

 

Liverpool looking at Micah (5M) according to NOTW.

[Corporal_Jones]

Liverpool looking at Micah (5M) according to NOTW.

 

 

 

Ignore absolutely everything NOTW says.

 

[ghostofcecere]

I would say United is a sounder business than Latics, maybe.

Not really they are in £700M worth of debt at the moment...... they would have to sell Ronaldo a good few times over to get rid of that!

[leeslover]

Not really they are in £700M worth of debt at the moment...... they would have to sell Ronaldo a good few times over to get rid of that!

The fact is that they are profitable and we make a loss. The debt is a result of the Glaziers transfering the cost to them of buying the club from their personal account to the club, not that disimilar to taking an equity release loan on your house. If they hadn't done that they would just be taking far bigger profits out of the club to fund their personal debt. If Glazier offered the club for £700m he would have people biting his arm off.