• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Richarlison

Either way that is regarding previous financials. That is regarding from july 1st 2017 till 30th june 2021. This deal will be in the rulings from july 1st 2018 till june 30th 2022. Nobody apart from everton will know how 17/18 compares to 21/22 as everton won't release the financial report till early next year.
No but they know how much they did or didn’t make last season
Don’t forget they make NO money and lose money
So by default they are down last season too (their wages and money owed were higher than their income)
They can’t have another season at a loss otherwise they exceed the threshold
 
No but they know how much they did or didn’t make last season
Don’t forget they make NO money and lose money
So by default they are down last season too (their wages and money owed were higher than their income)
They can’t have another season at a loss otherwise they exceed the threshold

Everton know because they will get up to date information. The rest of us won't because their financials will not be released till early next year.

They are allowed to make a loss. There are plenty of costs that don't count towards premier league sustainability rules. Including building a stadium.

It also only measured over a rolling 3 year period (4 due to covid). So some of their loses are wiped out as it is a new accounting year. 17/18 will no longer count. It is replaced by 21/22. Where everton spent far less. They can even argue that losing their sponsorships was beyond their control.

Does that mean they are clear? I don't know and unless a journalist is getting it from someone in accounts or high up at everton neither will they. It is guesswork.
 
Everton know because they will get up to date information. The rest of us won't because their financials will not be released till early next year.

They are allowed to make a loss. There are plenty of costs that don't count towards premier league sustainability rules. Including building a stadium.

It also only measured over a rolling 3 year period (4 due to covid). So some of their loses are wiped out as it is a new accounting year. 17/18 will no longer count. It is replaced by 21/22. Where everton spent far less. They can even argue that losing their sponsorships was beyond their control.

Does that mean they are clear? I don't know and unless a journalist is getting it from someone in accounts or high up at everton neither will they. It is guesswork.
Plenty of Journos are saying they need the cash
Their debt on transfers is publicly declared I believe and the wages are easy to work out
Their stadium is being financed and has had no money put in form the club as they have no cash
They also mortgages TV money a while back
 
Plenty of Journos are saying they need the cash
Their debt on transfers is publicly declared I believe and the wages are easy to work out
Their stadium is being financed and has had no money put in form the club as they have no cash
They also mortgages TV money a while back

Not talking about whether they need cash. Talking of whether they need to sell richalison in the next 24 hours. A bbc journalist has said they don't need to.

It looks like someone is buying them anyway. A consortium led by peter kenyon.
 
Not talking about whether they need cash. Talking of whether they need to sell richalison in the next 24 hours. A bbc journalist has said they don't need to.

It looks like someone is buying them anyway. A consortium led by peter kenyon.
The BBC journo is the only one
He is quite “straight” but not an ITK type (Phil McNulty you mean?)
I know people working on the stadium and they say their fudged financially
I was up in pool 2 weeks ago for a weekend and the talk in most bars was their fudged financially
And the guy who run the coffee shop in the music experience claimed he had friends at the club… and they say their fudged
Hey, we can assume many things but a club that has spent £500m over the last 4 seasons or so and not had much income is gonna struggle
 
The BBC journo is the only one
He is quite “straight” but not an ITK type (Phil McNulty you mean?)
I know people working on the stadium and they say their fudged financially
I was up in pool 2 weeks ago for a weekend and the talk in most bars was their fudged financially
And the guy who run the coffee shop in the music experience claimed he had friends at the club… and they say their fudged
Hey, we can assume many things but a club that has spent £500m over the last 4 seasons or so and not had much income is gonna struggle

Everyone knows they are fudged financially. Usminov has been sanctioned. He was the money guy. But that doesn't mean richarlison has to be sold by the end of tomorrow to meet premier league ffp rules.
 
Everyone knows they are fudged financially. Usminov has been sanctioned. He was the money guy. But that doesn't mean richarlison has to be sold by the end of tomorrow to meet premier league ffp rules.
I disagree
I think it does
They have had 3 years of big losses and went over the threshold due to Covid
They can’t argue that for the current season
If they had to pay transfer fees and wages and that was in excess of income… it’s another loss
 
Smacks of a levy double deal… offer what is required for both Gibson and richarleson, pull the fee at the last minute in a take or leave it deal, under cutting the initial offer knowing that they have to accept it or be sanctioned.
 
Smacks of a levy double deal… offer what is required for both Gibson and richarleson, pull the fee at the last minute in a take or leave it deal, under cutting the initial offer knowing that they have to accept it or be sanctioned.
Gibson?
 
I disagree
I think it does
They have had 3 years of big losses and went over the threshold due to Covid
They can’t argue that for the current season
If they had to pay transfer fees and wages and that was in excess of income… it’s another loss

All i was saying is that if we get an agreement tomorrow before a medical we'll know they were in trouble for ffp. If not, then they probably aren't.
 
All i was saying is that if we get an agreement tomorrow before a medical we'll know they were in trouble for ffp. If not, then they probably aren't.
We may not know publicly if we have the deal done
They just need to prove the deal was in place before hand for FFP
 
Smacks of a levy double deal… offer what is required for both Gibson and richarleson, pull the fee at the last minute in a take or leave it deal, under cutting the initial offer knowing that they have to accept it or be sanctioned.
Disagree. I think we're actually playing nice/the long game on this occasion - working to their terms (richarlson money tomorrow, alli and winks money next year), although the deals work for us too.
 
A couple of other points on Richarlison that crossed my mind today (to justify the fee)

1. I think a lot of people are judging him on what they’ve seen so far (which has been good obvs). But I think there’s another gear or two to come. That’s pretty exciting imo. Imagine him in a good team that creates chances and dominates games?

2. It will do no harm at all for Kane, Son, and Kulu. They could easily find another 5-10% if they know there is quality competition waiting in the wings. January onwards was great last year but they could all go up a gear also - especially if they are always fresh.

I’m also starting to get pretty excited about our physical power. Richy, Bissouma and Perisic really take us up a level.
 
Back