Are you thinking stewart? Bought for 300k and sold for 1.5-2million? Sorry, but in my opinion, selling prize assets and having a high turnover of playing staff isn't a recipe for success.
Self-financing means just that. It is the opposite of continuous financing from a bottomless pot, which some posters on here crave. The Allam’s have put the club on a sound footing and now expect a manager and squad to achieve what a well-run club should do, i.e. gain experience/competiveness and then progress via hard work. There are managers who can do this without a large investment every year. We can forget “buying the league” (a method most on here ridicule). I have the feeling NB will have money available if a really good case is made out which may involve trading and loans. The club would have been liquidated without the Allam’s; it’s churlish to turn on them now. Let’s see how good Nick Barmby is. It may be a bumpy ride but we should be used to that by now.
How do they gat tax relief on trading profits in Allam Marine for capital investment in Hull City Buying cheap players and selling them for a profit is ok for a one off but to rely on it would be a disaster as there is no guarantee that the cheap replacement will be able to cut it and then we could have a relagation battle and everyone would be calling the Allams for selling our best assets
They don't need to but even a junior accountant will find an easy way to offset much of the personal gains of one company owned vs the losses or capital expenditure of something else
Just because we wont be paying fees doesn't mean we wont be spending money. Some money will also be spent on improved deals for key players I would imagine. The Allams didn't buy the club because the wanted to own a club as a new venture. They bought the club to save it because of what it means to area. They'll spend what they can. Give the club time, we're still losing money remember.
It's easy to spend someone else's money isn't it.Even the idea that if we had invested in a striker or whatever would not have guaranteed promotion,as many on here believe. And then we'd be losing even more money than we already are. It needs to be remembered that the Allams will never see their £50 million again,even if the council did hand over the KC. Good business men don't buy football clubs as investments.
It's probably quite common within holding companies to use losses from one company to offset profits from another to reduce the tax bill, ie one loses £10M while the other profits by £40M and you just pay tax on £30M and that makes sense. In that situation they already own both businesses. What you're proposing though is that they bought a business knowing it would make a loss of £50M, in order to reduce their overall profit by £50M so they'd pay less tax. In raw numbers, they lost £50M so that they wouldn't have to pay £14M in tax. (Is corp tax still 28% at that level?). Doesn't sound likely to me.
I might be wrong but I thought they personally invested the money and not through an Allam Co. Wheather they invested personally or through another Co. this would create an associated company and split all available reliefs etc
I'm a student too so that's no excuse! But even at £5m in one window that would make us one of the biggest spending teams in the league.
The point is really that the club would not have gone into administration because there wasn't anything to administer. It owned nothing other than the training ground and the players were not an asset, they were overall a liability. The club would have been wound up/dissolved and we would not have found ourselves with a 10 point deduction in the Championship, we'd not have been in any league anywhere at all! The £51 million spent DOES NOT MAKE ANY BUSINESS SENSE. How many times have we heard that? Adam Pearson said it when the Allams took over. We know it makes no business sense. It was done to give the city of K-U-Hull a football club without any debt and a poistion in the Championship as opposed to not existing at all. So why criticise the Allams because they have blown £51 million on a lost cause to make it a worthwhile club? The club needs to stand on it's own feet. It's not reasonable to expect the owners to pump in additional £££'s every year in the hope of getting promotion. There is nobody out there who will buy the club and invest the kind of money it needs to ensure promotion. Where are they? So we are 'stuck' with the Allams!
Don't forget they also continue to fund the stupid wages of the premiership failure players - so that the squad budget is not harmed!
As far as I know they invested personally as well. The claim was made that it was to offset against the profits of Allam Marine. Allam Marine pay Corp tax on their profits so any offset would have to be on that basis. The exception I think would be if the claim was that they were going to take money from AM as a dividend and try to get it tax free by "investing" it in City as a loss. But that would be even more ludicrous as it would be like them taking £50M out of AM and then donating it to charity and people saying they were doing it for personal gain because it got them out of paying tax on the money they took from AM so I discounted it. I'm sure the Allams have much better qualified accountants than me (Papa Allam himself for starters), but I just don't see how buying a loss making company with no assets is a good move for tax purposes as I can't see how they'd save more in tax than they'd have to put into the club in the first place.
The Allams have invested a huge amount of money in our club. We all appreciate it enormously. So can we please stop throwing that into every discussion about the future like some sort of emotional blackmail? This club is currently standing at a cross-roads. Next season we will lose our best players if they don't see significant investment in the squad. If that happens we will be struggling to stay up and if we do go down the Allams will see their investment depreciate. However if we do show some ambition by signing two or three quality players our best players might stay. In that situation we could have a decent chance of promotion and if we do go up the Allams will see their investment rise in value. The ball is in their court and hopefully they will now see that not buying players when the team needs them is a false economy.
OK, without the emotional side of things: Financial Fair Play rules. The club has to be self sufficient to meet the rules. Failure to meet the rules can result in points deductions or denial of promotion. What's the point of them investing a fortune to get promotion next season if by doing so it denies us any chance of promotion for several years?
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...for-the-championship-put-on-hold-7619284.html At a time when some of Europe's highest-spending clubs are waiting to see if any of their competitors might mount a legal challenge to Uefa's Financial Fair Play regime, the Football League appears likely to water down plans to introduce a stringent regime to the Championship from next season. The League announced in June 2011 that FFP rules restricting clubs' spending to 60 per cent of turnover would be introduced from next season. Its schedule set February's quarterly meeting of all 72 clubs as the deadline for proposals to be ratified. But the financialfairplay.co.uk website has established that the deadline passed without resolution and, with all 24 clubs in the division not due to sit down again until the League's AGM in June, it seems next season is now too close to enforce a system under which clubs will be penalised for failing to restrict their spending.
You obviously understand these new rules a lot more than me, but if what your suggesting is true then we won't be talking about whether we go up next season, we will be wondering how the hell we stay up. I think that the clubs that want to invest in their teams will find a way and the ones that don't will use these new rules as an excuse.
I don't understand them as fully as I should, a lot is based on premise and them saying they're reserving the right to investigate and ignore any related transactions from the figures (eg Man City's stadium sponsorship). We found a way within the rules but the Council said no to a sports village that would if put under City's name have generated turnover without us needing to include the running costs as part of our 60% for the first level. Nicely found article Doveston, but the FFP require a 3 year rolling total for profit/loss. Gambling on doing it next season is much more risky than getting ourselves set up (hopefully) before everyone else does so that when everything is full in place we don't have to change when they have to cut back. Imagine our position as one of only two or three clubs at the top end who were in a position to sign players whilst the rest were having firesales.
