[Archived] Scott Wharton

[Dunnfc]

Obviously the rumour doing the rounds is if he plays one more game he triggers a 2k per week wage rise and hence despite having a great few games earlier on this season and the wealth of injuries at the back of the defence recently it would appear to make sense concerning the rumour.

If it is finances then 2K per Week is basically 108k per year rise and associated NI contributions. So that leaves us egging our attendances to 10.5k despite only 6k in through the turnstiles and paying more tax on the higher figure of fans!

Can the trust ensure this question is raised to the SHAM of a club?

[Paul]

The club could announce a 30,000 gate and still pay the same levels of tax. The figure the clb chose to announce has no connection whatsoever to income.

What nonsense.

[Dunnfc]

Paul afraid it does.

Under vat notice 701/45 a club faces the VAT liability concerning football spectators at standard rate i.e 20%.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70145-sport/vat-notice-70145-sport

Vat is equivalent to Sales and Purchases so the more tickets you've apparently sold the more VAT you pay.

[darrenrover]

Paul afraid it does.

Under vat notice 701/45 a club faces the VAT liability concerning football spectators at standard rate i.e 20%.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70145-sport/vat-notice-70145-sport

Vat is equivalent to Sales and Purchases so the more tickets you've apparently sold the more VAT you pay.

VAT 'input tax' is based on sales in a period. The majority of ours will be based on season ticket revenue paid prior to August and September, already declared and 'paid'. The declared gate means bugger all these days in terms of VAT.

[Dunnfc]

Darren so there is tax paid then?

How many STs are there from the August period and how many walk ons like Saturday for example? Compare it to the attendance figure. I'd base at least 3,000 are magicked up from thin air. Question is do you count them as STs or walk ons which would be subject to VAT which is a monthly bill, just ask Bury FC.

When we can't cough up 2k a week to keep a young defender then you see this club is getting everything consistently wrong you have to wonder about things.

[JHRover]

As I've already said on this, I fully expect Wharton to miraculously come into contention for selection when, and only when, another first team player has been offloaded. Prime contender for that at the moment is Ben Marshall, and make no mistake certain individuals behind the scenes will be gearing up for the January window by offering him around rival clubs to drum up interest. Expect a quick fire sale to Fulham/Wolves/Brighton in January for an undisclosed fee. Those clubs will happily take him off our hands. A player of his age and experience that can play in 3-4 positions are valuable assets in this league. Meanwhile our buffoon of a manager will toe the party line by talking about extended contracts and a deal being close, whilst we all know from bitter experience that the club has no intention of anything of the sort. I could almost accept selling another 'star' player if the club was hard at work lining up an adequate replacement but we also know on that front that nothing will be done.

If it isn't Marshall then outside bets include Craig Conway and Corry Evans. Both could probably fetch £500,000 each and could do a job for most sides in this league so Cheston and his hidden friends like Pasha will have one eye on their sales.

If we get another £20k a week off the wage bill with those two and Emnes heading back to Swansea then it will be a successful January. Then they might find room in the budget for Wharton to get his improved deal and maybe another of Coyle's mates on a 2 year contract.

The real sickener is that the cash was found to hand 36 year old Wes Brown a 12 month deal and he's still not fit enough to step in during a defensive crisis, yet an academy product seemingly can't play due to financial constraints when in years to come he could be a real asset for the club.

[JAL]

In relation to young Scot, see the agent who brought us many a donkey to shame about whilst creaming millions into their bank accounts for their sub standard performances with the likes of Bradley Orr and Luke Varney to name but a few, had another on the field Saturday in Ryan Nyambe.

So if Nyambe can get a game surely Wharton should be at least making the bench if the money's good enough for Nyambe and his agent then why not Scott.

[Stuart]

Could well believe such a rumour. Similarly with Mahoney.

Coming to something if we can't even afford to play / pay lads who we bring through the academy.

Yet somehow we find cash to pay Wes Brown some kind of basic. If he is not here to improve the first team, and we can't play the players he is supposed to be helping to develop then what good is he?

[MickBet]

Having spoken to people with very very close connections with scott at present he is injured, but he does trigger a pay rise when he next plays for the first team.

[JAL]

[quote

[JWUpper]

One of my good mates played cricket with him up until preseason when he became properly part of the first team squad, going off what he said Wharton definitely triggers a pay rise after his next appearance for the first team. Given how shambolically the club is being run at present that will definitely only happen when one or more players are sold in January (in my opinion).

Just out of interest (haven't been following the U23's much this season) was he captain last season, or has he been made captain following his stint in the first team with the hope it'll keep him on side until January?

[blondie]

More bizarre goings on, Samuelson playing against Rovers for West Ham tonight,and we are paying his wages!!!

[JAL]

More bizarre goings on, Samuelson playing against Rovers for West Ham tonight,and we are paying his wages!!!

All part of the bent English game from TheFA .con

[Stuart]

More bizarre goings on, Samuelson playing against Rovers for West Ham tonight,and we are paying his wages!!!

How can that be right?

[blondie]

Samuelson puts West Ham one up.

[darrenrover]

Darren so there is tax paid then?

How many STs are there from the August period and how many walk ons like Saturday for example? Compare it to the attendance figure. I'd base at least 3,000 are magicked up from thin air. Question is do you count them as STs or walk ons which would be subject to VAT which is a monthly bill, just ask Bury FC.

When we can't cough up 2k a week to keep a young defender then you see this club is getting everything consistently wrong you have to wonder about things.

VAT relates to income received, so if you assume all season tickets are paid for by the end of August you'd also assume that the VAT has been paid also. Walk on receipts amount to next to nothing: I know for a fact that from a Friday night game early last season that was on Sky the 'walk on revenue in total was less than £13k.

There's no tax incentives these days from doctoring the gate figure, just kidology but kidding nobody really.

We're not Bury, Charlton, Blackpool, Rochdale, Wigan or anything similar. We're not Bournemouth, Watford, Crystal Palace either. We're Blackburn Rovers, won the cup 3 times on the run, champions of Division 1 (and Premier League). FA and Venkys hang your heads in shame.

Apologies by the way for taking it off thread.

I've no doubt that Wharton's non appearance is down to finance, it's been thus for 6 years from Nelsen, MGP, Salgado etc to current day. B(W)ankers.

[SoldierMo]

What the hell is going on with samuelson so is he our player?

[Paul]

Darren so there is tax paid then?

How many STs are there from the August period and how many walk ons like Saturday for example? Compare it to the attendance figure. I'd base at least 3,000 are magicked up from thin air. Question is do you count them as STs or walk ons which would be subject to VAT which is a monthly bill, just ask Bury FC.

When we can't cough up 2k a week to keep a young defender then you see this club is getting everything consistently wrong you have to wonder about things.

I apologise for returning to this but I think you're misleading people.

Firstly VAT is payable quarterly, not monthly.

Secondly VAT is chargeable on any product or service which is not zero rated. The VAT element is charged at the point of sale, the total VAT a company pays is based on VAT received less VAT paid on purchases. The bulk of Rovers ticket income is probably in August with the VAT collected being payable at the end of the third quarter. All of this information is in the quarterly VAT return.

You seem to be suggesting HMRC assess the VAT due on the number of spectators the club choses to declare. This is simply untrue, VAT liability is determined by the value of product sold less inputs.

[chaddyrovers]

Having spoken to people with very very close connections with scott at present he is injured, but he does trigger a pay rise when he next plays for the first team.

So he is actually injured then?

[JHRover]

Samuelsen has made a number of appearances for West Ham's reserves this season. Rovers have made no comment on the subject and Coyle has dodged the matter. Presumably it is part of the loan agreement but it is the first time I have ever heard of such a thing taking place.

Tonight's scenario of him playing 90 minutes against Rovers Under 23s just takes it to a whole new level. This guy is in the senior squad on matchday yet during the week he is lining up for West Ham's reserves against our reserves? Ludicrous.

What does this say about our ambitions this season? We're allowing a senior squad member to travel off mid-week to go and play in a development league for West Ham. Meanwhile we're on the brink of relegation to League One and this is supposed to be acceptable? What if Samuelsen sustains a bad injury in these games? That could be potentially fatal to our survival prospects if one of our players gets injured and we can't rely on him to step in and play and there's no emergency loan market.

What does it say about the state of our club when if it isn't bad enough we're going with a begging bowl to the likes of West Ham for their kids but then we're powerless to stop them taking him back for match minutes?

What to it say to our own kids who are lining up against Samuelsen tonight that here is a lad playing in the same division as people like Hardcastle who have never been given a sniff of the first team yet Samuelsen can sit on our bench every week then play against them in this league for West Ham?

The club never mentioned it when he joined but presumably this is the consequence of a cheap loan. We're probably not even paying him or making a contribution to his wages which means West Ham have the power to do as they wish with him.

Never mind, such is life when dealing with Premier League 'giants' (quote Lancashire Telegraph).

[chaddyrovers]

I dont know why we signed him in the first place. Hardly played.

Could have signed a keeper or right back instead

[yoda]

I apologise for returning to this but I think you're misleading people.

Firstly VAT is payable quarterly, not monthly.

Secondly VAT is chargeable on any product or service which is not zero rated. The VAT element is charged at the point of sale, the total VAT a company pays is based on VAT received less VAT paid on purchases. The bulk of Rovers ticket income is probably in August with the VAT collected being payable at the end of the third quarter. All of this information is in the quarterly VAT return.

You seem to be suggesting HMRC assess the VAT due on the number of spectators the club choses to declare. This is simply untrue, VAT liability is determined by the value of product sold less inputs.

Mmmmmm,

There are food outlets that seem to have a high turn over but no customers in a town near you.

Maybe they should be renamed launderettes.

[davulsukur]

Samuelson puts West Ham one up.

I actually find this hilarious. Highlights the utter incompetence of pretty much everyone at our club

[Dunnfc]

VAT relates to income received, so if you assume all season tickets are paid for by the end of August you'd also assume that the VAT has been paid also. Walk on receipts amount to next to nothing: I know for a fact that from a Friday night game early last season that was on Sky the 'walk on revenue in total was less than £13k.

There's no tax incentives these days from doctoring the gate figure, just kidology but kidding nobody really.

We're not Bury, Charlton, Blackpool, Rochdale, Wigan or anything similar. We're not Bournemouth, Watford, Crystal Palace either. We're Blackburn Rovers, won the cup 3 times on the run, champions of Division 1 (and Premier League). FA and Venkys hang your heads in shame.

Apologies by the way for taking it off thread.

I've no doubt that Wharton's non appearance is down to finance, it's been thus for 6 years from Nelsen, MGP, Salgado etc to current day. B(W)ankers.

Apologies Darren in advance I'm on my mobile. You seem to be suggesting you know ST totals by your post so can you confirm to all of us what those totals are?

Vat relates to payment upon reciept and payment made... So it would be handy knowing your st figures? I've 5.7k given to me, given only 6.24k made it through the turnstile in Saturday do I seem 2k say missing STs? Again we declared a gate at 10.5 k my Vat would equate to a mean of say £20 each @ 2250 so would wipe you theory of 13k away... But

We are those teams now given the predicament we find ourselves in! Look how grubby our stadium has become in light of any cost cut. Over reporting of attendances only serves to boost a better perception to India! Realistically we have sub poor attendances and paying x amount for it. More than a 2k pay rise for Wharton if we could declare properly?

Glad we agree on the last paragraph of which is the main topic of thread... It's sinister

[Dunnfc]

I apologise for returning to this but I think you're misleading people.

Firstly VAT is payable quarterly, not monthly.

Secondly VAT is chargeable on any product or service which is not zero rated. The VAT element is charged at the point of sale, the total VAT a company pays is based on VAT received less VAT paid on purchases. The bulk of Rovers ticket income is probably in August with the VAT collected being payable at the end of the third quarter. All of this information is in the quarterly VAT return.

You seem to be suggesting HMRC assess the VAT due on the number of spectators the club choses to declare. This is simply untrue, VAT liability is determined by the value of product sold less inputs.

Paul you've gone from having x amount to y amount being taxable and suitably changed your tune from being exempt to now admitting its taxable?

Now we both accept this is the case lets delve into vat. Vat is charged monthly if a history of banking or finance issues, may you refer yourself to the fact we borrowed previous parachute monies prior to being paid? In instances to paying Berg off etc. I no doubt accept something similar has arisen with HMRC to ease cash flow pressures.

Not misleading people they can do there own maths but surely you must agree a mean of 2250 fans per game at Vat is a waste of money simply to inflate figures? Money which we have a clown currently trying to cost cut!?