BCFC_Dan Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 Peterborough's accounts for 2012 apparently show a profit of £3.6m Largely down to a profit on player sales and it won't include their recent loans but it's still frustrating that a side doing (slightly) better than us in the table is doing so much better financially. https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/319453735485071360/photo/1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 Peterborough's accounts for 2012 apparently show a profit of £3.6m Largely down to a profit on player sales and it won't include their recent loans but it's still frustrating that a side doing (slightly) better than us in the table is doing so much better financially. https://twitter.com/SwissRamble/status/319453735485071360/photo/1 Because they haven't paid stupid money for avg players on big wages and they haven't sacked a manager nether do they have a acadmey to pay for nor are they spending a lot on training ground improvements, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfOfWestStreet Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 They have bought well from the lower leagues. Credit where its due, there are very, very few clubs making any kind of profit so fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 They probably didn't stupidly hold out for £6M , for a striker who wanted to F.O. either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
italian dave Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 And I wonder how much they have to pay for their loan players from the likes of Man U??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanatic Red Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 And I wonder how much they have to pay for their loan players from the likes of Man U??? Not much, daddy sorts them right out! they both make my skin crawl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiale Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 And I wonder how much they have to pay for their loan players from the likes of Man U??? They pay a performance fee to Peterborough for the privilidge of playing............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunnyfunt Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 Not much, daddy sorts them right out! they both make my skin crawl.Wouldn't you though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanatic Red Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 Wouldn't you though? No, i would take more pride achieving something without my parents help & would not want my success to be down to my dad giving me players which other clubs in the same league wouldn't have the fortune of! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grifty Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 They probably didn't stupidly hold out for £6M , for a striker who wanted to F.O. either. Haha apart from when they wanted £5million for Aaron McClean, £5 million for CMS and just as much for Boyd you mean??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 Haha apart from when they wanted £5million for Aaron McClean, £5 million for CMS and just as much for Boyd you mean??? Apart from those , yeah !! Still , looks like their transfer policy yeilds a better return than ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWRed Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 Good for them, seriously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stockwood bcfc Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 Do the AV / AG costs come into our loss? Pretty sure they did! Seem to remember seeing them in the end of year accounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22A Posted April 4, 2013 Report Share Posted April 4, 2013 Haha apart from when they wanted £5million for Aaron McClean, £5 million for CMS and just as much for Boyd you mean??? A few years ago some of the Directors leaked Barry Fry's contract to the local paper. Barry gets 10% of the selling price for every player. It's in his interest therefore to ssell for as much as poss even if the club wants/needs that player to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanatic Red Posted April 4, 2013 Report Share Posted April 4, 2013 They currently have two players on loan from United: Scott Wootton who was loaned out to Forest last year and was very very average, and David Petrucci who has never made an appearance for United I fail to see how these players are ones that "other clubs wouldn't have the fortune of" The point i'm getting at is they will always have the first opportunity to loan players from daddy's club, and then if they decided they didn't want them, then other clubs would come into contention! how is that not an advantage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.