| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BHPIE
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Broken Hill
|
| Post subject: footy dept $$$ |  |
|
| In light of the crows n suns cooach sackings, does anyone know if the payouts r part of the dept spending cap? |
|
|
|
 |
winpies 
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
|
| Post subject: Re: footy dept $$$ | |
|
| BHPIE wrote: | | In light of the crows n suns cooach sackings, does anyone know if the payouts r part of the dept spending cap? |
Asked myself this same question when the Crows sacked Sando.
Has to be surely! They would have been paid if they stayed so I can't see why it wouldn't be included unless a clause exists for termination. Even then it is still an expense.
_________________
carn the mighty pies! |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: Re: footy dept $$$ | |
|
| winpies wrote: | | BHPIE wrote: | | In light of the crows n suns cooach sackings, does anyone know if the payouts r part of the dept spending cap? |
Asked myself this same question when the Crows sacked Sando.
Has to be surely! They would have been paid if they stayed so I can't see why it wouldn't be included unless a clause exists for termination. Even then it is still an expense. |
payout would be included in this year's spending thus avoiding the tax.
i think eddie or someone similar pointed out that clubs are paying out millions for sacked coaches yet we get taxed for footy dept spending.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: Re: footy dept $$$ | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | winpies wrote: | | BHPIE wrote: | | In light of the crows n suns cooach sackings, does anyone know if the payouts r part of the dept spending cap? |
Asked myself this same question when the Crows sacked Sando.
Has to be surely! They would have been paid if they stayed so I can't see why it wouldn't be included unless a clause exists for termination. Even then it is still an expense. |
payout would be included in this year's spending thus avoiding the tax.
i think eddie or someone similar pointed out that clubs are paying out millions for sacked coaches yet we get taxed for footy dept spending. |
I think ideally the Crows and Suns would like the payout counted in this years spend but there was some Crows angst in the Sando situation that they may have to count in the contracted year. Last mentioned that they were waiting on direction from the AFL.
I'm extremely disappointed about these senseless dismissals in an environment where some of these clubs rely heavily on handouts. Fluck 'Em I say, make it count in the contracted year, might take some of the glee off equalisation and the faux tax. |
|
|
|
|
Rexy17
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Location: Ballarat
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Think ya can add Essendon to that list also
_________________
B.U.M.S ROCK...That's Ballarat United Magpies Supporters.....Long trip but even longer hangovers! |
|
|
|
|
BHPIE
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Broken Hill
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Thanks fellas, I agree ,why should we pay for being successful off field, this equalization crap is really king me off. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Rexy17 wrote: | | Think ya can add Essendon to that list also |
 |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I really hope Essendon can get Hird on a breach of Contract and avoid a payout. So sick of that arrogant prick. |
|
|
|
|
BHPIE
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Broken Hill
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Hang on a mo, if the wages r counted in this yrs accounts, then surely they have exceeded this yrs cap ,other wise what's to stop us from offering a 10 yr contract to all our staff n then mix n match sackings ,if u know what I mean |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | I really hope Essendon can get Hird on a breach of Contract and avoid a payout. So sick of that arrogant prick. |
Isn't it funny how shit works out.
Essendon finally gave Sheedy the flick and bought in another ex Ninthmond hack in knights. Then, when they don't immediately win premierships they sack him and go begging to the jug eared one to please please be their coach. Pretty please with peptides on top.
So ole jughead drops out of his million dollar a year gig to coach, and immediately utterly forks things up by adopting a medication regime that was, at absolute best, as dodgy as a Michelangelo painting of Kim kardashian.
Now, after getting paid $1m to swan around Paris for a year, he actually seems to think he has a reputation to save? Dude that ship sailed, sank and is now a divers haunt.
I hope he stays, if only because as long as he does, Essendon is futterly ucked.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
collie dog
RIP Shelby 11-10-13
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Location: Shelby Christmas dog
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Interesting that Hawthorn is prepared to pay this tax on Footy Dept spending because they don't want to compromise the great coaching unit they have. Makes sense. Surely we are rich enough to pay the tax rather than make cuts, or has Hawthorn surpassed us in that capacity as well. They'll have more members than us next year as well.
_________________
Rain or hail, I wag my tail |
|
|
|
|
Redlight
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| collie dog wrote: | | Interesting that Hawthorn is prepared to pay this tax on Footy Dept spending because they don't want to compromise the great coaching unit they have. Makes sense. Surely we are rich enough to pay the tax rather than make cuts, or has Hawthorn surpassed us in that capacity as well. They'll have more members than us next year as well. |
I agree. We have the money and we should be spending whatever we need to in order to get an edge. If that means paying the tax, then pay it.
I don't see the victory in curtailing our own footy departments in order to make a futile point. |
|
|
|
|
winpies
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| collie dog wrote: | | Interesting that Hawthorn is prepared to pay this tax on Footy Dept spending because they don't want to compromise the great coaching unit they have. Makes sense. Surely we are rich enough to pay the tax rather than make cuts, or has Hawthorn surpassed us in that capacity as well. They'll have more members than us next year as well. |
Good point. If we can afford the extra tax, why not just get the best people we can?
_________________
carn the mighty pies! |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| BHPIE wrote: | | Hang on a mo, if the wages r counted in this yrs accounts, then surely they have exceeded this yrs cap ,other wise what's to stop us from offering a 10 yr contract to all our staff n then mix n match sackings ,if u know what I mean |
The faux footy department spend cap doesn't start till 2015, which is why these clubs want the expense this year. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
