My real concern is that by the time he does sell, he will have alienated a heck of a big percentage of our fanbase to the extent they wont come back, and also a whole generation of young fans will be lost - all because of this tossa.
Varney knows the score--he knows major football clubs and their dosh issues and he understands their cash flows, etc. Yet he still had an investor. They are out there---its the due diligence thats the issue.
IMO Roland never did any due diligence worthy of the term he was all about getting another club into his pan euro social football experiment.
is the £38 mil actual debt ? or does it INCLUDE the money Roland paid for us in the first place? some £14/12 million ? did he "loan" the money to pay for us?
The club doesn't have any equity value so the numbers you see banded around relate to how much of the existing debts new owners repaid to the previous owners (or that prospective owners would intend to repay).
Our problem is going to be that if/when Roland decides to exit he may well expect to have his debts repaid in full by the new owners, but that would require the implicit assumption that none of the investment pumped in (via debt) has been impaired. Judging by the state of the club in terms of playing squad, fan engagement etc. this would be rather unrealistic.
its his ego !!!!! FFS it dosnt matter what it says on paper his ego will not except HIS FAILURE !!
so a company he owns owes another company he owns £38 mil ? so what ??? its all "work in progress" as far as his ego is concerned and ALL of his followers will agree with the "work in progress" mantra.
Our ONLY hope is that he will take £20mill --ish and feck off . He of course wont see his monumental FAILURE as such , its just another social experiment that didnt work because "OTHERS" wouldnt let it or "understand" it
Was chatting with a good pal, who is in the industry, on Friday night and that's the figure he mentioned as being one that should get a deal done. He appreciates our "unique" owner's idiosyncrasies, but that's the amount that would be seen as appropriate from a buyer's perspective.
Before or after the Guinness & Jameson? Don't tell me during.
My real concern is that by the time he does sell, he will have alienated a heck of a big percentage of our fanbase to the extent they wont come back, and also a whole generation of young fans will be lost - all because of this tossa.
I agree, but having said that the boycotters are saying they are true Charlton fans and therefore logic says they should return, if they are true Charlton fans.
(I'm not suggesting for one moment that they are not true Charlton fans).
ok, but there are a lot of boycotters, but there are also a lot of people who have stopped coming simply because the football has been shite, and the results correspondingly have been poor.
ok, but there are a lot of boycotters, but there are also a lot of people who have stopped coming simply because the football has been shite, and the results correspondingly have been poor.
Hopefully, when he sells, we will get decent owners and the results will pick up.
If people have stopped coming because the football is shite, then that's not unexpected. It happens with all fans, but it would be extremely disappointing, as the vast majority of non attendees, claim that it's because of RD and that the football/results have little to do with it.
ok, but there are a lot of boycotters, but there are also a lot of people who have stopped coming simply because the football has been shite, and the results correspondingly have been poor.
In general terms the football has been shite and results poor since 1905.
I hope it isn't! Now, looking for the HMRC report a tax evader web site.
Haa! Just looked there is a form but the silly sods won't let you submit it without your contact details.
Hoping it isn't above board was my first thought, but I reckon it's far more likely that she is working under IR35 or is paid directly by another part of the Evil Empire. It's obvious she knows sod all about football, but I don't reckon she is stupid enough to illegally dodge her taxes when there are plenty of legal loopholes she can exploit. I would imagine there would be repercussions on her ability to operate as a lawyer if she had convictions for tax fraud, so I'd be pretty confident that she has covered her backside with regards to that so that she doesn't cut off her Pinocchio-sized hooter to spite her face from an employment perspective.
What are the different avenues she could be employed under? I'm going to take a punt - albeit with the admission that I'm not the most clued up on the subject - and guess these are the three issues:
- Full Time, PAYE
Would be the obvious choice, she has a permanent appointment at The Club and presumably is entitled to the benefits given to a full time employee. (Private medical cover, phone and so on)
- Self Employed (i.e Sole Trader)
This offers very little in way of tax management as far as I know, but would make some sense as she presumably has multiple income streams; as demonstrated by her (presumably paid for) appearances at conferences.
Having an official appointment at Charlton would be an issue with IR35 though. However you look at it, as CEO she is a full time employee; she can't send someone to work in that capacity in her place.
- Self Employed, via Ltd Company
I'm going to say this is a no go, purely because she's not listed as a director of any other company.. in the UK at least. I don't think she is in Belgium either - but I could well be wrong. Furthermore, I have no idea how you could contract out the services of a CEO to a company - nor how that would fly with regards to IR35.
It's a long shot, but does Belgium have a system like Sweden where you can look up the amount of taxes paid by a citizen?
As a CEO she cannot legally be self employed. It has to go through the PAYE system. It would be nice to think this is not happening but I suspect it is somehow. She is liable to UK tax whether she is being paid by CAFC or from anywhere else, even if this is abroad. There is no legal way for her to get out of this. It would be nice to set a HMRC enquiry in motion.
The latest set of Baton 2010 accounts (to 30/6/2015) state that there are no directors' emoluments, the directors being RD, KM and RD.
Most usually directors will be paid by the company for which they perform services, though this is commonly not the case. There would not be anything to report in a small company's financial statements if the director received payment from a different entity, but not a subsidiary, and these payments were not recharged to the company in question. This suggests that, probably for reasons of confidentiality, KM's pay arises from Staprix and no direct charge is made to Baton/CAFC so no UK disclosure is required. If she's not a director of Staprix (and i cant believe she is!) then her costs will be included in the overall people costs for the group, and you'd never see it.
This is no way suggest that there is any tax evasion going on. She may well be on UK PAYE administered by Staprix, and there's nothing illegal about that.
ok, but there are a lot of boycotters, but there are also a lot of people who have stopped coming simply because the football has been shite, and the results correspondingly have been poor.
In general terms the football has been shite and results poor since 1905.
Rubbish, We won the league every year from 1906 to 1914.
ok, but there are a lot of boycotters, but there are also a lot of people who have stopped coming simply because the football has been shite, and the results correspondingly have been poor.
In general terms the football has been shite and results poor since 1905.
Rubbish, We won the league every year from 1906 to 1914.
If Roland sells in my view he can't expect to recoup every penny he has 'loaned' via staprix.
The poor lossmaking transfer dealings he ought to cover. There is a price to pay for taking us down. There is the nearly three year 'depreciation' factor whilst he has been in charge. There is the income from player sales to take into account.
I am not an expert but the list above is down to Roland, as would be any decent investment he has made like the new pitch have to be taken into account.
Roland is not a reasonable man I get that. However he can't expect to get out from all this unscathed.
ok, but there are a lot of boycotters, but there are also a lot of people who have stopped coming simply because the football has been shite, and the results correspondingly have been poor.
In general terms the football has been shite and results poor since 1905.
If Roland sells in my view he can't expect to recoup every penny he has 'loaned' via staprix.
The poor lossmaking transfer dealings he ought to cover. There is a price to pay for taking us down. There is the nearly three year 'depreciation' factor whilst he has been in charge. There is the income from player sales to take into account.
I am not an expert but the list above is down to Roland, as would be any decent investment he has made like the new pitch have to be taken into account.
Roland is not a reasonable man I get that. However he can't expect to get out from all this unscathed.
For the most part he hasn't invested his cash, he's let squirrel face piss it away. There's no way he's getting that back.
There's been sales of Gomez - 3.5 million, Cousins - 1.4 million, Gudmundsson - 2.5 million, Kermogant, Stephens, THD. Has Duchatelet taken this money out of the club or has it been used to reduce the debt mountain ? 38 million is a lot of money and I understand that 14 million is the sale price, where does the rest of it come from ?
Owners never make back their investment unless it is a sale of a high profile club in the prem. 99% of clubs have consistent operating losses. There may be an off year when you are in the positive based on player sales but this the exception not the rule. It truly is an unsustainable business model. RD knew this going into his purchase of the club. He knew that there was a fair likelihood that he would lose on his investment. Buying a club for someone like RD is more about the ego of it, taking a risk in hitting it big in the prem and limiting investment losses to a certain acceptable level. The question is what is that ultimate level before he cuts bait. Is it 15 million loss after sale? 20? It is hard to tell. I just hope whatever it is that he reaches it soon
Owners never make back their investment unless it is a sale of a high profile club in the prem. 99% of clubs have consistent operating losses. There may be an off year when you are in the positive based on player sales but this the exception not the rule. It truly is an unsustainable business model. RD knew this going into his purchase of the club. He knew that there was a fair likelihood that he would lose on his investment. Buying a club for someone like RD is more about the ego of it, taking a risk in hitting it big in the prem and limiting investment losses to a certain acceptable level. The question is what is that ultimate level before he cuts bait. Is it 15 million loss after sale? 20? It is hard to tell. I just hope whatever it is that he reaches it soon
Granted that's the norm but RD never had an interest in "hitting it big in the prem" because he's a fool.
There's been sales of Gomez - 3.5 million, Cousins - 1.4 million, Gudmundsson - 2.5 million, Kermogant, Stephens, THD. Has Duchatelet taken this money out of the club or has it been used to reduce the debt mountain ? 38 million is a lot of money and I understand that 14 million is the sale price, where does the rest of it come from ?
There has also been significant outlay on players, but leaving that to one side the club trades at a loss each year and it pays (notional) interest to Staprix. Hence the debt accumulates each year net of transfer income.
I think if we don't go up this season, or are well off the pace in January 17, he will look for a buyer. He will know it makes no economic business sense to keep pumping money into an unsuccessful business at the current level. The amount of money required to 'have a punt' at promotion from the Championship (if we ever get there) is phenomenal now the price of player's is going up and up. It looks very unlikely that he is prepared to play that hand and potentially lose many more millions than he has already. Our club aren't the only one with money problems. I doubt many any clubs in Championship or lower are breaking even. Their boards will be looking to lose money year on year in the hope that their lottery ticket pays out. For most it won't and so the merry-go-round of owners will continue.
Roland will sell up and when the new owners come in the rebuilding will begin on and off the pitch. We've come too far to let a new owner play the same game as Roland and whoever thinks of buying us will know this.
Owners never make back their investment unless it is a sale of a high profile club in the prem. 99% of clubs have consistent operating losses. There may be an off year when you are in the positive based on player sales but this the exception not the rule. It truly is an unsustainable business model. RD knew this going into his purchase of the club. He knew that there was a fair likelihood that he would lose on his investment. Buying a club for someone like RD is more about the ego of it, taking a risk in hitting it big in the prem and limiting investment losses to a certain acceptable level. The question is what is that ultimate level before he cuts bait. Is it 15 million loss after sale? 20? It is hard to tell. I just hope whatever it is that he reaches it soon
I don't think it is ego in this case. He already owned one of the largest clubs in his own country when he bought us.
I think we were simply a part of his master scheme, which as supporters of all his clubs, past and present, know has been a total disaster but people like Roland don't like to admit failure but the one fact that we can hold out a little hope from is that he did sell his flagship club a while ago.
Roly wants to make a profit. He may not need to, but he wants to in order to prove he has a winning system. Even if it was possible to do this at the time he took over, it is in no way possible now. There are several reasons for that:
1. The knocking back of changes to FFP mean that even if he gets the club back the The Championship, it still won't be viable because the League is so heavily skewed in favour of chancers rather than more parsimonious players. 2. Even if this particularly parsimonious player got to The Championship, his own track record belies an inability to progress further. He may be careful with his money, but he's not nearly careful enough with his decision making. The long term employment of an incompetent CEO proves this. Someone as unskilled at running a football business will not succeed if they do not learn fast. Roly has shown no indication of being hands-on enough to learn the necessary lessons. 3. The spectacular and irreversible loss of good will across his 'customer' base. No-one likes him, no-one trusts him, no-one believes in him. Exactly the same goes for his hyper-elevated concierge and her little gang of lackeys. They have leaked fans and sponsors, many of whom will only return on the regime's departure. With appalling arrogance, they declined offers of help, refused to discuss issues with those who understood the club and sowed discontent throughout the club. They may have claimed that the club is not financially dependent on the fans; but that was not carefully considered economics talking, that was just Katrien blathering on about stuff she hadn't thought-through.
We are now in a position where the club is doomed to lose money for as long as Duchatelet is the owner. It's possible to feel some sympathy for the way that FFP blew up in his face and extinguished any chances of success. Then again, you'd have to question whatever diligence he undertook if he didn't foresee the greed of the other Championship owners. As for the other reasons, ultimately they all boil down to his own unbridled fuckwittery. The same fuckwittery that saw him refusing to plan for League One even though the most casual of observers could see that that was exactly where we were heading.
On paper, he may have the wherewithal to fund the club for his lifetime. In reality though, even someone as seemingly obtuse as Two Shats will get to understand the situation sooner or later. It may be costly to his pride, but in the long run neither his bank balance or his ego are going to come out of this well. For his own good, the good of the club and the fans, he needs to sell up as soon as possible. It's the only way to end a situation that is currently painful to everyone.
I hope it isn't! Now, looking for the HMRC report a tax evader web site.
Haa! Just looked there is a form but the silly sods won't let you submit it without your contact details.
Hoping it isn't above board was my first thought, but I reckon it's far more likely that she is working under IR35 or is paid directly by another part of the Evil Empire. It's obvious she knows sod all about football, but I don't reckon she is stupid enough to illegally dodge her taxes when there are plenty of legal loopholes she can exploit. I would imagine there would be repercussions on her ability to operate as a lawyer if she had convictions for tax fraud, so I'd be pretty confident that she has covered her backside with regards to that so that she doesn't cut off her Pinocchio-sized hooter to spite her face from an employment perspective.
What are the different avenues she could be employed under? I'm going to take a punt - albeit with the admission that I'm not the most clued up on the subject - and guess these are the three issues:
- Full Time, PAYE
Would be the obvious choice, she has a permanent appointment at The Club and presumably is entitled to the benefits given to a full time employee. (Private medical cover, phone and so on)
- Self Employed (i.e Sole Trader)
This offers very little in way of tax management as far as I know, but would make some sense as she presumably has multiple income streams; as demonstrated by her (presumably paid for) appearances at conferences.
Having an official appointment at Charlton would be an issue with IR35 though. However you look at it, as CEO she is a full time employee; she can't send someone to work in that capacity in her place.
- Self Employed, via Ltd Company
I'm going to say this is a no go, purely because she's not listed as a director of any other company.. in the UK at least. I don't think she is in Belgium either - but I could well be wrong. Furthermore, I have no idea how you could contract out the services of a CEO to a company - nor how that would fly with regards to IR35.
It's a long shot, but does Belgium have a system like Sweden where you can look up the amount of taxes paid by a citizen?
As a CEO she cannot legally be self employed. It has to go through the PAYE system. It would be nice to think this is not happening but I suspect it is somehow. She is liable to UK tax whether she is being paid by CAFC or from anywhere else, even if this is abroad. There is no legal way for her to get out of this. It would be nice to set a HMRC enquiry in motion.
No, laws to protect ones privacy don't allow others to know the amount of taxes someone has paid.
I'm afraid only the Scandis have this open online system where you can study your neighbour's tax returns. Belgium isn't that way at all.
Hi @PragueAddick. Yes, I made a mess of quoting (dont get a cheap replacement screen for your iphone is the moral), and my bit starts from "The latest set of Baton 2010 accounts..."
My point was really to redman regarding the lack of directors' remuneration reported in the filed accounts, ie because there wasn't any, and how that might be completely legitimate if KM is paid by Staprix.
The Belgians might not have a clue how to run a football club, but I don't believe Staprix would not comply with tax regulations.
I have heard that this regime approach tax situations in a very 'creative' manner, that is absolutely NOT to say that break any rules. Not at all. However they are very aware of the minutiae of tax rules all around the place.
I'm afraid only the Scandis have this open online system where you can study your neighbour's tax returns. Belgium isn't that way at all.
Hi @PragueAddick. Yes, I made a mess of quoting (dont get a cheap replacement screen for your iphone is the moral), and my bit starts from "The latest set of Baton 2010 accounts..."
My point was really to redman regarding the lack of directors' remuneration reported in the filed accounts, ie because there wasn't any, and how that might be completely legitimate if KM is paid by Staprix.
The Belgians might not have a clue how to run a football club, but I don't believe Staprix would not comply with tax regulations.
I agree, and doubt he is any more "creative" than most other owners of large businesses.
I believe that "all" we will uncover him doing is taking money out of football into his personal accounts, but in a way which is perfectly legal. He will then say to who is peers, "look I even made money from football, look how clever I am ". Clever dick.
Comments
Our problem is going to be that if/when Roland decides to exit he may well expect to have his debts repaid in full by the new owners, but that would require the implicit assumption that none of the investment pumped in (via debt) has been impaired. Judging by the state of the club in terms of playing squad, fan engagement etc. this would be rather unrealistic.
(I'm not suggesting for one moment that they are not true Charlton fans).
If people have stopped coming because the football is shite, then that's not unexpected. It happens with all fans, but it would be extremely disappointing, as the vast majority of non attendees, claim that it's because of RD and that the football/results have little to do with it.
Haa! Just looked there is a form but the silly sods won't let you submit it without your contact details.
Hoping it isn't above board was my first thought, but I reckon it's far more likely that she is working under IR35 or is paid directly by another part of the Evil Empire. It's obvious she knows sod all about football, but I don't reckon she is stupid enough to illegally dodge her taxes when there are plenty of legal loopholes she can exploit. I would imagine there would be repercussions on her ability to operate as a lawyer if she had convictions for tax fraud, so I'd be pretty confident that she has covered her backside with regards to that so that she doesn't cut off her Pinocchio-sized hooter to spite her face from an employment perspective.
What are the different avenues she could be employed under? I'm going to take a punt - albeit with the admission that I'm not the most clued up on the subject - and guess these are the three issues:
- Full Time, PAYE
Would be the obvious choice, she has a permanent appointment at The Club and presumably is entitled to the benefits given to a full time employee. (Private medical cover, phone and so on)
- Self Employed (i.e Sole Trader)
This offers very little in way of tax management as far as I know, but would make some sense as she presumably has multiple income streams; as demonstrated by her (presumably paid for) appearances at conferences.
Having an official appointment at Charlton would be an issue with IR35 though. However you look at it, as CEO she is a full time employee; she can't send someone to work in that capacity in her place.
- Self Employed, via Ltd Company
I'm going to say this is a no go, purely because she's not listed as a director of any other company.. in the UK at least. I don't think she is in Belgium either - but I could well be wrong. Furthermore, I have no idea how you could contract out the services of a CEO to a company - nor how that would fly with regards to IR35.
It's a long shot, but does Belgium have a system like Sweden where you can look up the amount of taxes paid by a citizen?
As a CEO she cannot legally be self employed. It has to go through the PAYE system.
It would be nice to think this is not happening but I suspect it is somehow.
She is liable to UK tax whether she is being paid by CAFC or from anywhere else, even if this is abroad. There is no legal way for her to get out of this.
It would be nice to set a HMRC enquiry in motion.
The latest set of Baton 2010 accounts (to 30/6/2015) state that there are no directors' emoluments, the directors being RD, KM and RD.
Most usually directors will be paid by the company for which they perform services, though this is commonly not the case. There would not be anything to report in a small company's financial statements if the director received payment from a different entity, but not a subsidiary, and these payments were not recharged to the company in question. This suggests that, probably for reasons of confidentiality, KM's pay arises from Staprix and no direct charge is made to Baton/CAFC so no UK disclosure is required. If she's not a director of Staprix (and i cant believe she is!) then her costs will be included in the overall people costs for the group, and you'd never see it.
This is no way suggest that there is any tax evasion going on. She may well be on UK PAYE administered by Staprix, and there's nothing illegal about that.
I think this one is a dead end.
Unfortunately.
Bloody Kaiser ruined us.
The poor lossmaking transfer dealings he ought to cover.
There is a price to pay for taking us down.
There is the nearly three year 'depreciation' factor whilst he has been in charge.
There is the income from player sales to take into account.
I am not an expert but the list above is down to Roland, as would be any decent investment he has made like the new pitch have to be taken into account.
Roland is not a reasonable man I get that. However he can't expect to get out from all this unscathed.
You win nothing with kids !
manyany clubs in Championship or lower are breaking even. Their boards will be looking to lose money year on year in the hope that their lottery ticket pays out. For most it won't and so the merry-go-round of owners will continue.Roland will sell up and when the new owners come in the rebuilding will begin on and off the pitch. We've come too far to let a new owner play the same game as Roland and whoever thinks of buying us will know this.
I think we were simply a part of his master scheme, which as supporters of all his clubs, past and present, know has been a total disaster but people like Roland don't like to admit failure but the one fact that we can hold out a little hope from is that he did sell his flagship club a while ago.
I'm afraid only the Scandis have this open online system where you can study your neighbour's tax returns. Belgium isn't that way at all.
1. The knocking back of changes to FFP mean that even if he gets the club back the The Championship, it still won't be viable because the League is so heavily skewed in favour of chancers rather than more parsimonious players.
2. Even if this particularly parsimonious player got to The Championship, his own track record belies an inability to progress further. He may be careful with his money, but he's not nearly careful enough with his decision making. The long term employment of an incompetent CEO proves this. Someone as unskilled at running a football business will not succeed if they do not learn fast. Roly has shown no indication of being hands-on enough to learn the necessary lessons.
3. The spectacular and irreversible loss of good will across his 'customer' base. No-one likes him, no-one trusts him, no-one believes in him. Exactly the same goes for his hyper-elevated concierge and her little gang of lackeys. They have leaked fans and sponsors, many of whom will only return on the regime's departure. With appalling arrogance, they declined offers of help, refused to discuss issues with those who understood the club and sowed discontent throughout the club. They may have claimed that the club is not financially dependent on the fans; but that was not carefully considered economics talking, that was just Katrien blathering on about stuff she hadn't thought-through.
We are now in a position where the club is doomed to lose money for as long as Duchatelet is the owner. It's possible to feel some sympathy for the way that FFP blew up in his face and extinguished any chances of success. Then again, you'd have to question whatever diligence he undertook if he didn't foresee the greed of the other Championship owners. As for the other reasons, ultimately they all boil down to his own unbridled fuckwittery. The same fuckwittery that saw him refusing to plan for League One even though the most casual of observers could see that that was exactly where we were heading.
On paper, he may have the wherewithal to fund the club for his lifetime. In reality though, even someone as seemingly obtuse as Two Shats will get to understand the situation sooner or later. It may be costly to his pride, but in the long run neither his bank balance or his ego are going to come out of this well. For his own good, the good of the club and the fans, he needs to sell up as soon as possible. It's the only way to end a situation that is currently painful to everyone.
Haa! Just looked there is a form but the silly sods won't let you submit it without your contact details.
Hoping it isn't above board was my first thought, but I reckon it's far more likely that she is working under IR35 or is paid directly by another part of the Evil Empire. It's obvious she knows sod all about football, but I don't reckon she is stupid enough to illegally dodge her taxes when there are plenty of legal loopholes she can exploit. I would imagine there would be repercussions on her ability to operate as a lawyer if she had convictions for tax fraud, so I'd be pretty confident that she has covered her backside with regards to that so that she doesn't cut off her Pinocchio-sized hooter to spite her face from an employment perspective.
What are the different avenues she could be employed under? I'm going to take a punt - albeit with the admission that I'm not the most clued up on the subject - and guess these are the three issues:
- Full Time, PAYE
Would be the obvious choice, she has a permanent appointment at The Club and presumably is entitled to the benefits given to a full time employee. (Private medical cover, phone and so on)
- Self Employed (i.e Sole Trader)
This offers very little in way of tax management as far as I know, but would make some sense as she presumably has multiple income streams; as demonstrated by her (presumably paid for) appearances at conferences.
Having an official appointment at Charlton would be an issue with IR35 though. However you look at it, as CEO she is a full time employee; she can't send someone to work in that capacity in her place.
- Self Employed, via Ltd Company
I'm going to say this is a no go, purely because she's not listed as a director of any other company.. in the UK at least. I don't think she is in Belgium either - but I could well be wrong. Furthermore, I have no idea how you could contract out the services of a CEO to a company - nor how that would fly with regards to IR35.
It's a long shot, but does Belgium have a system like Sweden where you can look up the amount of taxes paid by a citizen?
As a CEO she cannot legally be self employed. It has to go through the PAYE system.
It would be nice to think this is not happening but I suspect it is somehow.
She is liable to UK tax whether she is being paid by CAFC or from anywhere else, even if this is abroad. There is no legal way for her to get out of this.
It would be nice to set a HMRC enquiry in motion.
No, laws to protect ones privacy don't allow others to know the amount of taxes someone has paid.
My point was really to redman regarding the lack of directors' remuneration reported in the filed accounts, ie because there wasn't any, and how that might be completely legitimate if KM is paid by Staprix.
The Belgians might not have a clue how to run a football club, but I don't believe Staprix would not comply with tax regulations.
Not at all.
However they are very aware of the minutiae of tax rules all around the place.
I believe that "all" we will uncover him doing is taking money out of football into his personal accounts, but in a way which is perfectly legal. He will then say to who is peers, "look I even made money from football, look how clever I am ". Clever dick.