TOPIC:

swan42 wrote:

Larry Bird wrote: Your making yourself look ridiculous Swan. Ahead of salary cap is different from breaching it. You really are about half as clever as you think you are. Are you a hoarder by chance you seem to get fixated on things.

Let me put it simply for you LB. If the salary cap is say $230,000 for the season, it is $230,000 whether it is round 1, round 11 or round 23. There is no requirement for the salary cap to be paid on a pro-rata basis. Therefore, it is only exceeded when a club pays more than the salary cap. You have asserted that Swans were ahead of the salary cap at the half way mark of the 2014 season. For that to be true it would require to have exceeded the salary cap; that did not occur at any stage of the 2014 season. Swans did not at any stage exceed the salary cap in 2014.

LB you need to apologise or provide evidence that Swans exceeded the salary cap in 2014.

chit swan...its not that hard...LB never said you bogandean troglodytes had breached the salary cap...just that you had exceeded it on a pro-rata basis...which is all fine and dandy as long as it falls back to where it should be by seasons end. what I'm reading is not an accusation rather an observation....jeez, get over it and move on.

how is it possible to exceed something on a pro-rata basis when it is not calculated on a pro-rata basis ?
you are using a form of calculation which is not relevant.
you guys really need some budgeting tips.

MarkOlsen wrote: how is it possible to exceed something on a pro-rata basis when it is not calculated on a pro-rata basis ?
you are using a form of calculation which is not relevant.
you guys really need some budgeting tips.

Hey MO man, sounds like a quote from those chief dudes at the ATO to the SDFC from a couple of years back

pity for the ATO the bloke that didnt understand about paying GST and super was no longer there.
and those on the board that should have been monitoring this have moved on, our Treasurer now got lumped with this mess and due to his work the ATO wrote off part of the GST debt, the super issue is his next issue to sort out unfortunately.

The Salary cap is a set figure per season Mark Olsen. The fact the WAFC discovered Swans had spent 60% or whatever the figure was in the first ten games is a moot point because they corrected this in the second half of the year. That is the end of the matter, unless you don't think what I have said is true. And at know point did I assert Swans had breached anything. How they reduced their wage bill so significantly in the back half of the year might be a more sensible debate.

how do you know they reduced their wage bill ?
how do you know they corrected anything ?

I know you are havingtrouble with this but this is what Swan42 posted before on this matter:

"To further emphasise the patent nonsense of both Mudlark's and Lb's assertions here is a direct and unexpurgated quote from our Treasurer:

"At no stage were we ever in danger of breaching the cap in 2014.
When the WAFC looked at our figures after 10 games they divided our payments so far by 10 and multiplied by 20 and determined that if we continued to pay at that rate we would be over the cap.
What they didn't take into account ( a fact they soon realised ) is that we brought forward some payments in advance to accommodate special needs. At no stage were we ever in danger of breaching the cap in 2014."

so your issue is with the Swans treasurer and what he has said, have you contacted him to dispute what he has said ?

I'm in 100% accord with that statement from your treasurer. Can I please have an apology from Swan42 and yourself. If indeed you are different people, I find it hard to think two such obtuse people exist. At no stage did I ever suggest Swans had or indeed were in danger of a breach.

I apologise profusely......never ever want to discriminate against a club accommodating for special needs.....were they player related or fan related

Freezin wrote: I apologise profusely......never ever want to discriminate against a club accommodating for special needs.....were they player related or fan related

we had to pay for a letter writing course, hasnt been needed as yet.

Larry Bird wrote: I'm in 100% accord with that statement from your treasurer. Can I please have an apology from Swan42 and yourself. If indeed you are different people, I find it hard to think two such obtuse people exist. At no stage did I ever suggest Swans had or indeed were in danger of a breach.

you can have an apology if you tell me what its for as i can see you need it to make you feel better.