bustocromwell wrote:

Jimmy Exile wrote:So it wasn't 19k for amond in agents fees and people and wetting their pants again for no reason?

But Nicholls did not necessarily receive the full figure of £19,058 for the transfer of Amond

Payments included in these figures may have been made in respect of transactions entered into prior to February 2017.

So the 19k figure is pointless then?

no the argus article was pointless.

bustocromwell wrote:no the argus article was pointless.

I don't get it. what am I missing? did we pay 19k to an agent for the amond deal or not

yep that's a good question..

the documentation was pretty clear, but the argus article questioned it without
any evidence either way... which I find strange..

either way, he was a great signing ..and if that's the what it takes to bring in
the players the manager has identified, so be it... would be nice if the details were clearer tho

It's a maybe.

We paid £19k to agents.

In that period the only transfer recorded including an agent was Amond, but it is possible that money was due to be paid to an agent during that period for transfers that happened in earlier periods. An example of this would be if we received money from a sell on clause and a portion of it was due to be paid to the agent.

Amberexile wrote:It's a maybe.

We paid £19k to agents.

In that period the only transfer recorded including an agent was Amond, but it is possible that money was due to be paid to an agent during that period for transfers that happened in earlier periods. An example of this would be if we received money from a sell on clause and a portion of it was due to be paid to the agent.

That is interesting because Lee Evans was sold to Sheffield United from Wolverhampton Wanderers in January 2018 for approximately £750k. It was reported at the time that Newport County would receive 15% of that fee as a sell on clause. Oddly enough, a quick google search will show that Lee Evans is represented by Paul Nicholls at the Elite Management Agency, as is Conor Washington. It is therefore quite plausible that we negotiated staggered payments for both Washington and Evans , but I do not know if true. The irony is if, and I stress the word if, a large percentage of that £19,058 was paid to Paul Nicholls for the Washington & Evans deals, the current board are now being lambasted for the shrewdness of the previous directors who negotiated significant sell on clauses with EMA.

bustocromwell wrote:no the argus article was pointless.

Agree with that. If as has been reported Michael Flynn is with the Elite Management Agency and he is also negotiating contracts with players represented by the Elite Management Agency, then a good local paper would be investigating the possible conflict of interest.

Then again I suppose it is just possible that EMA are a charity dedicated to the well-being of Newport County. Perhaps the club shop should start selling half and half scarfs, County on one half and EMA on the other.

A new song for Taff,

E.M.A. and County,
Flynny is our king,
We often lose,
We sometimes draw,
We seldom f@cking win.

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Amberexile wrote:It's a maybe.

We paid £19k to agents.

In that period the only transfer recorded including an agent was Amond, but it is possible that money was due to be paid to an agent during that period for transfers that happened in earlier periods. An example of this would be if we received money from a sell on clause and a portion of it was due to be paid to the agent.

That is interesting because Lee Evans was sold to Sheffield United from Wolverhampton Wanderers in January 2018 for approximately £750k. It was reported at the time that Newport County would receive 15% of that fee as a sell on clause. Oddly enough, a quick google search will show that Lee Evans is represented by Paul Nicholls at the Elite Management Agency, as is Conor Washington. It is therefore quite plausible that we negotiated staggered payments for both Washington and Evans , but I do not know if true. The irony is if, and I stress the word if, a large percentage of that £19,058 was paid to Paul Nicholls for the Washington & Evans deals, the current board are now being lambasted for the shrewdness of the previous directors who negotiated significant sell on clauses with EMA.

Who's lambasting the board ?

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

bustocromwell wrote:no the argus article was pointless.

Agree with that. If as has been reported Michael Flynn is with the Elite Management Agency and he is also negotiating contracts with players represented by the Elite Management Agency, then a good local paper would be investigating the possible conflict of interest.

Then again I suppose it is just possible that EMA are a charity dedicated to the well-being of Newport County. Perhaps the club shop should start selling half and half scarfs, County on one half and EMA on the other.

A new song for Taff,

E.M.A. and County,
Flynny is our king,
We often lose,
We sometimes draw,
We seldom f@cking win.

That is an excellent idea, but may I suggest an equally rewarding exercise would be to tot up the revenue generated from the Washington , Collins, Poole and Evans transfers and cross reference that with commission paid to EMA. Then the supporters can decide if there is a conflict of interest or that we simply have a good relationship with a reputable agent.

Alan G Bryant wrote:

That is an excellent idea, but may I suggest an equally rewarding exercise would be to tot up the revenue generated from the Washington , Collins, Poole and Evans transfers and cross reference that with commission paid to EMA. Then the supporters can decide if there is a conflict of interest or that we simply have a good relationship with a reputable agent.

I think that you are missing the point. If the manager handing out the contracts is represented by the same agency as the players that are receiving the contracts then there is a conflict of interest.

Believe me I am a barrister. Before I retired I represented many people in court. Everyone believes that in a court case one side wins and the other side loses. Whilst that sometimes happens, the usual outcome is that one side loses and the other side loses badly. But the lawyers always win. Every single time.

When agents are involved, they too always win.

hi stan. with your lawyers always win comment, I'm starting to see why you have such a superiority complex lol.

thanks to Alan for clearing it up. looks like that money was for Washington and Lee Evans so the knicker wetters are wrong again lol.

I love coming on this board. although stan often calls me thick, coming on here make me feel clever lol

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Alan G Bryant wrote:

That is an excellent idea, but may I suggest an equally rewarding exercise would be to tot up the revenue generated from the Washington , Collins, Poole and Evans transfers and cross reference that with commission paid to EMA. Then the supporters can decide if there is a conflict of interest or that we simply have a good relationship with a reputable agent.

I think that you are missing the point. If the manager handing out the contracts is represented by the same agency as the players that are receiving the contracts then there is a conflict of interest.

Believe me I am a barrister. Before I retired I represented many people in court. Everyone believes that in a court case one side wins and the other side loses. Whilst that sometimes happens, the usual outcome is that one side loses and the other side loses badly. But the lawyers always win. Every single time.

When agents are involved, they too always win.

stan football is full of situations where the manager is representing by some of the players agents. in fact flynny is still a player isn't he? anyway it surely helps us pick up good players and happens across football

so why pick on the flynny about it? it seems you have a hate campaign going on against the manager and the club

Who is actually in charge with the contract dealings on the club's behave ??

owlsabout wrote:Who is actually in charge with the contract dealings on the club's behave ??

hi. don't know but presume flynny and Lennie?

Anyway am glad that it's cleared up that we didn't pay 19k to an agent for Amond

Jimmy Exile wrote:

owlsabout wrote:Who is actually in charge with the contract dealings on the club's behave ??

hi. don't know but presume flynny and Lennie?

Anyway am glad that it's cleared up that we didn't pay 19k to an agent for Amond

How is it cleared up? Is Alan Bryant the chairman? The only evidence is the official report that has 19k alongside the name Armond. Maybe if Alan Bryant is that in the know he can tell us why we are late again submitting our accounts.