I reckon common sense tells you that Boyd2 is right in what he says - think about it. We know for absolute certainty that Broughy is bankrupt - its a fact and proof is available in the public domain.
Now I am no expert in bankruptcy but I reckon its a fair bet that a condition of it is that you are obliged to pay your creditors a certain percentage of your income for a set period of time - lets assume 3 years, so say for example Wakeys offer was (complete guess work on frigures by the way):
£120k per year for 4 years, say for arguments sake (and easy rounding) that he is obliged to pay 50% to his creditors for 3 years.
Year 1 £120k Danny "sees" £60k
Year 2 £120k Danny "sees" £60k
Year 3 £120k Danny "sees" £60k
Year 4 £120k Danny "sees" £120k
Total contract value = £480k
Total value to Danny = £300k
Then for arguments sake say that Hudds offer looks something like this:
Year 1 £60k Danny "sees" £30k
Year 2 £60k Danny "sees" £30k
Year 3 £60k Danny "sees" £30k
Year 4 £140k Danny "sees" £140k
Year 4.5 £140k Danny "sees" £140k
total contract value = £460k
Total value to Danny = £370k
Less money, but the contract is structured in such a way that benefits the player despite it being "worth" less on paper in total.
The there is the possiblitity of other "incentives" that maybe Ted wouldn't offer but somebody else might?
