Am I being a little simplistic here, or have I misunderstood, but just looking at those figures, the match day and revenue balance the wages, and with the player sales and purchases giving a profit, so actually although we are running at a loss, the loss has actually been reduced
Obviously I could have been sold down the river but from what I heard from Tan on Friday with his level of assured calmness and control I have no worries in regards to if they are on top of it or not. Seem to be smooth operators who know EXACTLY what they are doing.
They 100% do have a plan no doubt. That plan will basically include selling a key asset or assets if we don’t go up
It's interesting that the EFL signs off all signings, but if we refused to sell any players we'd fail FFP. Begs the question of what they're approving.
Better than black and white irregular hoops. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
I imagine its more to do with fitting in the supposed business plan they were talking about friday. Maybe keeping amortisation under a certain level relative to turnover?
He’s highlighting that match day income is up 12%. Must be one of the good focal points of the accounts, 12% is a damn good increase. All the extra fans in the ground have just about paid for Allsopp for the year, excluding any transfer fee we may have been duped out of.
Not seen anyone mention the £9m borrowing yet. Could it be possible that that borrowing is from Murat Ulker, or someone else backing us from the shadows? I know nothing about the legality of such things but it just seems odd that we're borrowing money to facilitate our spending, and perhaps this would go a way to explaining how we're able to be (apparently) so heavily backed by McVities, Corendon etc despite sponsorship deals being vetted for market value by the EFL.
I understand that, but I would have thought commercial income is up even more so would have been more worth highlighting.
The borrowing would help from a cashflow perspective but has no impact on profit / loss so doesn't help in that sense.
Theoretically what’s stopping us selling a player to Fenerbahce for £15m and signing someone from them for the same amount on a 3 year deal. No money actually changes hand but the accounts show a nice £10m profit. Believe Juve and Barca did something similar with Pjanic and Arthur and got away with it
Anyone know the exact value of promotion to the PL this season? I'm seeing 170M to 250M per season plus parachute payments?
I'll admit that I don't understand FFP. But, surely if someone invests in the club and ploughs money in, that money then belongs to the club and the business, not the individual. Then irrespective of crowds and income, expenditure in players purchased etc is calculated against the clubs value....What's the problem? Is this what the owners of Man City and to a lessor extent Newcastle have done? Its there money so if they wish to give it to the club, I can't see anything wrong!
Depends on if you stay up and where you finish, I think each spot higher up the table is around £3 million extra
It's at least £135m, then if you get relegated after just the one season you get 55% of that in the first year and 45% in the second year. If you manage to stay up, you obviously get the £135m again and if you get relegated after that, you get 55% in year one, 45% in year two and 20% in year three.
