I think the accounts for QPR Holdings, the parent company, would make more relevant reading. These make it look OK for 2015, though I struggle to see where the £112m income came from. Anyway income will be a fraction of that for this year, so let's hope that the £60m spent on wages has similarly shrunk. I am sure the several financial experts on here will have more insight.
Not having read the accounts, the one figure that I've seen quoted by others that surprises me (or makes me laugh) is that we reduced the wages that we paid while in The Premier from Harold's play off winning side!
Bottom line is that it shows an operating loss of £1.3m (due no doubt to the TV money being as little as we could have received) but the balance being made up by a positive transfer balance, resulting in a net profit for the year of £468k. It's not a lot, but it's there. The accounts have been fully audited so there's no arguing with them, but they seem better than Hertfordshire's initial doom-laden view. There's really not a lot there that surprises me, or makes me worried. QPR Holdings is a different matter, and yes, I'd like to see those for context/ This season, we have parachute payments instead of the TV money, and a lower wage bill which, allied to better transfer dealings, should help this years accounts balance out pretty much the same.
I didn't spot that, where is it? May be remaining loans to the club made by the owners after they wrote off the rest by transferring it to equity. But I thought that was QPR Holdings.
A few interesting items: 1, the club managed to make a gross and operating loss on increased Premier League revenues, but clawed this back to a net profit on ordinary activities by virtue of making a gain on player's contracts. Quite which players did this for them is a mystery. 2, net working capital remains significantly in the red, with the overall net worth of the club being down to the capital value of the playing staff; this despite a huge impairment to accelerate the write-off of certain player contracts, presumably as relegation beckoned. 3, I'd be interested to learn what the large debtor from group undertakings is, as well as the reason for the huge increase in creditors. Neither is adequately described. 4, whilst the average staff (playing & management) increased over the previous year, the total wage bill fell. Did we fight a PL campaign with more players, but of a lesser overall quality? That was probably a yes. 5, there was nothing in there about knees.
Looks as you can take whatever value you want from the published figures http://www.insideworldfootball.com/2016/03/31/qpr-stay-tune-ffp-rules-post-45m-loss/
The £45 million loss that they mention as their headline figure - I can't find that anywhere in the release, so I can only assume they are wrong, or lying to make us look bad. Either eway, it's highly innacurate reporting.
The link in the OP is to the accounts for QPR Football & Athletic Club which show a profit of £468k. The Group accounts for QPR Holdings show a £45m loss. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03197756/filing-history
Very poor reporting then, because the article reads as if it's the club (which everyone associates with the name) that lost £45m rather than the holding company, which means nothing to pretty much everyone.
Doesn't look great. I am a bit puzzled how the Athletic Club company had turnover of 112M but the group accounts have a turnover of 88M (figures might be slightly out). I thought they were all consolidated? Another huge loss though and that despite the TV income and a less wreckless transfer strategy.
I think that you're referring to the "unprovided deferred tax" This is a technical accounting term but essentially means that if the company makes taxable profits in the future it can reduce the amount of tax (or pay none at all) as it has tax losses carried forward from prior years The comment on FPP is interesting - auditors and directors have to be very careful to fully disclose any future liabilities, so there must be sufficient uncertainty over the likelihood of us being fined for no estimate / range of estimates to be included Trust me.....I'm an accountant
That was precisely my point, we are in stage where we are not allowed to divulge such information, however with that said that figure can't be laughed away and is accountable to something, presumably expected down the line.
Cheers. I think. Was the £45m loss in the QPR Holdings accounts covered by loans from the owners that have now been converted to equity? It'll still be a couple of seasons until we can say we are over the disastrous transfers of the last few years, unless we can permanently get rid of Caulker, Sandro, Fer etc this summer.
