I guess you guys are going to be giving your own reviews on what these figures mean in a short while? It'd be handy.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
Just been announced, on various news wires (BBC, Sky etc.)
BBC saying 80million pounds loss.Spin your way out of that one Gill.
If you read through the last few pages of this very thread you'll (hopefully) understand why the reported accounting loss isn't very relevant. It's largely made up of non-cash expenses that haven't cost the club a thing.
The most interesting revelation by far is that the owners haven't taken either their carve-out or a dividend, that and that EBITDA is higher than expected indicating a very good growth-rate through recession.
Commercial revenue up 16% to £81.4m from £69.9m.
Media revenue up from £99.7m to £104.8m
Matchday revenue down to £100.2m from £108.8m the year before. Two less home games played.
Deferred income from matchday activities down just £2m from £54m to £52m.
Deferred income from commercial activities up £8m on the year before.
Media revenue up from £99.7m to £104.8m
Matchday revenue down to £100.2m from £108.8m the year before. Two less home games played.
Deferred income from matchday activities down just £2m from £54m to £52m.
Deferred income from commercial activities up £8m on the year before.
It's very relevant.
180 million pounds have been spent or written off one way or the other.
16% commercial revenue growth looks a great success; do you reckon they can continue that trend, GCHQ, or even improve on it? Commercial revenue would equal matchday revenue in two years time if so.
When making significant losses taking dividends for personal use only increases club debt further. I'm not sure why the Glazers not taking money from their own business is hailed as a success.
Suit yourself. If you read the last few pages of the thread then you'd probably understand a bit better.
It's fantastic. And yes I very strongly believe that trend will continue. We could well see even higher growth next year.
Great work from the marketing and finance department. The biggie would be to reduce debt over the next few years.
GCHQ I actually admire the fact you have come on and tried to defend which frankly is beyond defending. Horrendous figures and sadly the club will suffer eventually, the people responsible determinded to hang on until they can squeeze out as much as they can. I am not worried anymore I am extremely concerned
Net debt has been reduced to £357.8m. Will that do you?
Fixed.
I wouldn't necessarily call a success; where did you get that from? It's interesting though, because every man and his dog who'd looked at the situation had predicted the carve-out to have been taken; at the time when everyone thought it imperitive for the Glazers to to take cash from the club, they didn't.
"The club's interest payments on bank debt for the past year totalled £40m."
Glazers = cnuts
The most unnecessary debt ever, in the history of debts.
Glazers = cnuts
The most unnecessary debt ever, in the history of debts.
I have been reading the last few pages, and even taking part in the discussion. The bottom line is we made a 83 million loss. All the great work done on field and by the marketing team is going down the gutter.
How can that be when the bond issue alone is £520m, that not debt? You can't spin your way out of these disastrous results
£163.8m in the bank.
Exactly, we should be the strongest club in the world, not being mocked by opposing fans for our financial position
Net cash outflow on player expenditure (transfers) - £31.4m
To be fair, that is the least of my worries.
but is it that straight forward? did we really bring in 286 million quid, increase or maintain or cash reservers, yet 369 million quid was spend by the club last year?
cos 286 million turn over, with an 83 million quid loss = 369 million to me, if its as simple as you say.
Cider, whatever way you look at it, MASSIVE amounts of money is going out of the club. For what? For the påleasure of Glazer and his family to own us. The only reason whatsoever. And oh so unnecessary.
That doesn't include amortisation, right? That's an actual cash expense incurred in the last 12months?
The PIK's disappear then or have the Glazer's decided to pay them off with their own money of which they don't have any. We blew £100m of profits and £80m along with it in one finanacial year without a major signing that is the sad pathetic bottom line.
Not me, ever!
I have a simple approach to life.
The Glazers own the club. It's their business what they do with the money.
The remarkable £83m ''loss'' and yet the club's cash reserves increased from £150.5m the year before up to £163.8m. Explain that for me please.
Oh dear oh dear, this is not good! People who are trying to spin this as "not as bad as we thought" are clueless!
However your looking at it we have lost over £80m. Now how are we meant to progress as a club if we continue to make such losses. Now some of that loss is said to be for a one off payment in the bond but a good £40m was on debt "interest".
For all of you "we will sort all this" please explain to me how by 2017 we could possibly be debt free under the Glazer ownership. Also the longer they stay the harder they will be to remove, do you honestly think they are going to invest 10 years in the club and not want to walk away with a huge profit?
However your looking at it we have lost over £80m. Now how are we meant to progress as a club if we continue to make such losses. Now some of that loss is said to be for a one off payment in the bond but a good £40m was on debt "interest".
For all of you "we will sort all this" please explain to me how by 2017 we could possibly be debt free under the Glazer ownership. Also the longer they stay the harder they will be to remove, do you honestly think they are going to invest 10 years in the club and not want to walk away with a huge profit?
Yes, that's the actual cash expense incurred in the last 12 months.
I assume that includes the recent money coming in for season ticket sales? which will be needed for operating costs over the year.
I am cheered by the fact that it isn't just me who struggles to get their head around how a loss can be made, and not made, at the same time! 
Well. Where does this leave us?
I was most pleased with that Commercial Revenue rise. For people who cannot see the importance of this, it is the Glazers effectively attempting to nullfiy the impact of the debt they have brought onto the club.
The other good things about increasing these revenues is that the higher they get, the more we are cushioned financially from the effects of a bad season or two on the pitch.
You cannot keep banging on about how much money is leaving the club because of the debts without giving them credit for the increase in commercial revenues they are responsible for.
Well. Where does this leave us?
I was most pleased with that Commercial Revenue rise. For people who cannot see the importance of this, it is the Glazers effectively attempting to nullfiy the impact of the debt they have brought onto the club.
The other good things about increasing these revenues is that the higher they get, the more we are cushioned financially from the effects of a bad season or two on the pitch.
You cannot keep banging on about how much money is leaving the club because of the debts without giving them credit for the increase in commercial revenues they are responsible for.
New purchases £26m
Proceeds of sales £14m
Net therefore = £12m
The cash outgoings reflects stage payments on existing player purchases as well I'm assuming so is misleading.
It also appears Bebe did cost £8m, as the only other signing that might cost us money is not confirmed and wouldn't be significant (Van Velzen).
As i've said before, money going towards interest payments just doesn't bother me as long as enough's coming in to cover the expense; the club carries on as normal despite the payments.
Look at the commercial growth in isolation as an example. 16% up from last year means the club earned £11m more than it did in the previous twelve months; £81m in total compared with £70m the year before. Compare that figure to commercial revenue pre-Glazer and you'll see that the interest payments have been totally negated by growth.
As revenues grow the debt decreases in its significance, and growth rate under Glazer ownership has been phenomenal; these latest results are very encouraging.
Do you see what i'm getting at?
what is the worst case scenario (off the pitch) that can happen in the next year until the next results come out and we see if these "exceptional" items are indeed a once off.
maybe this time next year, that 100million operating profit indeed is operating profit.
maybe this time next year, that 100million operating profit indeed is operating profit.
Good rational post. The damage been done is constant and gradually the club is suffering on the field, which I take no joy in saying. We are not longer able to compete for top players and ours are liable to being poached by the now bigger clubs. Season tickets sales I fear as a consquence of apathy with the owners and possibly less competitive team will continue to fall
I am cheered by the fact that it isn't just me who struggles to get their head around how a loss can be made, and not made, at the same time!
Well. Where does this leave us?
I was most pleased with that Commercial Revenue rise. For people who cannot see the importance of this, it is the Glazers effectively attempting to nullfiy the impact of the debt they have brought onto the club.
The other good things about increasing these revenues is that the higher they get, the more we are cushioned financially from the effects of a bad season or two on the pitch.
You cannot keep banging on about how much money is leaving the club because of the debts without giving them credit for the increase in commercial revenues they are responsible for.
Very good post. Kudos.
Sorry that would be kidding ourselves, the Glazer debt problem will be on going until they leave
It is most be hard for the maketing people to see all their hard work in the last year and for the remaining years of Glazer ownership go up in smoke. We are a laughing stock in the media todayI am cheered by the fact that it isn't just me who struggles to get their head around how a loss can be made, and not made, at the same time!
Well. Where does this leave us?
I was most pleased with that Commercial Revenue rise. For people who cannot see the importance of this, it is the Glazers effectively attempting to nullfiy the impact of the debt they have brought onto the club.
The other good things about increasing these revenues is that the higher they get, the more we are cushioned financially from the effects of a bad season or two on the pitch.
You cannot keep banging on about how much money is leaving the club because of the debts without giving them credit for the increase in commercial revenues they are responsible for.
- Status