Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST)

[Guest Roger Kint]

So whoever brought up transfers in the comparison with WBA, it was a red herring.  Whatever they bought or sold given the headline prices, their actual transfer frofit for that year worked out at a few million that takes what seems to be a £6m profit up to an £11m profit.

 

Are you on drugs? Turnover - £27m less wages - £21m is £6m

 

Do you lie in a world where football clubs dont pay any other costs?

 

WBA would have made a P&L loss without the profit on player transfers. For some reason their accounts don't include a cash flow but it looks like their cash usage was close to neutral over the 12 months. But as you said in an earlier post comparisons with us and WBA aren't too relevant.

 

Yeah i got that, just wondering why Happy seems to think football clubs only pay out wages and nothing else

 

I'd not done the sums and took the bottom line figures I read.  I was wrong to claim a £6m profit before player trading.  Can you find it in your heart to forgive me?  I can't promise i won't make a mistake like this in future, maybe this is why I identify with the NUST so much. 

 

 

 

Now who is being arsey

 

I just got sick of pointing it out and got frustrated, sorry

[Happy Face]

So whoever brought up transfers in the comparison with WBA, it was a red herring.  Whatever they bought or sold given the headline prices, their actual transfer frofit for that year worked out at a few million that takes what seems to be a £6m profit up to an £11m profit.

 

Are you on drugs? Turnover - £27m less wages - £21m is £6m

 

Do you lie in a world where football clubs dont pay any other costs?

 

WBA would have made a P&L loss without the profit on player transfers. For some reason their accounts don't include a cash flow but it looks like their cash usage was close to neutral over the 12 months. But as you said in an earlier post comparisons with us and WBA aren't too relevant.

 

Yeah i got that, just wondering why Happy seems to think football clubs only pay out wages and nothing else

 

I'd not done the sums and took the bottom line figures I read.  I was wrong to claim a £6m profit before player trading.  Can you find it in your heart to forgive me?  I can't promise i won't make a mistake like this in future, maybe this is why I identify with the NUST so much. 

 

 

 

Now who is being arsey

 

I just got sick of pointing it out and got frustrated, sorry

 

[quayside]

So whoever brought up transfers in the comparison with WBA, it was a red herring.  Whatever they bought or sold given the headline prices, their actual transfer frofit for that year worked out at a few million that takes what seems to be a £6m profit up to an £11m profit.

 

Are you on drugs? Turnover - £27m less wages - £21m is £6m

 

Do you lie in a world where football clubs dont pay any other costs?

 

WBA would have made a P&L loss without the profit on player transfers. For some reason their accounts don't include a cash flow but it looks like their cash usage was close to neutral over the 12 months. But as you said in an earlier post comparisons with us and WBA aren't too relevant.

 

I was more interested in the kind of money we can expect in the Championship when mentioning them.  It was more of a contrast than a compare.

 

They got £14m tv money, it's safe to say we'll be getting more than that this year.

They got £2.2m in merchandise, it's safe to say we'll be getting more than that this year.

They got £4m other commercial income, it's safe to say we'll be getting more than that this year.

They got £7m gate + matchday, 43,000 paying £20 each over 23 games is £19.8m before pies or pints.

 

So where they earned £27.2m in the championship, it's unclear what we've earned but it's safe to say it's clearly in excess of £40m.  Llambias said it was £50m.

 

They spent £22m on wages (80%), we're spending £35m on wages (70%)

 

Not saying you are wrong but that's an interesting statement on our wages - you got a source for that? That would mean we have taken £35m out of our wage bill since 2008.

[Thespence]

Notable players leaving:Owen, Viduka, Oba, Beye, N'Zogbia, Given, Duff & Bassong. (We have signed players since 2008 as well )

Directors left: Mort, Williamsons, Jimenez, Wise & there is anothe name but cant think of him

Known to have left footballing staff: Richard Money, Robbie Elliott & Mark Hulse.

 

The clubs wages have also been reduced by a lot of outsourcing as well such as: match day programme, catering & stewards (not sure if that was post 2008)

 

Not looking for a ruck or a debate just trying to see how HF gets to his £35 million.

 

[Happy Face]

Notable players leaving:Owen, Viduka, Oba, Beye, N'Zogbia, Given, Duff & Bassong. (We have signed players since 2008 as well )

Directors left: Mort, Williamsons, Jimenez, Wise & there is anothe name but cant think of him

Known to have left footballing staff: Richard Money, Robbie Elliott & Mark Hulse.

 

The clubs wages have also been reduced by a lot of outsourcing as well such as: match day programme, catering & stewards (not sure if that was post 2008)

 

Not looking for a ruck or a debate just trying to see how HF gets to his £35 million.

 

 

I never calculated it.  It's just a value i had in my head that I was sure i'd read somewhere...but i can't find it.

 

[Thespence]

[UV]

In 2008 our other (non wages) costs were £50m - god knows how much of that is still there now, but the running costs of the training ground and SJP won't come cheap.

 

Compared to £28m (including £6m of exceptional items) in 2007 and £20m (including £3m of exceptional items) in 2006. That's the cost of sorting out the club's finances from the mess they were in I guess.

[Guest]

Happy Face, if we were making any significant profit then we'd have had several parties offering £100m in the summer.

[Happy Face]

Happy Face, if we were making any significant profit then we'd have had several parties offering £100m in the summer.

 

We did

 

[ToonTastic]

In 2008 our other (non wages) costs were £50m - god knows how much of that is still there now, but the running costs of the training ground and SJP won't come cheap.

 

Probably why we had the mass redundancies after relegation.

[Guest]

Happy Face, if we were making any significant profit then we'd have had several parties offering £100m in the summer.

 

We did

 

Who from? Seemed plenty of groups were looking but when it came to the crunch then nobody proved their funds or credentials.

[Happy Face]

Happy Face, if we were making any significant profit then we'd have had several parties offering £100m in the summer.

 

We did

 

Who from? Seemed plenty of groups were looking but when it came to the crunch then nobody proved their funds or credentials.

 

http://nufc-ashlies.blogspot.com/2009/12/its-official-ashley-refused-to-cut-his.html

 

It was at the start of the season too when no-one knew how we would perform under Hughton or if the crowds would be maintained over 40K.  I'm not saying we could maintain a profit if we didn't go up, lost more of our best performers, dropped down the league, pulled lesser crowds and the parachute mayments stopped....all of which looked a lot more likely back in August.

[Cronky]

Just to muddy the waters still further, there's an article on Times Online today by George Caulkin, and he seems to have a good relationship with NUST. The following passage struck me -

 

'At some stage, the NUST will seek to purchase a portion of the club from Mike Ashley. For the record, they are well aware that they cannot buy Newcastle outright; the aim is to take a percentage and build from there'.

 

After what they've said about Ashley, there's no way they can have a constructive working relationship with him. Any mutual trust has been blown out of the water. They either have to buy outright or remain a pressure group on the outside.

 

It does look like they've been a bit indiscreet with Caulkin. I can't see anyone wanting to part with a large amount of money just for the privilege of a minority share with no real power.

 

These guys are just totally out of their depth.

[Happy Face]

Just to muddy the waters still further, there's an article on Times Online today by George Caulkin, and he seems to have a good relationship with NUST. The following passage struck me -

 

'At some stage, the NUST will seek to purchase a portion of the club from Mike Ashley. For the record, they are well aware that they cannot buy Newcastle outright; the aim is to take a percentage and build from there'.

 

After what they've said about Ashley, there's no way they can have a constructive working relationship with him. Any mutual trust has been blown out of the water. They either have to buy outright or remain a pressure group on the outside.

 

It does look like they've been a bit indiscreet with Caulkin. I can't see anyone wanting to part with a large amount of money just for the privilege of a minority share with no real power.

 

These guys are just totally out of their depth.

 

I thought the chances of a constructive working relationship between any group of fans and Ashley were blown out of the water before the NUST even got started tbf.

[Benwell Lad]

Happy Face, if we were making any significant profit then we'd have had several parties offering £100m in the summer.

 

We did

 

Who from? Seemed plenty of groups were looking but when it came to the crunch then nobody proved their funds or credentials.

 

If NUFC can make £7M a month profit (as NUST say we are presently doing) then I will be buying the club and I'm prepared to pay more than the recent asking price.

I'm gonna need a decent bean counter who can make a profit look like a loss, or a loss look like a profit to suit particular circumstances.

I have to say I'm very impressed with the skills and knowledge of certain N-O posters who seem to be well versed in book-keeping and accountancy matters.

[Happy Face]

Happy Face, if we were making any significant profit then we'd have had several parties offering £100m in the summer.

 

We did

 

Who from? Seemed plenty of groups were looking but when it came to the crunch then nobody proved their funds or credentials.

 

If NUFC can make £7M a month profit (as NUST say we are presently doing) then I will be buying the club and I'm prepared to pay more than the recent asking price.

I'm gonna need a decent bean counter who can make a profit look like a loss, or a loss look like a profit to suit particular circumstances.

I have to say I'm very impressed with the skills and knowledge of certain N-O posters who seem to be well versed in book-keeping and accountancy matters.

 

NUST don't say that NUFC make £7M a month profit.

 

They say that Ashley has been taking up to £7m out of the club each month.

 

There's a difference.

 

[Benwell Lad]

Just to muddy the waters still further, there's an article on Times Online today by George Caulkin, and he seems to have a good relationship with NUST. The following passage struck me -

 

'At some stage, the NUST will seek to purchase a portion of the club from Mike Ashley. For the record, they are well aware that they cannot buy Newcastle outright; the aim is to take a percentage and build from there'.

 

After what they've said about Ashley, there's no way they can have a constructive working relationship with him. Any mutual trust has been blown out of the water. They either have to buy outright or remain a pressure group on the outside.

 

It does look like they've been a bit indiscreet with Caulkin. I can't see anyone wanting to part with a large amount of money just for the privilege of a minority share with no real power.

 

These guys are just totally out of their depth.

 

Getting the "back tracking" in early.

Very different to the pompous, confident releases of late which spoke of overwhelming support and huge amounts "pledged".

We need new and clear ownership not a bunch of amateurs playing games.

Maybe it's time to change their motto to "Well we never could actually" or just plain "No we can't"

[Guest Roger Kint]

NUST don't say that NUFC make £7M a month profit.

They say that Ashley has been taking up to £7m out of the club each month.

 

There's a difference.

 

 

Yes they did:

 

'sources have told us that Mr Ashley is making up to £7m profit out of our club every month '

[Happy Face]

Just to muddy the waters still further, there's an article on Times Online today by George Caulkin, and he seems to have a good relationship with NUST. The following passage struck me -

 

'At some stage, the NUST will seek to purchase a portion of the club from Mike Ashley. For the record, they are well aware that they cannot buy Newcastle outright; the aim is to take a percentage and build from there'.

 

After what they've said about Ashley, there's no way they can have a constructive working relationship with him. Any mutual trust has been blown out of the water. They either have to buy outright or remain a pressure group on the outside.

 

It does look like they've been a bit indiscreet with Caulkin. I can't see anyone wanting to part with a large amount of money just for the privilege of a minority share with no real power.

 

These guys are just totally out of their depth.

 

Getting the "back tracking" in early.

Very different to the pompous, confident releases of late which spoke of overwhelming support and huge amounts "pledged".

We need new and clear ownership not a bunch of amateurs playing games.

Maybe it's time to change their motto to "Well we never could actually" or just plain "No we can't"

 

You're right. 

 

Fuck it! 

 

I think it was Homer Simpson who said "if at first you don't succeed give up"

 

Or is his other one more apt "Kids, You Tried Your Best and You Failed Miserably. The Lesson Is, Never Try."

 

Either way best leave Ashley to get on with it.

 

[quayside]

In 2008 our other (non wages) costs were £50m - god knows how much of that is still there now, but the running costs of the training ground and SJP won't come cheap.

 

Compared to £28m (including £6m of exceptional items) in 2007 and £20m (including £3m of exceptional items) in 2006. That's the cost of sorting out the club's finances from the mess they were in I guess.

 

Not sure where you are coming from here. I haven't got the 2006 accounts to hand but in 2007 turnover was £87m, wages were £60m and the other costs were £61m which is why we lost £34m that year.

 

 

Edit - have now checked out 2006 - Turnover £83m, wages £52m and other costs £43m = loss of £12m.

 

2006 was only an 11 month accounting period so that puts the other costs at about £47m on an annual basis.

[Happy Face]

NUST don't say that NUFC make £7M a month profit.

They say that Ashley has been taking up to £7m out of the club each month.

 

There's a difference.

 

 

Yes they did:

 

'sources have told us that Mr Ashley is making up to £7m profit out of our club every month '

 

I'll not argue semantics.  But I don't see something that profits Mike Ashley as being of profit to Newcastle United.

 

For example Arsenals Emirates Staium naming rights were sold at a price of £100m for 15 years.  About £7m a year.

 

It'd be cheaper for someone to get our naming rights of course, but for Mike Ashley to name the Stadium after Sports Direct, personally I see that as an advertising saving for his other unrelated company and as a profit to him/his other company, not the club.

[bealios]

Just to muddy the waters still further, there's an article on Times Online today by George Caulkin, and he seems to have a good relationship with NUST. The following passage struck me -

 

'At some stage, the NUST will seek to purchase a portion of the club from Mike Ashley. For the record, they are well aware that they cannot buy Newcastle outright; the aim is to take a percentage and build from there'.

 

After what they've said about Ashley, there's no way they can have a constructive working relationship with him. Any mutual trust has been blown out of the water. They either have to buy outright or remain a pressure group on the outside.

 

It does look like they've been a bit indiscreet with Caulkin. I can't see anyone wanting to part with a large amount of money just for the privilege of a minority share with no real power.

 

These guys are just totally out of their depth.

 

To be fair I've said all along that NUST would make a lot more progress and get a lot less (often undeserved) criticism if they came out with this as their long term goal, and forget about any statements about buying the club, owning the club or being involved in running the club.

 

With statements such as yesterdays, at the moment they are miles away from being a respected consensual voice for NUFC supporters. They still, despite recent improvements, seem imo to be a slightly better organised "Ashley out" pressure group. It is amateurish, but to be fair these guys are not professionals and they are devoting their own time and hopefully learning as they progress.

 

Which is why if they are to retain any real reputation after this, they need to change their goals, and work slowly towards a more realistic goal. There is nothing wrong with the ultimate aim being to own a small stake in the club, if only so that they have a little more weight to the group. Its been done before, with the PLC thing, although the fans were not organised in any way. However in the current world, to buy any sort of stake, the ultimate owner of the club, whoever that may be, needs to be willing to sell. And since most sensible people now seem to accept NUST are not going to be able to buy the whole club, the owner must be able to work with NUST on an ongoing basis - and no owner is going to be willing to sell any sort of stake and work with any body who issues official communications like the one that came out yesterday.

 

 

 

 

[Teasy]

It amazes me that someone can try and make a comparison between WBA & NUFC when all he has shown are Turnover/Wages and a profit figure clearly showing that even without running costs any theory of them running at a profit looks dubious. The only reason their accounts show a profit is via transfers which makes the whole thing a complete pile of dogshit as an argument

 

If buying players only affects the P&L over time (ie spend over the period of the contract), surely the same is the case for selling players?

 

Profits/losses on player sales are shown in the year the player is sold.

 

Example: Player is bought for £8 million on a 4 year contract. The P&L is charged (amortisation) £2 million every year of the contract. If however the player is sold after 2 years for £6 million then the P&L will show a profit that year of £2 million  - being £6 million less the written down value of the player of £4 million(8-4). 

 

Edit: Just for clarification - once the player has been sold no further charges are made to the P&L and the player disappears from the club accounts.

 

So given what we paid for the players sold in the last 5 months, shouldn't the profit on players in the last 5 months be hefty?  Genuine question....

 

Bassong is bought for £0 on a 4 year contract. The P&L is charged (amortisation) £0 million every year of the contract. However the player is sold after 1 year for £8 million then the P&L will show a profit that year of £8 million   - being £8 million more the marked up value of the player of £8 million(8-0). 

 

and the other players were Martins Beye and Duff who's combined profit/loss is dwarfed by the size of the bassong deal.

 

Similarly large profits would have been realised on Given, Nzogbia and Milner recently too if I understand you right.  No?

 

Absolutely yes, but it'll be a paper profit only, the cash flow will be quite different as the real money from those transfers will come in staggered payments.  So to be clear what you need to do when these accounts come out is actually look at the cash flow, not the basic accounts.  I bet if you looked at the real cash flow for those accounts for West Brom they'd show something very different to the profit you posted.

[Guest Roger Kint]

NUST don't say that NUFC make £7M a month profit.

They say that Ashley has been taking up to £7m out of the club each month.

 

There's a difference.

 

 

Yes they did:

 

'sources have told us that Mr Ashley is making up to £7m profit out of our club every month '

 

I'll not argue semantics.  But I don't see something that profits Mike Ashley as being of profit to Newcastle United.

 

For example Arsenals Emirates Staium naming rights were sold at a price of £100m for 15 years.  About £7m a year.

 

It'd be cheaper for someone to get our naming rights of course, but for Mike Ashley to name the Stadium after Sports Direct, personally I see that as an advertising saving for his other unrelated company and as a profit to him/his other company, not the club.

 

Sorry but i dont see that at all. Whatever it amounts to its not the £7m PROFIT a month that is clearly stated by NUST

[Happy Face]

NUST don't say that NUFC make £7M a month profit.

They say that Ashley has been taking up to £7m out of the club each month.

 

There's a difference.

 

 

Yes they did:

 

'sources have told us that Mr Ashley is making up to £7m profit out of our club every month '

 

I'll not argue semantics.  But I don't see something that profits Mike Ashley as being of profit to Newcastle United.

 

For example Arsenals Emirates Staium naming rights were sold at a price of £100m for 15 years.  About £7m a year.

 

It'd be cheaper for someone to get our naming rights of course, but for Mike Ashley to name the Stadium after Sports Direct, personally I see that as an advertising saving for his other unrelated company and as a profit to him/his other company, not the club.

 

Sorry but i dont see that at all. Whatever it amounts to its not the £7m PROFIT a month that is clearly stated by NUST

 

I wasn't saying that it adds up to £7m.  They say Ashley has recently generated that kind of profit from the club.  Not that the club has seen a profit like that.  The club doesn't need to profit for Mike Ashley to strip the assets.