NG32 Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Not sure how true this is...but it has been mendtioned as fact. Wasn't ashley and Llambias budget set on the attendence being around 25k mark. But we have averaged 43 ish. If this is correct it hink the acocunts might be better then we expect. Where in the hell is that coming from? I'm not sure, thats why i said i'm not sure if its true or not. wont make a difference anyway if the accounts are from last season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Right everyone to their corners when the accounts hit come out bickering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 large loss ashley continuing to subsidise it as a growing concern to get the auditors to sign off. why is it so late though? purely my own thinking but the only thing I can think of that would want to make MA delay the accounts is the fact that we are now champions and promoted. obviously a very good foot note to the accounts and reduces the going concern risk for the auditors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 100% agree with Stu on this, quayside will be fighting a hard battle again very soon. As for wages, am going for 80% of turnover since the last years accounts are bound to go up tbh Sorry RK, forgot to mention your sterling efforts at repeating, reciting and re-informing the delusional fools who are unable to comprehend quayside's quite simple explanations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 large loss ashley continuing to subsidise it as a growing concern to get the auditors to sign off. why is it so late though? purely my own thinking but the only thing I can think of that would want to make MA delay the accounts is the fact that we are now champions and promoted. obviously a very good foot note to the accounts and reduces the going concern risk for the auditors. Didn't know you were a trained accountant or auditor madras, the plot thickens... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 large loss ashley continuing to subsidise it as a growing concern to get the auditors to sign off. why is it so late though? purely my own thinking but the only thing I can think of that would want to make MA delay the accounts is the fact that we are now champions and promoted. obviously a very good foot note to the accounts and reduces the going concern risk for the auditors. Didn't know you were a trained accountant or auditor madras, the plot thickens... self taught. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 In theory I shouldn't have spotted this post since this thread is opposite-bookmarked. You can't be for real anyway madras. You know as well as I do that it'll disolve into the same tedious s**** it always does. I don't see why it should result in an argument (although you’re possibly right), the accounts will not be subjective. I know we'll not all agree on everything but that happens in most threads as people form an opinion on everything. If nothing else, at least you know where to avoid. Aye, exactly. Wasn't saying it wasn't worth a thread or owt - because it clearly is - but you know. I'll be reading the thread when the accounts get published but I doubt I'll last more than a few pages. Anyway: Ashley Out. The formula for these threads is usually: WILD STATEMENT MADE IN OP AND LINK TO ACCOUNTS - Immediate response made by general forumites based upon the comments in the OP and not the accounts - Wildfire. - Quayside/LLO/CS&C/etc come along and explain what the accounts mean, refuting all of the outlandish comments - General forumites agree and say thanks - FAT COCKNEY BASSA ASHLEYLIES for 2/3 pages - WILD STATEMENT MADE (having not read any of the previous 18 pages) - Quayside/LLO/CS&C/etc come along and explain what the accounts mean, refuting all of the outlandish comments - FAT COCKNEY BASSA RESPONDS ad infinitum You forgot to say that every post relevant to the thread will be interspersed with 5 posts from people posting just to complain about how they hate these kinds of threads or how it would have been even worse if [insert disaster scenario/example of smaller club in administration]... I'm relieved the accounts have been filed now though, it should stop the customer base, debtors, creditors and football in general being all over us chasing money & reducing trading terms given to the club which will have been happening since they were late at the start of the month. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 100% agree with Stu on this, quayside will be fighting a hard battle again very soon. As for wages, am going for 80% of turnover since the last years accounts are bound to go up tbh Sorry RK, forgot to mention your sterling efforts at repeating, reciting and re-informing the delusional fools who are unable to comprehend quayside's quite simple explanations. I also forgot to add the obligatory person to state the accounts were all made up and cant possibly be correct because[insert mad assumption here] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 In theory I shouldn't have spotted this post since this thread is opposite-bookmarked. You can't be for real anyway madras. You know as well as I do that it'll disolve into the same tedious s**** it always does. I don't see why it should result in an argument (although youre possibly right), the accounts will not be subjective. I know we'll not all agree on everything but that happens in most threads as people form an opinion on everything. If nothing else, at least you know where to avoid. Aye, exactly. Wasn't saying it wasn't worth a thread or owt - because it clearly is - but you know. I'll be reading the thread when the accounts get published but I doubt I'll last more than a few pages. Anyway: Ashley Out. The formula for these threads is usually: WILD STATEMENT MADE IN OP AND LINK TO ACCOUNTS - Immediate response made by general forumites based upon the comments in the OP and not the accounts - Wildfire. - Quayside/LLO/CS&C/etc come along and explain what the accounts mean, refuting all of the outlandish comments - General forumites agree and say thanks - FAT COCKNEY BASSA ASHLEYLIES for 2/3 pages - WILD STATEMENT MADE (having not read any of the previous 18 pages) - Quayside/LLO/CS&C/etc come along and explain what the accounts mean, refuting all of the outlandish comments - FAT COCKNEY BASSA RESPONDS ad infinitum You forgot to say that every post relevant to the thread will be interspersed with 5 posts from people posting just to complain about how they hate these kinds of threads or how it would have been even worse if Shepherd was still here Too true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 My crystal ball says around £100m turnover, 76% wage bill, and an accounting loss of £5-10m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 My crystal ball says around £100m turnover, 76% wage bill, and an accounting loss of £5-10m. That sounds reasonable, the profits on selling the likes of Milner, Given and N'Zog will go some way to cutting the annual operating losses, and might even wipe them out. So I expect a much improved result over 2008. So I pretty much agree with you and on financial matters that may be a first.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malandro Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 I predict much confusion about how player amortisation works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 I predict much confusion about how player amortisation works. I like to ask about that 2-3 times per accounts thread if possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 I predict much confusion about how player's work. All round tbj Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Well the accounts are available now. I've had a quick look. The highlights: Turnover was only £86 million (all 3 areas of revenue matchday, media and commercial were down on the previous year) Wages (including Keegan's £2.2m payoff) £73m Profit on transfers £23m Other costs £51m Therefore the Loss = £15m so it was an improvement on 2008 but, due to the fall in turnover, not a massive one. As at 30th June Ashley had loaned £111m making his investment a total of £247m. He took no money out in interest. At one point in the year his loan was up to £112m. Not surprisingly, as the club is technically insolvent by £51m, he was required to give a personal guarantee to satisfy the going concern status. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikri Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Well the accounts are available now. I've had a quick look. The highlights: Turnover was only £86 million (all 3 areas of revenue matchday, media and commercial were down on the previous year) Wages (including Keegan's £2.2m payoff) £73m Profit on transfers £23m Other costs £51m Therefore the Loss = £15m so it was an improvement on 2008 but, due to the fall in turnover, not a massive one. As at 30th June Ashley had loaned £111m making his investment a total of £247m. He took no money out in interest. At one point in the year his loan was up to £112m. Not surprisingly, as the club is technically insolvent by £51m, he was required to give a personal guarantee to satisfy the going concern status. Do those figures include the early season ticket renewals for next season? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Well the accounts are available now. I've had a quick look. The highlights: Turnover was only £86 million (all 3 areas of revenue matchday, media and commercial were down on the previous year) Wages (including Keegan's £2.2m payoff) £73m Profit on transfers £23m Other costs £51m Therefore the Loss = £15m so it was an improvement on 2008 but, due to the fall in turnover, not a massive one. As at 30th June Ashley had loaned £111m making his investment a total of £247m. He took no money out in interest. At one point in the year his loan was up to £112m. Not surprisingly, as the club is technically insolvent by £51m, he was required to give a personal guarantee to satisfy the going concern status. Do those figures include the early season ticket renewals for next season? those are accounts for 2009 aren't they ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Well the accounts are available now. I've had a quick look. The highlights: Turnover was only £86 million (all 3 areas of revenue matchday, media and commercial were down on the previous year) Wages (including Keegan's £2.2m payoff) £73m Profit on transfers £23m Other costs £51m Therefore the Loss = £15m so it was an improvement on 2008 but, due to the fall in turnover, not a massive one. As at 30th June Ashley had loaned £111m making his investment a total of £247m. He took no money out in interest. At one point in the year his loan was up to £112m. Not surprisingly, as the club is technically insolvent by £51m, he was required to give a personal guarantee to satisfy the going concern status. Do those figures include the early season ticket renewals for next season? No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Well the accounts are available now. I've had a quick look. The highlights: Turnover was only £86 million (all 3 areas of revenue matchday, media and commercial were down on the previous year) Wages (including Keegan's £2.2m payoff) £73m Profit on transfers £23m Other costs £51m Therefore the Loss = £15m so it was an improvement on 2008 but, due to the fall in turnover, not a massive one. As at 30th June Ashley had loaned £111m making his investment a total of £247m. He took no money out in interest. At one point in the year his loan was up to £112m. Not surprisingly, as the club is technically insolvent by £51m, he was required to give a personal guarantee to satisfy the going concern status. Do those figures include the early season ticket renewals for next season? No - only income that relates to the year to 30th June 2009 is included in the accounts. So advance season ticket revenue for the 2009/2010 season isn't included. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Still impressed that, unlike the majority of owners including Gibson and Learner, no interest has been charged by Ashley so far on the money he's lent the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Well the accounts are available now. I've had a quick look. The highlights: Turnover was only £86 million (all 3 areas of revenue matchday, media and commercial were down on the previous year) Wages (including Keegan's £2.2m payoff) £73m Profit on transfers £23m Other costs £51m Therefore the Loss = £15m so it was an improvement on 2008 but, due to the fall in turnover, not a massive one. As at 30th June Ashley had loaned £111m making his investment a total of £247m. He took no money out in interest. At one point in the year his loan was up to £112m. Not surprisingly, as the club is technically insolvent by £51m, he was required to give a personal guarantee to satisfy the going concern status. Do those figures include the early season ticket renewals for next season? those are accounts for 2009 aren't they ? Yes - the year ended 30th June 2009. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 He has changed the £111m he has lent the club from payable after more than one year to payable within 12 months though on the basis that it was only payable on demand in the event of a change in owner. Seems like he is still wanting to sell up on that basis. Edit - reading again it looks like he has changed the terms to remove the repayable upon demand if he sells the club to just repayable upon demand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 I wonder if MA would consider trying to float us again in order to get back some of his money? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Jerusalem Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 So these accounts are up to June 30th 2009. How can Kevin Keegan's payout be included as he didn't get that until October 2009? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistle17 Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Where can you look at them? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now