NUFC 2009 Accounts

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Or suffer a catastrophic reduction in revenue by getting relegated.

 

That's next years thread .   We were financially s*** before Ashley arrived and I can't see how we could have kept on pissing our money up the wall in the manner that we were without somebody with deep pockets to finance it, we've been living beyond our means for years.

 

 

 

Drivel.

 

£15m loss exacerbated by a £5m plus for sacking a former manager. Reduced match-day revenues as result of the sacking, reduced prize-money as well. In a recession. Our overdraft remains the same. We still owe the big amount on the important term. What improved as a result of relegation, which is all we got out of it?

 

Have you seen the accounts for the year before that?

 

Yes.

 

You should read them.

[Guest fraser]

Or suffer a catastrophic reduction in revenue by getting relegated.

 

That's next years thread .   We were financially s*** before Ashley arrived and I can't see how we could have kept on pissing our money up the wall in the manner that we were without somebody with deep pockets to finance it, we've been living beyond our means for years.

 

 

 

Drivel.

 

£15m loss exacerbated by a £5m plus for sacking a former manager. Reduced match-day revenues as result of the sacking, reduced prize-money as well. In a recession. Our overdraft remains the same. We still owe the big amount on the important term. What improved as a result of relegation, which is all we got out of it?

 

Have you seen the accounts for the year before that?

 

Yes.

 

You should read them.

 

And then attempt to understand them.

[Mick]

 

Drivel.

 

£15m loss exacerbated by a £5m plus for sacking a former manager. Reduced match-day revenues as result of the sacking, reduced prize-money as well. In a recession. Our overdraft remains the same. We still owe the big amount on the important term. What improved as a result of relegation, which is all we got out of it?

 

I haven't got a clue what you're on about, you're right it is drivel.

 

How was the overdraft going to remain the same considering that it had gone from less than £1 million to £35,781 million in 1 set of accounts?  At the same time as the overdraft went through the roof we were getting handouts of £11 million from Ashley.

 

 

Also, our attendances were not brilliant before Keegan had left the club and we had more at the first game without him than we had during the last game with him.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

If the £15m loss is "exacerbated by a £5m plus for sacking a former manager" it might also be relevant to mention it being minimised an awful lot more by selling players.

[Stu]

Or suffer a catastrophic reduction in revenue by getting relegated.

 

That's next years thread .   We were financially s*** before Ashley arrived and I can't see how we could have kept on pissing our money up the wall in the manner that we were without somebody with deep pockets to finance it, we've been living beyond our means for years.

 

 

 

Drivel.

 

£15m loss exacerbated by a £5m plus for sacking a former manager. Reduced match-day revenues as result of the sacking, reduced prize-money as well. In a recession. Our overdraft remains the same. We still owe the big amount on the important term. What improved as a result of relegation, which is all we got out of it?

 

Have you seen the accounts for the year before that?

 

Yes.

 

You should read them.

 

And then attempt to understand them.

 

Pot?

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Or suffer a catastrophic reduction in revenue by getting relegated.

 

That's next years thread .   We were financially s*** before Ashley arrived and I can't see how we could have kept on pissing our money up the wall in the manner that we were without somebody with deep pockets to finance it, we've been living beyond our means for years.

 

 

 

Drivel.

 

£15m loss exacerbated by a £5m plus for sacking a former manager. Reduced match-day revenues as result of the sacking, reduced prize-money as well. In a recession. Our overdraft remains the same. We still owe the big amount on the important term. What improved as a result of relegation, which is all we got out of it?

 

Have you seen the accounts for the year before that?

 

Yes.

 

You should read them.

 

And then attempt to understand them.

 

I'd take it one step at a time if I were you.

[quayside]

 

 

We still owe the same money. In terms of the overdraft to the same institution; in terms of the debts to Ashley, it's just a different debtor but, largely, under the same conditions. Do you understand this? Do you think that it's been disappeared by the Llambias fairy?

 

So can you not see that there is a slight difference between owing £111m ( probably nearer £140m now) apparently interest free to someone who has already forked out £137m to buy the club as compared to owing that sum to a faceless institutional lender with interest charges and foreclosure rights? And let's not even go into the question of whether said faceless institutional lender would have even considered lending us anything (let alone £111m) in the financial risk climate of recent years.

[Guest malandro]

Instead of getting lost in the trees could you apply your knowledge in these matters to the big picture and tell us what the debt was Ashley bought the club, what it is now and how it could be repaid. 

 

At the moment Ashley is holding Damocles’ Sword over the existence of NUFC. Unlike the banks with their committees and future business needs, there are no safeguards against Ashley making a rash decision and calling in the debt. The club could be snuffed out of existence if he wakes up in a bad mood. It’s not a good position to be in.

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Instead of getting lost in the trees could you apply your knowledge in these matters to the big picture and tell us what the debt was Ashley bought the club, what it is now and how it could be repaid. 

 

At the moment Ashley is holding Damocles Sword over the existence of NUFC. Unlike the banks with their committees and future business needs, there are no safeguards against Ashley making a rash decision and calling in the debt. The club could be snuffed out of existence if he wakes up in a bad mood. Its not a good position to be in.

 

 

How could he call in the debt?

[madras]

Instead of getting lost in the trees could you apply your knowledge in these matters to the big picture and tell us what the debt was Ashley bought the club, what it is now and how it could be repaid. 

 

At the moment Ashley is holding Damocles’ Sword over the existence of NUFC. Unlike the banks with their committees and future business needs, there are no safeguards against Ashley making a rash decision and calling in the debt. The club could be snuffed out of existence if he wakes up in a bad mood. It’s not a good position to be in.

 

this may be naive but to my thinking the major obstacle to him calling the debt in is that the money isn't there to pay him.

[Mistle17]

Instead of getting lost in the trees could you apply your knowledge in these matters to the big picture and tell us what the debt was Ashley bought the club, what it is now and how it could be repaid. 

 

At the moment Ashley is holding Damocles’ Sword over the existence of NUFC. Unlike the banks with their committees and future business needs, there are no safeguards against Ashley making a rash decision and calling in the debt. The club could be snuffed out of existence if he wakes up in a bad mood. It’s not a good position to be in.

 

this may be naive but to my thinking the major obstacle to him calling the debt in is that the money isn't there to pay him.

 

That's what I was thinking. He could either wait till we have the money for one big lump payment, or, gradually refund himself by taking money out of the club coffers as we get money in.

[madras]

Instead of getting lost in the trees could you apply your knowledge in these matters to the big picture and tell us what the debt was Ashley bought the club, what it is now and how it could be repaid. 

 

At the moment Ashley is holding Damocles’ Sword over the existence of NUFC. Unlike the banks with their committees and future business needs, there are no safeguards against Ashley making a rash decision and calling in the debt. The club could be snuffed out of existence if he wakes up in a bad mood. It’s not a good position to be in.

 

this may be naive but to my thinking the major obstacle to him calling the debt in is that the money isn't there to pay him.

 

That's what I was thinking. He could either wait till we have the money for one big lump payment, or, gradually refund himself by taking money out of the club coffers as we get money in.

the only way he'd get a lump payment is by selling up. as for taking little bits, it would take a long time to do it.

[Guest malandro]

Instead of getting lost in the trees could you apply your knowledge in these matters to the big picture and tell us what the debt was Ashley bought the club, what it is now and how it could be repaid. 

 

At the moment Ashley is holding Damocles’ Sword over the existence of NUFC. Unlike the banks with their committees and future business needs, there are no safeguards against Ashley making a rash decision and calling in the debt. The club could be snuffed out of existence if he wakes up in a bad mood. It’s not a good position to be in.

 

this may be naive but to my thinking the major obstacle to him calling the debt in is that the money isn't there to pay him.

There’s £35m of TV money winging its way into the clubs accounts, the season ticket money and a squad of disposable assets. However, I take your point, which could be applied with equal merit if the club owed the money to a bank.

 

All I was trying to illustrate is that there’s advantages and disadvantages to being in hock to one man to the tune of £140m.

 

[Mick]

the only way he'd get a lump payment is by selling up. as for taking little bits, it would take a long time to do it.

 

I wouldn't mind knowing how our loan from him went up to £112 million and ended the year at £111 million.  My guess is that he had to put in a short term loan and was repaid at some time. 

 

He's since put in a lot more though so he's not looking for pay back just yet.

[Mick]

 

Theres £35m of TV money winging its way into the clubs accounts, the season ticket money and a squad of disposable assets. However, I take your point, which could be applied with equal merit if the club owed the money to a bank.

 

All I was trying to illustrate is that theres advantages and disadvantages to being in hock to one man to the tune of £140m.

 

 

The extra TV money will help us towards breaking even if we don't see much of an increase in costs.

[Guest malandro]

the only way he'd get a lump payment is by selling up. as for taking little bits, it would take a long time to do it.

 

I wouldn't mind knowing how our loan from him went up to £112 million and ended the year at £111 million.  My guess is that he had to put in a short term loan and was repaid at some time. 

 

He's since put in a lot more though so he's not looking for pay back just yet.

Yet, being the important word.

 

He could have tried to run the club within its means this season, but choose to sub it by £25m and gamble on going back up. Luckily for him, and the club, this gamble paid off. Next season will be different, the investment needed to seriously increase income would be nearer £200m (if Man City can be used as a gauge) and I can’t see him taking the risk.  I reckon our promotion marks the investment cut off point and from here in it’ll be payback time – it’ll be back to gambling on avoiding relegation without serious investment in the squad year after year. 

 

[Mick]

Yet, being the important word.

 

He could have tried to run the club within its means this season, but choose to sub it by £25m and gamble on going back up. Luckily for him, and the club, this gamble paid off. Next season will be different, the investment needed to seriously increase income would be nearer £200m (if Man City can be used as a gauge) and I can’t see him taking the risk.  I reckon our promotion marks the investment cut off point and from here in it’ll be payback time – it’ll be back to gambling on avoiding relegation without serious investment in the squad year after year. 

 

 

I don't think he'll take anything out next season, I don't think he'll put anything in either.

[Guest malandro]

 

There’s £35m of TV money winging its way into the clubs accounts, the season ticket money and a squad of disposable assets. However, I take your point, which could be applied with equal merit if the club owed the money to a bank.

 

All I was trying to illustrate is that there’s advantages and disadvantages to being in hock to one man to the tune of £140m.

 

 

The extra TV money will help us towards breaking even if we don't see much of an increase in costs.

I still can’t work out how our debt has doubled in three years. The initial £100m cleared the existing debts and relegation cost us £40m. But we’ve also made a net profit on transfers of £25m, reduced the wage bill by £21m and received £14m in parachute payments.

 

I know these figures aren’t spot on but if the debt is currently about £180m that gives us an average operating loss of £25m a season. Is this right?

 

[Guest malandro]

Yet, being the important word.

 

He could have tried to run the club within its means this season, but choose to sub it by £25m and gamble on going back up. Luckily for him, and the club, this gamble paid off. Next season will be different, the investment needed to seriously increase income would be nearer £200m (if Man City can be used as a gauge) and I can’t see him taking the risk.  I reckon our promotion marks the investment cut off point and from here in it’ll be payback time – it’ll be back to gambling on avoiding relegation without serious investment in the squad year after year. 

 

 

I don't think he'll take anything out next season, I don't think he'll put anything in either.

Nah, he’ll want to make hay while the sun is shining. Our wage bill will never be lower and there’s always the chance we’ll go back down at some point over the next few years. Poor results will probably erode attendances as well, over time.

[Teasy]

 

There’s £35m of TV money winging its way into the clubs accounts, the season ticket money and a squad of disposable assets. However, I take your point, which could be applied with equal merit if the club owed the money to a bank.

 

All I was trying to illustrate is that there’s advantages and disadvantages to being in hock to one man to the tune of £140m.

 

 

The extra TV money will help us towards breaking even if we don't see much of an increase in costs.

I still can’t work out how our debt has doubled in three years. The initial £100m cleared the existing debts and relegation cost us £40m. But we’ve also made a net profit on transfers of £25m, reduced the wage bill by £21m and received £14m in parachute payments.

 

I know these figures aren’t spot on but if the debt is currently about £180m that gives us an average operating loss of £25m a season. Is this right?

 

 

Where are you getting £180m from?, it'll be more like £140 surely?

[Mick]

I still cant work out how our debt has doubled in three years. The initial £100m cleared the existing debts and relegation cost us £40m. But weve also made a net profit on transfers of £25m, reduced the wage bill by £21m and received £14m in parachute payments.

 

I know these figures arent spot on but if the debt is currently about £180m that gives us an average operating loss of £25m a season. Is this right?

 

 

You've got to remember a few things, firstly our accounts don't cover relegation and that financial year is running up to the end of June. 

 

Also we now pay up front when we buy players so the full fee will show up in the financial year in which we make the purchase while player sales will be spread over a number of years.  Most of the players sold during the last couple of seasons will show up as income on our accounts for a number of years.

[Mick]

Nah, hell want to make hay while the sun is shining. Our wage bill will never be lower and theres always the chance well go back down at some point over the next few years. Poor results will probably erode attendances as well, over time.

 

I doubt he'll take anything out for a year or two unless we do better than expected.

[OzzieMandias]

Yet, being the important word.

 

He could have tried to run the club within its means this season, but choose to sub it by £25m and gamble on going back up. Luckily for him, and the club, this gamble paid off. Next season will be different, the investment needed to seriously increase income would be nearer £200m (if Man City can be used as a gauge) and I can’t see him taking the risk.  I reckon our promotion marks the investment cut off point and from here in it’ll be payback time – it’ll be back to gambling on avoiding relegation without serious investment in the squad year after year. 

 

 

I don't think he'll take anything out next season, I don't think he'll put anything in either.

 

I think he'll put in his annual £20 million.

[madras]

Yet, being the important word.

 

He could have tried to run the club within its means this season, but choose to sub it by £25m and gamble on going back up. Luckily for him, and the club, this gamble paid off. Next season will be different, the investment needed to seriously increase income would be nearer £200m (if Man City can be used as a gauge) and I can’t see him taking the risk.  I reckon our promotion marks the investment cut off point and from here in it’ll be payback time – it’ll be back to gambling on avoiding relegation without serious investment in the squad year after year. 

 

 

I don't think he'll take anything out next season, I don't think he'll put anything in either.

 

I think he'll put in his annual £20 million.

i think he may aswell

[Mick]

 

I think he'll put in his annual £20 million.

 

I can't see that happening, he's put more in than he would have wanted this season and will not add to it.