Jump to content

NUFC finances for 2010/11 announced


Recommended Posts

We've lost a lot of commercial revenue due to many local firms deciding not to sponsor the club in one form or another since Ashley took over, that and Sports Direct now dominates all advertising. As for attracting other sponsors and increasing commercial revenue, that isn't going to happen because who would want to be associated with Sports Direct? Companies will want to be associated with NUFC but the more SD adverts are plastered around the stadium and the whole stadium renaming crap, will only ever put would be sponsors off. Virgin Money was a no brainer. They are on an offensive charm having taken over Northern Rock, to continue sponsoring NUFC's shirt but under the new VM brand, was the logical thing to do. In no other circumstances would Virgin Money want to be associated with NUFC had it not taken over NR.

 

The finances look healthy but more by default than by design. Carroll has basically brought things in line. And, we still owe one man over 130m. At no time in this club's history have we ever owed anyone or any entity so much money.

 

Moot point really, we were owing the same amount to multiple parties and paying over 7m in interest annually. Now we owe Ashley and dont pay any interest, presumably. How is that a bad thing?

 

Because when Ashley sells us this will be recouped, meaning that any interested party will have to pay up 130m before they even think of spending money on players

 

He'll have recouped it long before he sells up at this rate. When we start posting £20m+ profit a season, he'll begin to pay it down in stages.

 

How the f*** are we going to make £20m+ profit per season? That will never happen.

 

Wheyyyy, working from the rough figures provided this week, increase revenue streams by £17m more than our costs increase :bluestar: whether it's through matchday, commercial or media (or a combination of all 3)

 

Never gonna happen.

 

Really? :lol: they'll use the amortisation to 'hide' the OP for as long as they can but we'll continue to post positive figures for the next 4-5 years barring any massive economic crashes on the horizon.

 

By that point, if we're still doing well on the pitch, MA might even reconsider his current desire to pay down the loan. If he's enjoying it and not getting abuse then there's no reason why he might not leave it be and think of it as 6 seasons of the original "£20m per season funding" which he can still claim back in an emergency.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Hong Kong Phooey

Reading the Accounts and we look (obviously if Ashley doesn't want his money back like) to be one of the most stable clubs in the league.

 

Nearly £33m profit before tax - wow.  Nearly £10m in the bank, no loans, not really high creditors.  Looking in good shape to nick a couple of players from clubs in dire trouble.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all set up for us to be one of the big forces in a few years time if we can keep that up, and continue to finish around the top 7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a brief summary of the published accounts, it is pretty much as reported in the press

 

 

                    £millions

Income

 

Matchday 24

Media     49

Commercial 16

Total       89

 

Costs

Wages     54

Amortisation17

Other costs  22

Total         (93)

 

Operating loss       (4)

 

Profit on transfers 37

 

Profit for the year 33

 

We are still technically insolvent. Ashley hasn't reduced his loan - however instead of having the £10 million overdraft we had last year, we now have £10 million cash in the bank.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone explain how the cash position in the directors report reconciles to that shown in the balance sheet and notes?

 

Need more info on your question. Can you quote from both directors report and balance sheet/notes sources and explain the discrepancy between the two?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Need more info on your question. Can you quote from both directors report and balance sheet/notes sources and explain the discrepancy between the two?

 

"As at June 2011 we had positive cash balances of £9.5m"- page 2, Financing

 

Balance sheet- cash = nil

Note 14, Bank overdraft £2.07m

 

Unless they are being obtuse with their words and they are not in fact referring to a positive net cash balance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Need more info on your question. Can you quote from both directors report and balance sheet/notes sources and explain the discrepancy between the two?

 

"As at June 2011 we had positive cash balances of £9.5m"- page 2, Financing

 

Balance sheet- cash = nil

Note 14, Bank overdraft £2.07m

 

Unless they are being obtuse with their words and they are not in fact referring to a positive net cash balance.

 

Not sure you are looking at the group accounts.

I can see the page 2 financing comment, but the balance sheet on page 8 clearly shows £9.5 million cash as stated in the Directors Report. And note 14 relates to provisions.

 

This is in the accounts of company number 2529667 - Newcastle United Limited.

Link to post
Share on other sites

                                                            <---------------------  The amount received from SD for all of the advertising.

 

Maybe he should pay a few Mill a year and but also maybe charge interest on his loans, fairs fair an all that, eh ??

Link to post
Share on other sites

                                                            <---------------------  The amount received from SD for all of the advertising.

 

Maybe he should pay a few Mill a year and but also maybe charge interest on his loans, fairs fair an all that, eh ??

 

Maybe he could have just not injected any more money and watched his initial investment go up in smoke?

Link to post
Share on other sites

                                                            <---------------------  The amount received from SD for all of the advertising.

 

Maybe he should pay a few Mill a year and but also maybe charge interest on his loans, fairs fair an all that, eh ??

 

Maybe he could have just not injected any more money and watched his initial investment go up in smoke?

 

No - that would have been counter-productive

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...