NUFC finances

[STM]

It unbelievable and still everyone will turn up to support the lads.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Sorry I haven't looked back over the last few pages, but transferring money into a different bank account really doesn't alter your profit. What's the excuse?

[Sima]

It's either go to the match or spend 3 hours with the missus, man.  I know what I'd choose.  Heaven forbid I'd have to walk round the Metrocentre for a bit.

[Guest reefatoon]

It's either go to the match or spend 3 hours with the missus, man.  I know what I'd choose.  Heaven forbid I'd have to walk round the Metrocentre for a bit.

 

[NG32]

It's either go to the match or spend 3 hours with the missus, man.  I know what I'd choose.  Heaven forbid I'd have to walk round the Metrocentre for a bit.

 

So your only options are going to the match or the metro centre?

 

Why not advise Mrs Slim that you are going to the match but actually go to the protest, then go to bar to watch the match.  Then go home, she will be none the wiser.  Unless she has had a sim card inserted in you and she can track your movements.

[Matt]

Edwards is talking rubbish.

[quayside]

Edwards is talking rubbish.

 

Indeed.

If he puts that ridiculous statement in the Telegraph he is going to look like an utter prick.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I'm pretty sure when I do a bank transfer HMRC doesn't knock it off my profits. Wish they would.

 

Has anyone actually reported on the full accounts yet? I guess not.

[Interpolic]

I'm with Ian here, I don't understand it.  I don't understand how we've accumulated £30m+ in a bank account, yet have reported a seemingly separate profit of £19m.

[The College Dropout]

Different accounts within MASH which is a holding group perhaps?

[quayside]

In round numbers as far as I can see the 3 things that have reduced the profit from the expected levels are:

 

Increase in wages £16 million

Increase in amortisation £6 million

Increase in "other operating charges" £6 million

 

The wages increase is a surprise but without knowing who is earning what its hard to pinpoint, a bonus system is a possibility as someone earlier said. The amortisation is also a surprise as at first glance the gross cost of the squad of players has gone down from £88 million to £83 million from 2013 to 2014. Although that isn't a totally foolproof guide it does suggest there may have been some sort of impairment provision put through. No idea what "other operating charges" consists of.

 

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

We could have cash in the bank greater than our profit, but if so we still need to work out how the profit was so low. Basically we still need the detail of how the costs went up so much.

 

Edit: thanks quayside.

 

£16m increase in wages is baffling, as is the other operating costs.

[Stifler]

If you put money in another account and say it's a payment for something then of course it comes off your profits because profits are what's left after all expenses have been paid for. Claiming a profit as an expense is rule 101 in avoiding tax. It's the same with high level of management in business, they are paid via their expenses and not an actual wage, this way they arn't tax on their income.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Also quick question quayside, can we legitimately increase amortisation in an individual year if we have already defined the rate of depreciation over a player's contract in an earlier year? Seems a bit fishy but I guess it might be OK accounting-wise.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

If you put money in another account and say it's a payment for something then of course it comes off your profits because profits are what's left after all expenses have been paid for. Claiming a profit as an expense is rule 101 in avoiding tax. It's the same with high level of management in business, they are paid via their expenses and not an actual wage, this way they arn't tax on their income.

 

Yeah but you would have to say what the expense was and that would go in the accounts. You can just move money out of your bank account.

[Interpolic]

I clearly know fuck-all about accounting but regardless I stand by the opinion that player amortisation has no place whatsoever in accounts related to football clubs.

[leffe186]

Also quick question quayside, can we legitimately increase amortisation in an individual year if we have already defined the rate of depreciation over a player's contract in an earlier year? Seems a bit fishy but I guess it might be OK accounting-wise.

 

IIRC you can write off some of the value if you state that a player's actual value has decreased for some reason (e.g. being managed by Pardew). Can't remember what it's called.

[Stifler]

If you put money in another account and say it's a payment for something then of course it comes off your profits because profits are what's left after all expenses have been paid for. Claiming a profit as an expense is rule 101 in avoiding tax. It's the same with high level of management in business, they are paid via their expenses and not an actual wage, this way they arn't tax on their income.

 

Yeah but you would have to say what the expense was and that would go in the accounts. You can just move money out of your bank account.

Thats why you have to follow the paper trail. Look at every single expense, look at where the money goes, double check the the people who it says it's for actually got that amount. It's what accountants for HMRC do when investigating fraud. It's beyond our means as fans to look for it because we won't be allowed an in depth access.

[quayside]

Also quick question quayside, can we legitimately increase amortisation in an individual year if we have already defined the rate of depreciation over a player's contract in an earlier year? Seems a bit fishy but I guess it might be OK accounting-wise.

 

 

The accounting policy on amortisation in note 1(f)(1) gives some scope for impairment if "it is clear that a player is no longer expected to remain an active member of the playing squad". Any impairment must be based on "a measureable net realiseable value". 

 

Hope that helps!

 

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Also quick question quayside, can we legitimately increase amortisation in an individual year if we have already defined the rate of depreciation over a player's contract in an earlier year? Seems a bit fishy but I guess it might be OK accounting-wise.

 

 

The accounting policy on amortisation in note 1(f)(1) gives some scope for impairment if "it is clear that a player is no longer expected to remain an active member of the playing squad". Any impairment must be based on "a measureable net realiseable value". 

 

Hope that helps!

 

 

Cheers (and leffe), seems to open up a whole world of random numbers in the accounts of football clubs.

[The College Dropout]

Any business tbh.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Any business tbh.

 

Aye, I guess so.

[TaylorJ_01]

That's bullshit though. So we can say "Yanga-Mbiwa is no longer going to play so has depreciated £5m in value" or something like that?

[quayside]

Any business tbh.

 

Aye, I guess so.

 

There are reasons why things like amortisaion/depreciation are charged in accounts. Mostly it is to do with reflecting the fact that when you buy an asset (a player) it is intended that you get value for the player over the duration of a number of years. If you hit the accounting profit with the full value in one go then it is a distortion of the transaction that has taken place. I fully understand why people don't like it and it always gets a fair amount of air time on here. I suppose the key thing to look at is cash flow which has far less subjectivity, it shows we had £34 million in the bank as at 30th June 2014.

[Anderson]

If you put money in another account and say it's a payment for something then of course it comes off your profits because profits are what's left after all expenses have been paid for. Claiming a profit as an expense is rule 101 in avoiding tax. It's the same with high level of management in business, they are paid via their expenses and not an actual wage, this way they arn't tax on their income.

 

You make it up as you go along, don't you?