MAN CITY MAKE BIGGEST LOSS WHILE NUFC MAKE BIGGEST PROFIT

[DEADMAN 0]

that dont compute the richest club man city recorded a loss while we nufc made a profit eh

[jaythesouthernmag 0]

that dont compute the richest club man city recorded a loss while we nufc made a profit eh

They spent a lot more than they made, its what happens when you pay £200,000 a week in wages but money doesn't matter to them as they are a rich man's plaything

[DEADMAN 0]

true maybe if they didnt pay such stupid wages maybe they would look abit healthier

[jaythesouthernmag 0]

true maybe if they didnt pay such stupid wages maybe they would look abit healthier

True but then they wouldn't have Toure,Silva,Aguaro,Tevez etc. Their owner can write it all off and con the new fair play rules so it will carry on

[DEADMAN 0]

mind il give ashley a praise hes certainly changed us from been in debt to clean

[jaythesouthernmag 0]

We owe him rather than the banks but still a plus I reckon

[DEADMAN 0]

yea i reckon so still dont like him but hes turned us around

[Happy Face 29]

yea i reckon so still dont like him but hes turned us around

 

In terms of turnover, wages, wages as a percentage of turnover & profit NUFC are currently where they were in 2005.

 

The debt is currently 4 times as high, commercial income is £10m lower and matchday income is £10m lower than it was back then.

 

It's a similar story comparing to 2007 except the debt has only doubled since then

 

What do you see as the areas he's turned around?

[Baggio 0]

In terms of turnover, wages, wages as a percentage of turnover & profit NUFC are currently where they were in 2005.

 

The debt is currently 4 times as high, commercial income is £10m lower and matchday income is £10m lower than it was back then.

 

It's a similar story comparing to 2007 except the debt has only doubled since then

 

What do you see as the areas he's turned around?

 

He's turned us around to being close to break even rather than making substantial losses every year.

[Happy Face 29]

He's turned us around to being close to break even rather than making substantial losses every year.

 

I'd question whether we made "substantial losses every year". In 5 out of ten years prior to Ashleys arrival, losses were lower than they were in the most recent set of accounts, the accounts being lauded as a great vindicator. Only once in that time did losses exceed those in ANY previous year under Ashley.

 

He's turned around his own failings, still a way to go by most other measures.

[LeazesMag 0]

In terms of turnover, wages, wages as a percentage of turnover & profit NUFC are currently where they were in 2005.

 

The debt is currently 4 times as high, commercial income is £10m lower and matchday income is £10m lower than it was back then.

 

It's a similar story comparing to 2007 except the debt has only doubled since then

 

What do you see as the areas he's turned around?

 

is that right ? I knew he was running "tighter financial ship" etc etc blah blah but that is seriously not good. How can you make progress if income is down as much as that, and how is the income down by so much

[Baggio 0]

I'd question whether we made "substantial losses every year". In 5 out of ten years prior to Ashleys arrival, losses were lower than they were in the most recent set of accounts, the accounts being lauded as a great vindicator. Only once in that time did losses exceed those in ANY previous year under Ashley.

 

He's turned around his own failings, still a way to go by most other measures.

 

What happened in 5 of the 10 years prior to Ashley in terms of losses is a completely moot point as nobody has said the club was in a mess financially for that period of time, the losses were while Ashley was here but they were the result of what happened in the final few years of the previous boards era due to player amortisation hitting the accounts and players bought over a period of years needed paying for.

 

I seem to remember that after Ashley's first season the Ernst & Young only signed the club off as a going concern if he agreed to cover all of the losses the club were predicted to make, this despite spending very little in the transfer market.

 

So it wasn't only his own failings at all, you could say relegation was his fault for not spending more money we didn't have but the club still lost over £50 million in the 2 seasons prior to that.

[Happy Face 29]

is that right ? I knew he was running "tighter financial ship" etc etc blah blah but that is seriously not good. How can you make progress if income is down as much as that, and how is the income down by so much

 

Crowds are down since relegation, seats are cheaper, family enclosure is much bigger, advertising revenue is down across the board in the current economic climate, that's before you get to any ill feeling around Ashley and his many decisions that lead people to stop spending in the club shop and bar.

[Baggio 0]

is that right ? I knew he was running "tighter financial ship" etc etc blah blah but that is seriously not good. How can you make progress if income is down as much as that, and how is the income down by so much

 

Income is down on matchday because we haven't played many home games, standard league fixtures and one cup game compared to the 10 cup games at SJP in 2005.

 

Commercial is down because we don't do the catering anymore and have contracted it out instead, which even though it brought in a predicted £7 million a year we are still financially better off without it.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Baggio

[Happy Face 29]

What happened in 5 of the 10 years prior to Ashley in terms of losses is a completely moot point as nobody has said the club was in a mess financially for that period of time, the losses were while Ashley was here but they were the result of what happened in the final few years of the previous boards era due to player amortisation hitting the accounts and players bought over a period of years needed paying for.

 

I seem to remember that after Ashley's first season the Ernst & Young only signed the club off as a going concern if he agreed to cover all of the losses the club were predicted to make, this despite spending very little in the transfer market.

 

So it wasn't only his own failings at all, you could say relegation was his fault for not spending more money we didn't have but the club still lost over £50 million in the 2 seasons prior to that.

 

Over those 2 seasons Ashley broke our transfer record for a defender, brought in a cripple on £60k a week and spent just shy of £6m on a shambles of a young striker who played about 2 and a half games for us.

 

If you're turning something around I fail to see how it's moot to look at the situation in the decade that leads to the changeover. The 2 years at the end was defined by one particularly stupid decision, investing almost £40m in Owen, when he was as good as finished.

[Baggio 0]

Over those 2 seasons Ashley broke our transfer record for a defender, brought in a cripple on £60k a week and spent just shy of £6m on a shambles of a young striker who played about 2 and a half games for us.

 

If you're turning something around I fail to see how it's moot to look at the situation in the decade that leads to the changeover. The 2 years at the end was defined by one particularly stupid decision, investing almost £40m in Owen, when he was as good as finished.

 

Spending very little as in net spend. So if we were running close to break even in terms of transfers in that time then how did we accumulate further losses of £50 million in the following 2 Premiership seasons?

 

The past 10 years have nothing at all to do with it because we were a well ran club financially then, it's the fuck up with Souness and Roeder that cost us massively and that's what Ashley had to turn around.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Baggio

[LeazesMag 0]

Crowds are down since relegation, seats are cheaper, family enclosure is much bigger, advertising revenue is down across the board in the current economic climate, that's before you get to any ill feeling around Ashley and his many decisions that lead people to stop spending in the club shop and bar.

 

of course. It's been a steady decline hasn't it.

[Happy Face 29]

Spending very little as in net spend. So if we were running close to break even in terms of transfers in that time then how did we accumulate further losses of £50 million in the following 2 Premiership seasons?

 

The past 10 years have nothing at all to do with it because we were a well ran club financially then, it's the fuck up with Souness and Roeder that cost us massively and that's what Ashley had to turn around.

 

Let's say you're right, (though I fail to see a £10m net spend in his first year - £15m in his first 2 years - before wages, as break even and rectifying the issue) What has Ashly done to turn it around? Considering the fact that commercial and matchday incomes are way down. Any re-balancing of the books is predominantly down to improved media income. There's been some improvement in wages, but not a significant amount. The wage bill has gone from £59m when he bought us to £53m now. Basically the cost of Xisco saved. Woop woop.

[Happy Face 29]

It's the fuck up with Souness and Roeder that cost us massively and that's what Ashley had to turn around.

 

Notwithstanding the relegation season...

 

Matchday income lowest since 2000

Commercial income lowest since 2001

Turnover (without media) lowest since 2000

Wages as a percentage of income lowest since 2005

[Baggio 0]

Let's say you're right, (though I fail to see a £10m net spend in his first year - £15m in his first 2 years - before wages, as break even and rectifying the issue) What has Ashly done to turn it around? Considering the fact that commercial and matchday incomes are way down. Any re-balancing of the books is predominantly down to improved media income. There's been some improvement in wages, but not a significant amount. The wage bill has gone from £59m when he bought us to £53m now. Basically the cost of Xisco saved. Woop woop.

 

He's turned it around by covering the losses of the previous board to get us close to a break even position while building a better squad at the same time.

 

Pretty sure the wage bill was £62 million back in 2007 btw so bought us Tiote and Cabaye. Woop woop.

 

I've explaind why everything else has dropped in a previous post, without European football our revenue has dropped due to the lack of games at SJP, back in 2005 when you said it was £10 million more we played 9 more cup games so of course that's going to have an effect on matchday income. Other things like a larger family section meaning cheaper tickets for kids but the big loss is to less games.

 

The commercial side is down mainly to contracting out the catering to Sodexo which was worth £38 million over 5 years instead of doing it in house, so while it's a loss on the income sheet it apparently saves us money. Again there are other things like taking a reduced sponsorship with NR while we were in the Championship but that is over now anyway.

 

The obvious questions to ask yourself is are we in a better position financially than when he bought the club in 2007?

 

I'd say yes, we have more debt as we accumulated losses but we're in a position where we are close to break even, compared to posting a loss of £33 million. All of our debt is interest free now rather than being to banks in the form of mortgages against the training ground and future season ticket sales.

 

Do we have a better squad of players now than when he bought the club in 2007?

 

Absolutely IMO, in fact there wouldn't be many players from that squad I would pick in the current starting 11.

[Happy Face 29]

I've explaind why everything else has dropped in a previous post, without European football our revenue has dropped due to the lack of games at SJP, back in 2005 when you said it was £10 million more we played 9 more cup games so of course that's going to have an effect on matchday income. Other things like a larger family section meaning cheaper tickets for kids but the big loss is to less games.

 

The commercial side is down mainly to contracting out the catering to Sodexo which was worth £38 million over 5 years instead of doing it in house, so while it's a loss on the income sheet it apparently saves us money. Again there are other things like taking a reduced sponsorship with NR while we were in the Championship but that is over now anyway.

 

I don't think you explained it, you gave your view, but in my view playing less games isn't a root cause, it's a symptom of the root cause which is Ashley's poor handling of the club. Matchday revenue is the lowest since 2000, we've not got into Europe several times before since then, we've had poor cup runs too. Attributing the lower income to less games is accounts talk that ignores the failings of the owner to ensure both we have more games, and that people want to come to what games there are.

 

Similarly with commercial income, the reduced income follows club performance, not the other way around. As you would have it, whoever owns the club is helpless in the face of the whims of sponsors. While market forces are at play in a broad sense, I've showed previously that our commercial performance goes against the trend for other similarly sized clubs.

 

The obvious questions to ask yourself is are we in a better position financially than when he bought the club in 2007?

 

I'd say yes, we have more debt as we accumulated losses but we're in a position where we are close to break even, compared to posting a loss of £33 million. All of our debt is interest free now rather than being to banks in the form of mortgages against the training ground and future season ticket sales.

 

In my opinion no, for all of the reasons I've set out here.

 

Our debt is better structured, absolutely, but it is much, much bigger. Anything the club is responsible for maximising is down, only TV money is up.

 

Wages as a percentage of turnover is improved so credit is deserved for that. That's the easiest thing in the world to control though, the slash and burn approach to it is what saw us get relegated, however, the excellent way the squad has been rebuilt on a budget negates that very disappointing initial approach.

 

The saving grace is Ashley is so rich.

 

Can I ask you, if Shepherd was in charge now with the finances exactly as they are, would you be happier than you were in 2007?

 

 

Do we have a better squad of players now than when he bought the club in 2007?

 

Absolutely IMO, in fact there wouldn't be many players from that squad I would pick in the current starting 11.

 

Agreed.

[Baggio 0]

I don't think you explained it, you gave your view, but in my view playing less games isn't a root cause, it's a symptom of the root cause which is Ashley's poor handling of the club. Matchday revenue is the lowest since 2000, we've not got into Europe several times before since then, we've had poor cup runs too. Attributing the lower income to less games is accounts talk that ignores the failings of the owner to ensure both we have more games, and that people want to come to what games there are.

 

Similarly with commercial income, the reduced income follows club performance, not the other way around. As you would have it, whoever owns the club is helpless in the face of the whims of sponsors. While market forces are at play in a broad sense, I've showed previously that our commercial performance goes against the trend for other similarly sized clubs.

 

Of less games is the cause, how can you compare a season when we've played 10 games in the cup at home to when we've played 1 and say it isn't the cause that matchday revenue has dropped? That's ridiculous.

 

You can say it's Ashley's fault we haven't had European football under him now but he took over a club that were 13th in the league, the Intertoto had been scrapped which was a backdoor way into European we attempted a few times and as the graph you put up a few weeks ago showed that it is more difficult to crack the top 4 that previous years.

 

As for the commercial side of things, if the club scrap the catering as it's costing us money then surely that''s a good thing to everyone apart from the people who like to argue that a higher turnover shows how much bigger a club we are. If you add that back in (roughly £7.5 million a year) it's back to roughly where it was in 2004/05, as I've already pointed out that isn't including the new shirt sponsorship they've got.

 

 

In my opinion no, for all of the reasons I've set out here.

 

Our debt is better structured, absolutely, but it is much, much bigger. Anything the club is responsible for maximising is down, only TV money is up.

 

Wages as a percentage of turnover is improved so credit is deserved for that. That's the easiest thing in the world to control though, the slash and burn approach to it is what saw us get relegated, however, the excellent way the squad has been rebuilt on a budget negates that very disappointing initial approach.

 

The saving grace is Ashley is so rich.

 

Can I ask you, if Shepherd was in charge now with the finances exactly as they are, would you be happier than you were in 2007?

 

It's much bigger mainly due to Amortisation costs from the previous owners, as I said we made a £50+ million loss in Shepherd's last season and Ashley's first, was there any way that Ashley could have avoided that loss happening? He takes a share of the blame for losses due to relegation but luckily for him it worked out well for him in the end.

 

You say the slash and burn approach is what got us relegated but then say he spent £15 million net in those 2 seasons, so which is it?

 

If Shepherd was in charge with the finances exactly the way they are with him shouldering all of the losses then of course I would be happier now than 2007 even if he would have been to blame completely for the debt, the problem was he wasn't in a position to do that or could he guarantee to cover our losses to get the books signed off.

 

I was more than happy with things how they were going up until 2004, even if I didn't trust him when it came to appointing managers.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Baggio

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

I see the big hitters are getting warmed up. Exciting stuff.

[Happy Face 29]

I'm comparing the latest accounts with EVERY season going back over a decade. If a club has more cup games, it's because they get past clubs like Brighton or (relegated) Blackburn in the early stages. To attribute poor matchday revenues ONLY to that is to completely let them off the hook. Attendances are down 4k - 5k. That impacts matchday revenue and is down to Ashley.

 

The previous owners would have cut loose the catering if it was costing them money, they weren't subsidising pies for fans. The fact Ashley did it is more indicative of how fans aren't happy to give him their money.

 

Up to the week we sold Milner he'd spent £27m,that was a year and a half, Keegan had started the season reasonably too. Drawing at old Trafford and beating Bolton at home. Then we sold Milner, Zoggy and Given to pull in £22m and go on a downward spiral. He spent beyond the clubs means...and then he undercut the confidence that can build by gutting the team despite the manager. the worst of both worlds.

 

I'm asking without someone to shoulder the losses/debt, if NUFC were required to stand on it's own two feet financially, was it better placed to do so in 2007 or now?

 

The banks wouldn't lend us another £40m or whatever to cover the losses then so we were in the shit really bad, but would any financial institution lend us the £150m Ashley has built it up to while alienating most of his customers/sponsors....on the back of the same turnover we had then and losses back to what they were in 2005.

[PaddockLad 17641]

I see the big hitters are getting warmed up. Exciting stuff.

 

Since when has it been up to YOU to decide who the BIG hitters are around here?