| Audited Accounts are now out 12:04 - Mar 13 with 28579 views | Shaky |
For club: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00123414/filing-history
For holding company: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04305508/filing-history
Will try to find time to crunch the numbers later, but quick glimpse shows the huge increase in operating costs is all substantially down to staff costs.
As I said previously, it is hard to imagine how even the lions share can be attibutable to the playing staff given the departures.
What is certain is the for example Peralman' s salary is lumped in there, and potentally also some kind of remuneration for the US property developer on the board of the parent company. How much is attributable to this remains unclear, however.
|  |
| |  |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 19:02 - Mar 15 with 2593 views | icecoldjack |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 13:45 - Mar 14 by awayjack |
Thanks for good analyis. Yup creditors and cash outflow is pretty worrying, with our conmercial guru deciding to sell our assets to balance the books rather than increasing commercial income and cutting costs. Not clear on timing of some of the Sky installed payments but £60m - even after offsetting Sales of Siggy, Cork and Llornete post YE. Close to going concern risk and God forbid what happens if we're relegated. Firesale!
As you point out the real mystery is why the cost base has increased so much. It's much higher than many lower half Premier League clubs that also have higher match day and commercial income.
Getting shot of very high earners like Gomis, Ayew and Ash in that year should've balanced out new wages for likes of Llorente. I don't expect we'll get much more details of these costs from Club - espadrilles if they are hiding big fees to Yanks. Trust will say nothing, so perhaps get 'Swiss Ramble' to do some analysis V other clubs, as it's usually more useful. |
It's not a mystery really though, everyone is taking a slice of the action, i'm guessing it's how you remove the cash from the club that really counts for the yanks .
They are in it to screw money out the club in every way possible, the wages we got off the books the last few seasons should show the club looking more healthy IMO not increasing rapidly !
Thanks huw and co . |  | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 19:30 - Mar 15 with 2536 views | Pacemaker |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 18:47 - Mar 15 by londonlisa2001 |
I know.
But we would have made the sales we did and not the purchases as we would have known we were relegated when the window opened so we would have bridged the gap that way.
FFS, we've already been through this. |
Thank you Lisa very clear.
Have you thought about training? I think you have handled Shaky v well there with a balanced feedback without falling into the parent child scenario. |  |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 19:45 - Mar 15 with 2514 views | Kilkennyjack |
Lisa is a champion. |  |
| Beware of the Risen People
|
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 20:01 - Mar 15 with 2484 views | QJumpingJack |
Are there any accountants on the Trust board?
Did Pearlman & Jemkins share these figures with the Trust before they were published?
Are the Trust happy with the accounts? |  | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 20:36 - Mar 15 with 2426 views | E20Jack |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 18:38 - Mar 15 by magicdaps10 |
All I can say after reading all this is....no wonder the country is in a state.
Far too many people thinking they are better than they are.
At least I know what I am  |
An idiot that thinks people believe his transfer rubbish and the fact he watches such delights as the South African league on a regular basis? Or were you thinking something else? |  |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 20:38 - Mar 15 with 2417 views | PozuelosSideys |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 19:30 - Mar 15 by Pacemaker |
Thank you Lisa very clear.
Have you thought about training? I think you have handled Shaky v well there with a balanced feedback without falling into the parent child scenario. |
Its Academic vs Operational.
One talks and reads about it, the other actually does it. Theres a place for both however. |  |
| "Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper." | | Poll: | Hattricks |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 09:05 - Mar 16 with 2245 views | Shaky |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 18:44 - Mar 15 by londonlisa2001 |
What exactly is that supposed to show?
Is cash non operating? Is it an excess marketable security? Or do you think it's an interest bearing liability?
We are also, in case you haven't realised, neither valuing the company, nor preparing a calculation of free cash flow.
As an aside to this delightfully ridiculous argument, players in a football club are a bit of an accounting anomaly. They have characteristics of both long term and short term assets, since they may either be held for generating income (by playing), or they may be traded as though they were held for resale (as there is a transfer system). Effectively having elements of investment but also operations. The accounting hasn't ever got to grips with it for reasons best known to itself as it's easy to do and indeed, is done in several other industries not least financial services and property. [Post edited 15 Mar 2018 18:49]
|
Yes, Lisa. for the fourth time in financial analysis cash is considered part of the financing, not the operations. With luck it is the result of operations! [Post edited 16 Mar 2018 9:07]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Audited Accounts are now out on 09:07 - Mar 16 with 2242 views | Shaky |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 20:38 - Mar 15 by PozuelosSideys |
Its Academic vs Operational.
One talks and reads about it, the other actually does it. Theres a place for both however. |
Thanks for confirming you are trolling me. | |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 09:09 - Mar 16 with 2237 views | STID2017 |
Yes there have been departures, but the two big ones (Gylfi and Llorente) were after July 31st 2017 ? |  |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 11:27 - Mar 16 with 2189 views | Shaky |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 18:44 - Mar 15 by londonlisa2001 |
What exactly is that supposed to show?
Is cash non operating? Is it an excess marketable security? Or do you think it's an interest bearing liability?
We are also, in case you haven't realised, neither valuing the company, nor preparing a calculation of free cash flow.
As an aside to this delightfully ridiculous argument, players in a football club are a bit of an accounting anomaly. They have characteristics of both long term and short term assets, since they may either be held for generating income (by playing), or they may be traded as though they were held for resale (as there is a transfer system). Effectively having elements of investment but also operations. The accounting hasn't ever got to grips with it for reasons best known to itself as it's easy to do and indeed, is done in several other industries not least financial services and property. [Post edited 15 Mar 2018 18:49]
|
And by the way of course I am analysing and calculating free cash-flow, or operating cash-flow as we always called it in my old shop.
How on earth else to you imagine i am making balance sheet projections? | |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 11:55 - Mar 16 with 2164 views | Shaky |
There is some good news - at least to me - on the relegation scenario front.
Have just done a little googling, and from what I can gather, the parachute payment in the fist year of relegation seems to be around £50 million!
That's obviously a huge amount, that almost exactly matches the TV prepayment for the premier league. As such it would just about plug the net debt position as it must have been before the start of this season.
That would leave a working capital hole on the balance sheet of perhaps only £30-35m to raise from player sales, which is in itself much more manageable.
However, with the vastly reduced TV revenues in the Championship it appears the club will only generate other sales of perhaps £20-25 million, with cash operating costs last financial year at the £125 million mark and rising.
As such a huge cash-flow crisis would still develop unless the squad is pared to the bone. And that needs to happen in the first available trasfer window firesale style, otherwise the club would potentially be hemorrhaging cash at the rate of +£10 million per month. | |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:16 - Mar 16 with 2144 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 09:05 - Mar 16 by Shaky |
Yes, Lisa. for the fourth time in financial analysis cash is considered part of the financing, not the operations. With luck it is the result of operations! [Post edited 16 Mar 2018 9:07]
|
Oh for God's sake Shaky.
No. No it's not. In accounting terms in this sort of business cash is always part of working capital.
In M&A activity, cash is sometimes removed from the definition, and is sometimes partially removed to leave operating cash within working capital and excess cash out of it. It depends on the deal. | | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:19 - Mar 16 with 2139 views | Shaky |
And you know what Lisa, I most certainly didn't set out to embarrass you - quite the contrary in fact - but on reflection I am not going to let this shit go.
Here's you @17:10 yesterday: "What's actually happened here is you missed the deferred income element when doing your calculation and since I've pointed it out, you've been trying to bullsh*t."
and @ 17:33 "That's why I was able to point out you'd included the deferred income which the above shows."
You are full of shit Lisa. And as this thread has conclusively shown, you simply don't have any understanding of how the most basic financing element cash is treated in balance sheet analysis.
I am genuinely in shock.
You need to get yourself some books. Or maybe an online course:
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/what-is-net-wo
And you need to listen and ask questions when you come across something you don't understand, rather than resort to your default reflex of bluster and blagging. That is if you want to impress others apart from your natural yokel constituency on this messageboard. | |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:19 - Mar 16 with 2137 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 11:27 - Mar 16 by Shaky |
And by the way of course I am analysing and calculating free cash-flow, or operating cash-flow as we always called it in my old shop.
How on earth else to you imagine i am making balance sheet projections? |
You didn't always call it that because the two things are different.
Free cash flow is operating cash flow (also known as free cash flow from operations) less the capital expenditure needed to maintain the current level of operations.
And I don't imagine you are making balance sheet projections. I have no idea what the hell you're doing other than plucking numbers from thin air to suit whatever you're trying to prove and ignoring the facts that I'm trying to present you with. | | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:23 - Mar 16 with 2134 views | Drizzy |
Another tedious accountant snoozefest purported by a serial fantasist and the queen of condescension. Congratulations if you've actually made it to this page without falling into a coma. |  |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:33 - Mar 16 with 2123 views | longlostjack |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:19 - Mar 16 by londonlisa2001 |
You didn't always call it that because the two things are different.
Free cash flow is operating cash flow (also known as free cash flow from operations) less the capital expenditure needed to maintain the current level of operations.
And I don't imagine you are making balance sheet projections. I have no idea what the hell you're doing other than plucking numbers from thin air to suit whatever you're trying to prove and ignoring the facts that I'm trying to present you with. |
Does the Trust still have access to the quarterly management accounts Lisa? I would imagine they could provide a better insight into the reason for the rise in operating costs. |  |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:39 - Mar 16 with 2114 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:19 - Mar 16 by Shaky |
And you know what Lisa, I most certainly didn't set out to embarrass you - quite the contrary in fact - but on reflection I am not going to let this shit go.
Here's you @17:10 yesterday: "What's actually happened here is you missed the deferred income element when doing your calculation and since I've pointed it out, you've been trying to bullsh*t."
and @ 17:33 "That's why I was able to point out you'd included the deferred income which the above shows."
You are full of shit Lisa. And as this thread has conclusively shown, you simply don't have any understanding of how the most basic financing element cash is treated in balance sheet analysis.
I am genuinely in shock.
You need to get yourself some books. Or maybe an online course:
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/what-is-net-wo
And you need to listen and ask questions when you come across something you don't understand, rather than resort to your default reflex of bluster and blagging. That is if you want to impress others apart from your natural yokel constituency on this messageboard. |
'You missed it". In other words, you didn't spot that your creditor figure was also including deferred income.
'You'd included it' . Again, you included it in your creditors figure.
As for the rest. Seriously. Shaky f*ck off.
And as an aside, the article you list defines NET working capital for specific purposes. Net being net of cash. And even then it would be wrong to do so in a business like this one. | | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:41 - Mar 16 with 2109 views | E20Jack |
Mods can you make this a sticky please.
| |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:46 - Mar 16 with 2101 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:23 - Mar 16 by Drizzy |
Another tedious accountant snoozefest purported by a serial fantasist and the queen of condescension. Congratulations if you've actually made it to this page without falling into a coma. |
Grow up,
It's important because if someone who doesn't know what they're talking about starts claiming that the club have huge liabilities that can't be paid, it's not long before that turns into a 'fact' unless it's corrected by someone that does know what they're talking about.
If you're not interested, don't read it. It's not difficult. | | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:47 - Mar 16 with 2094 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:33 - Mar 16 by longlostjack |
Does the Trust still have access to the quarterly management accounts Lisa? I would imagine they could provide a better insight into the reason for the rise in operating costs. |
Yes, it does. | | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:53 - Mar 16 with 2079 views | Shaky |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:39 - Mar 16 by londonlisa2001 |
'You missed it". In other words, you didn't spot that your creditor figure was also including deferred income.
'You'd included it' . Again, you included it in your creditors figure.
As for the rest. Seriously. Shaky f*ck off.
And as an aside, the article you list defines NET working capital for specific purposes. Net being net of cash. And even then it would be wrong to do so in a business like this one. |
So you are saying that in my analysis the line for other creditors of £28.6m already included accruals of £46.1m?
And that the corporate finance institute has made the exact same fundamnetal analytical mistake that i am also making. | |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 13:11 - Mar 16 with 2040 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 12:53 - Mar 16 by Shaky |
So you are saying that in my analysis the line for other creditors of £28.6m already included accruals of £46.1m?
And that the corporate finance institute has made the exact same fundamnetal analytical mistake that i am also making. |
No. I said creditors not other creditors.
I made it clear from my first post what you had done. Included deferred income as though it was a creditor that required repayment. And your spreadsheet showed that I was right.
And I've already said when sometimes people strip out cash or some cash when looking at working capital. I said it before you posted your little Janet and John does finance link. You wouldn't do it in this instance. | | | |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 14:57 - Mar 16 with 1987 views | Shaky |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 13:11 - Mar 16 by londonlisa2001 |
No. I said creditors not other creditors.
I made it clear from my first post what you had done. Included deferred income as though it was a creditor that required repayment. And your spreadsheet showed that I was right.
And I've already said when sometimes people strip out cash or some cash when looking at working capital. I said it before you posted your little Janet and John does finance link. You wouldn't do it in this instance. |
Yes, i included the deferred income/TV prepayment as part of my net working capital calculation.
You say it shouldn't be there.
This is what the Corporate Finance Institute says: "Net Working Capital (NWC) is the difference between a company’s current assets (net of cash) and current liabilities (net of debt)"
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/what-is-net-wo
The partners at McKinsey who wrote the book I posted a pic from said it should include everything except for "interest bearing liabilities", which was a much better definition in the days before zero interest rates on cash.
Is deferred income income interest bearing or a form of debt? No, therefore it is included, and on page 2/3 I explained the technical reason how it is in effect borrowing from the following period's receivables.
This is a joke.
And your last pragraph is gibberish | |
| |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 15:19 - Mar 16 with 1968 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Audited Accounts are now out on 14:57 - Mar 16 by Shaky |
Yes, i included the deferred income/TV prepayment as part of my net working capital calculation.
You say it shouldn't be there.
This is what the Corporate Finance Institute says: "Net Working Capital (NWC) is the difference between a company’s current assets (net of cash) and current liabilities (net of debt)"
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/what-is-net-wo
The partners at McKinsey who wrote the book I posted a pic from said it should include everything except for "interest bearing liabilities", which was a much better definition in the days before zero interest rates on cash.
Is deferred income income interest bearing or a form of debt? No, therefore it is included, and on page 2/3 I explained the technical reason how it is in effect borrowing from the following period's receivables.
This is a joke.
And your last pragraph is gibberish |
It's really simple.
We are in the premier league in which case we get the money.
We are not in the premier league in which case we do not buy the players we bought and we sell others.
There isn't not one single scenario that sees us fail to receive premier league money and yet still buy premier league players. Not one. So there NEVER could have been a £66m 'hole' that will need to be paid for this year. I did not say deferred income shouldn't be part of working capital. I said it was not a 'hole' that would need to be financed - you described it as 'money that has to be found'.
Now I'm bored of explaining this to you.
You have no idea what you are talking about. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
