Financial results out


Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm sure a few Leeds, Plymouth and Pompey fans similarly weren't bothered.

Not our place to sit gushing over finances. I know were in a decent state and a well run club, thats enough. No point at all in looking into the details that i probably couldnt understand anyway. Theres always a few blockheads coming on when these are out and getting themselves upset about somthing when they actually dont know wtf theyre looking at.
 
Next years should be a lot better - as we will have a new Kit Deal, Sponsorship, possibly some stadium naming rights and the cup run to go on as income. That plus some deadwood being shifted from the wage bill.... we're making progress.
 
Operating loss will be turnover less operating expenses (Staff Costs, amortisation and impairment of players contracts, plus other operating expenses).

Guessing the difference will be profit on disposal of players contracts.

Since I'm a sad fucker I can't see the accounts on the company house website yet

I also looked for this.
 
Operating loss will be turnover less operating expenses (Staff Costs, amortisation and impairment of players contracts, plus other operating expenses).

Guessing the difference will be profit on disposal of players contracts.

Since I'm a sad fucker I can't see the accounts on the company house website yet

So the first figure just doesn't include the operating costs ie player wages?
 
"The overall loss for the financial year ending July 31st 2011 was reduced by 72% to £7.8m - £20.1m less than the previous year's figure of £27.9m.

The club's operating expenses, which include areas such as staff/player wages, match costs and utilities rose to £110.7m, which resulted in a net operating loss of £31.2m."

Someone explain how it reckons we lost £7.8m, but then the next par down says we lost £31.2m?

As I understand it....

The £7.8m represents losses in that year alone.

The operating loss of £31.2m includes player amortisation i.e. any player we have bought into the club loses his worth gradually and this is built into the club accounts. As an example, if we paid £12m for Gyan on a 4 year deal, the club would detract £3m a year as a 'loss' to the club assuming he walks at the end of the contract on a free. This is reflected in the £31.2m.

We know though of course that a lot of players will either sign new deals or be sold on which will change the picture.

Gyan, is an interesting one, I cant see the accounts but assuming we paid £12m for him this will all be included in the £31.2m (didnt he leave after July?). So assuming we get £12m for him including the loan fee you can knock that off already.

Basically the figures assume everyone we have bought in (it doesnt include home growns where no transfer e.g Colback) will leave at the end of their contract with no sell on occurring.
 
What effect will the fact that virtually all of our inward business was done by 31st July have had on the figures? Will their cost be included in any way or will we start to see the amortisation in next years figures? Additionally this won’t include the money from the Anton or Gyan deals
 
I'm not an accountant but that's a hefty operating loss (albeit including player depreciation) offset by some player sales....
 
Not our place to sit gushing over finances. I know were in a decent state and a well run club, thats enough. No point at all in looking into the details that i probably couldnt understand anyway. Theres always a few blockheads coming on when these are out and getting themselves upset about somthing when they actually dont know wtf theyre looking at.

Who's gushing?

It wouldn't be the SMB if there wasn't loads of uninformed bollocks, but there will be one or two posters with some accountancy experience who will be able to shed light on the figures.

The club's financial results should be important to every supporter.

If nothing else they are an indication if our current progress on the pitch is genuinely sustainable or if we are yet another club simply 'living the dream' (© Leeds United).
 
I'm not an accountant but that's a hefty operating loss (albeit including player depreciation) offset by some player sales....

Does not look good to me, given that it should partially include Bent
No wonder we bloody sold him

Although it proves that Short is still prepared to bankroll us

What effect will the fact that virtually all of our inward business was done by 31st July have had on the figures? Will their cost be included in any way or will we start to see the amortisation in next years figures? Additionally this won’t include the money from the Anton or Gyan deals

Yeah, the inward fees are amortised, but we still seem some way off operating at break even
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Operating loss will be turnover less operating expenses (Staff Costs, amortisation and impairment of players contracts, plus other operating expenses).

Guessing the difference will be profit on disposal of players contracts.

Since I'm a sad fucker I can't see the accounts on the company house website yet

What date did we sell Henderson?
 
Interesting that we're still paying for Welbeck and the other loan deals.

They seem promising, but it's clear that we need a better sponsorship deal.

Eh?! The period is for mainly last season, not now.
 
Next years should be a lot better - as we will have a new Kit Deal, Sponsorship, possibly some stadium naming rights and the cup run to go on as income. That plus some deadwood being shifted from the wage bill.... we're making progress.

Add in the Henderson sale fee (if after July last year) - the Gyan loan fee and any subsequent sale fee and we might show a profit this time next year, just.

June 2011. But these fees are amortized and paid in installments anyway, so the picture gets blurred

Ah right, oh well. Henderson will have had no amortised value though?
 
Last edited:
Players sales aren't though. They hit the accounts straight away less any amounts being held on the balance sheet, so this will include the Henderson deal then.

They are, because in most cases you haven't even received most of the money.

I should have emphasized this instead of 'amortized'

We'll still be being paid for both Bent and Henderson
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top