Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 The Premier League's 20 clubs collectively made a loss of £361m last year, after spending all of their record £2.3bn income. Of the clubs which were in the Premier League in 2010‑11, the year of most clubs' latest published accounts, eight made a profit, of £97.4m in total. Of the other clubs, 11 made losses, totalling £458m. Manchester City, in the third year since Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan of Abu Dhabi's ruling family bought the club and began to pour in money to acquire a team capable of winning the Premier League, lost £197m, the greatest financial loss in the history of football. Chelsea lost the next highest amount, £68m, bankrolled by their owner, the Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, who loaned £94m to the club during 2010‑11. Liverpool, documenting the first eight months of ownership by John Henry's Fenway Sports Group, lost £49m. Birmingham City, now in the Championship, have failed to file their accounts for 2010‑11, which were statutorily due on 31 December. The club's parent company, Birmingham International Holdings, registered on the Hong Kong stock exchange, has not yet published its own accounts, and Carson Yeung, who led the takeover of the club in 2009, is awaiting trial on money-laundering charges, which he denies. The clubs' combined turnover of £2.3bn is partly the result of the first year of the Premier League's 2010‑13 TV deals, in which a record £1.5bn was earned from overseas broadcasters. The financial figures portray a league of fierce sporting competition which relentlessly forces up players' wages. In total, £1.5bn was spent on wages by the 20 clubs in 2010-11 (including Birmingham's £38m wage bill in 2009‑10). That accounted for 69% of the clubs' total income, slightly up from the 68% of income the clubs spent in 2009‑10 on wages. The largest profit was recorded by Newcastle United, in their first season back in the Premier League since relegation in 2009. The accounts were published before last summer's transfer business, swollen by the £35m sale to Liverpool of the striker Andy Carroll, which netted £33m profit. Manchester United, despite paying £50m in interest on the debts loaded on to the club by United's owners, the Glazer family, won the championship having spent less on wages, at £153m, than Chelsea and City, and still made a profit of £12m. Liverpool, by contrast, made an operating loss of £90m. Had they not recorded a profit of £43m for the sale of players, including £50m from Chelsea for Fernando Torres (the money spent on buying players, such as Carroll, is accounted for more gradually), Liverpool would have stated a much greater overall loss than the £49m final figure. Richard Scudamore, chief executive of the league which this season celebrated 20 years since it was formed by a breakaway of the old Football League First Division clubs, has rejected introducing a break-even rule similar to "financial fair play". Such rules, designed to make clubs break even rather than rack up losses, whether bankrolled by an owner or not, have been agreed by Uefa for its competitions and, more recently, by the Football League. In the Premier League, clubs playing in Uefa's Champions League or Europa League must comply with financial fair play over this year and next. Even the two which are lavishly backed, Chelsea and City, have stated they want to move towards breaking even. Lower down, most clubs make losses in the effort to stay up. The Wigan Athletic owner, Dave Whelan, who wrote off £48m in loans to the club last August, said that financial fair play "can only be a good thing … for football in general to ensure that debt is maintained at reasonable and sustainable levels". http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/23/premier-league-losses-2010-11-profits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 31 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Have to be pleased with that. To run a good season and still not make a loss. Though is realise the summer and jan transfers have still to be included in that. I reckon there are 15 other teams would rather be in our position in the league (I say 15 as most fans would rather lose money and finish higher, as unrealistic as that may be for some clubs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2188 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 197m loss in one year is obscene really. Still, if Sheikh Yermoney wants to piss his oil dollars down the drain, that's up to him. I don't suppose it dents his fortune much but I wonder what he gets out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14655 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Does the profit stay in the club or could Ashley trouser some of it himself?.....I take it we find this out in our next set of books?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 3997 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Does the profit stay in the club or could Ashley trouser some of it himself?.....I take it we find this out in our next set of books?.... One day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2432 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Where's the Carroll money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 (edited) Where's the Carroll money? In a local casino's coffers. Edited May 25, 2012 by Monroe Transfer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Does the profit stay in the club or could Ashley trouser some of it himself?.....I take it we find this out in our next set of books?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34793 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 He owns the club so is pretty much entitled to do as he pleases with it, but I wouldn't have thought he'll be plundering it for cash. He deserves a lot of credit for the fact that the club is in a position where there's anything worth plundering tbf, rather than suspicion that it just means that he's gonna nick all the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I didn't realise Liverpool's operating loss was that much, when you think of the shite they signed to have a loss like that then it was a great effort by King Kenny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2432 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Unbelievable really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 31 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 He owns the club so is pretty much entitled to do as he pleases with it, but I wouldn't have thought he'll be plundering it for cash. He deserves a lot of credit for the fact that the club is in a position where there's anything worth plundering tbf, rather than suspicion that it just means that he's gonna nick all the money. what he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Just to point out that there isn't £33 million sat in a club bank account that Ashley can dip in to whenever he feels like. In fact I would be interested in knowing how much is left in available cash they can dip in to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aimaad22 3484 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Aye plus the profit figure doesn't exactly mean thats the amount of 'free money' or cash we have that he can just pocket and run away with. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aimaad22 3484 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Oh you beat me to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Does the profit stay in the club or could Ashley trouser some of it himself?.....I take it we find this out in our next set of books?.... The last set of books shows that despite this massive profit, none of it was used to reduce NUFC liabilities to Mike Ashley. Perhaps if we had to pay tax on that profit, it would have been....but then it would have been a common sense move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34793 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Paying down debt would do nothing to reduce profits or tax liability. Paying himself interest on the loan would though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14655 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 The last set of books shows that despite this massive profit, none of it was used to reduce NUFC liabilities to Mike Ashley. Perhaps if we had to pay tax on that profit, it would have been....but then it would have been a common sense move. Yeah, and I largely agree with those that say its his club so his dough and he can do what he likes with it. Bottom line is he's not putting another penny in of his own money, we're spending only what we create and he turned a massive profit on the back of the Carroll deal....wonder how the books (and for that matter the team?) would look if AC was still here?...got to be happy with how things have gone since he left though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Paying down debt would do nothing to reduce profits or tax liability. Paying himself interest on the loan would though. Tax is a fucked up mystery to me like. If you have a company that makes £30m profit while having £150m of debt, if they instead reduce the debt to £120m and report £0 profit, then surely they don't pay tax on profits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aimaad22 3484 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 The interest on the debt would affect the profit mate, the repayment of the debt itself would have no effect on the figure as Gemmil said. That would just hit the company's reserve from which they repay the loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Got in now, just me being daft. The way I had it I suppose money loaned to the club would conversely be classed as profit...which is obviously bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34793 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Debt repayments don't impact your profit. It's purely a balance sheet transaction - cash goes down by 30m, debt goes down by the same amount. It is a pain in the arse to get your head around though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34793 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Whoa I'm a bit slow with that response. Ignore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted May 25, 2012 Author Share Posted May 25, 2012 The so-called accountant waits for someone else to answer, then copies it to keep the ruse alive. WELL LET IT BE KNOWN I HAVE YOU RUMBLED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34793 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 The so-called licker of Asian tuppence is wide of the mark AGAIN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now