Jump to content

NUFC Accounts 12/13


Recommended Posts

From the minutes at the first fans forum of the season..

 

 

http://www.nufc.co.uk/page/Fans/FansForum/0,,10278~3462657,00.html

 

:lol:

 

So if we don't achieve the bare minimum we don't hold anyone to account, we just reduce the minimum.

Looks like it mate complete amateurs nobodys minding the shop just please yourself 8th 10th 16th its all water off a ducks arse innit.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 401
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Also from those "pre-accounts" minutes ....

 

But now the accounts say...

 

 

For January AND the summer before. Anita, Curtis Good, Bigirimana and Amalfitano were close to £10m that summer.

 

What is the point of a forum where the fans are lied to so brazenly? It shouldn't be dignified by the attendance of any fan, it just suggests gullibility enough to buy into the shite.

HF you should be in there, how can we get you in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having scrutinized the accounts, and read the Fans Forum minutes, I realise now that I have been mistaken in my belief that Ashley is a cuntish money sponge using the club as a vehicle to punt his tawdry wares in his Chav shops.

Silly , silly me.

So, in readiness for my return to the Hallowed Ground, I'd like to propose a few amendments to some of the songs we sing.

 

Your support

Your support

Your support is financially irresponsible

Yooour support is financially irresponsible

 

Tell me Ma, me Ma

I will be home for tea

But we're stable fiscalee

Tell me Ma, me Ma

 

One club in profit

There's only one club in profit

One club in profffff it

There's only one club in profff it.

( Apart from the others)

 

Oh when the books

Are submitted

Oh when the books are submitted

I wanna see

All those numbers

Oh when the books are sub-mit-ted

 

We

Are

Tenth or more

Said we are tenth or more.

 

I have to be honest, I've got a semi on just thinking about how stable we're going to be.

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd probably just get banned from the thing tbh.

 

:blush2:

 

Steve Cole and Gordon Gilchrist seem to ask good questions, so it isn't a complete PR exercise. Would just be nice if they countered on some of the lies being spouted to their faces.

 

Vishal Vedhara comes across to me as a plant. One question on equality (his role) and half a dozen other interjections on what a good job they're doing selling players and following the Arsenal model. He's had the wool pulled right over his eyes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They repeatedly said 'interest free loan', they said as part of the interest free loan mike wants the Sports direct signage up for no fee. How the fuck is the loan interest free when they're forfeiting upto 10m in sponsorship every season as part of the loan. None of the spokespersons even pulled them on this point either.

Edited by JaMoUsE
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all pissing in the wind, corporations and PLCs need to be accountable to their customers and/or shareholders. This is just one bloke doing what the fuck he wants and no amount of 'connecting with the fans' is going to change that. They'd be better off having an evening in the Bodega.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of shite served up by these knackers once again.

 

Anyone still care to defend them?

 

Toonpack, CT, anyone?

 

Is there anyone left blind enough to still not see what they're doing the club

I dunno if this is classified as a defence or not, But

 

I accepted (a long time ago) that Ashley aint going to put his own money into the club and the only way forwards for the club was to grow organically and that would also mean slowly. I actually still think that is a good thing because were bigger than most.

 

That said, the appointment of Kinnear was incomprehensible to me and the apparent lack of any leadership at the club is similarly head scratching.

 

The latest accounts are good evidence of growth, so thats a positive and we should be absolutely minted by now and especially by the end of the season when the TV/prize money gets dished out.

 

Should have had something sorted to replace Cabaye in January and as weve spent bugger all squared (in real terms) wed better make good moves in the summer because we absolutely can afford it, even when staying within the self-sufficiency model.

 

The lack of money for the SD signage as a quid pro quo for no interest on the loans I have no problem with, as I think that actually is likely better for the club in real money terms (i.e. interest on the £129 Mill > income from any signage). I dont particularly understand it logic wise, given SD will have a marketing budget and that could pay the club, whereas not taking interest hits Ashleys personal pocket versus a commercial payment from his other corporate entity which is not his personal pocket. Although I believe theres something in FPP about income from organisations closely associated with the ownership. (and yeah I know about Citeh and Etihad but think Etihad doesnt technically have a close ownership link with Mansoor could be wrong, and I suspect its a separation of convenience anyway).

 

The club continues to grow, which is good.

Edited by Toonpack
Link to post
Share on other sites

They repeatedly said 'interest free loan' they said as part of the Intetest free loan mike wants the Sports direct signage up for no fee. How the fuck is the loan interest free when they're forfeiting upto 10m in sponsorship every season as part of the loan. None of the spokes people even pulled them on this point either.

It'd be nowhere near that, Citeh with their exorbitant and "friendly" deal with Etihad "only" get £35Mill a year for Shirt/Ground naming and Training complex sponsorship. We wouldn't get the equivalent of near 30% of Citeh's deal, for signs around our ground. Really we wouldn't.

Edited by Toonpack
Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd be nowhere near that, Citeh with their exorbitant and "friendly" deal with Etihad "only" get £35Mill a year for Shirt/Ground naming and Training complex sponsorship. We wouldn't get the equivalent of near 30% of Citeh's deal, for signs around our ground. Really we wouldn't.

 

The argument still stands to a certain extent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno if this is classified as a defence or not, But

 

I accepted (a long time ago) that Ashley aint going to put his own money into the club and the only way forwards for the club was to grow organically and that would also mean slowly. I actually still think that is a good thing because were bigger than most.

 

That said, the appointment of Kinnear was incomprehensible to me and the apparent lack of any leadership at the club is similarly head scratching.

 

The latest accounts are good evidence of growth, so thats a positive and we should be absolutely minted by now and especially by the end of the season when the TV/prize money gets dished out.

 

Should have had something sorted to replace Cabaye in January and as weve spent bugger all squared (in real terms) wed better make good moves in the summer because we absolutely can afford it, even when staying within the self-sufficiency model.

 

The lack of money for the SD signage as a quid pro quo for no interest on the loans I have no problem with, as I think that actually is likely better for the club in real money terms (i.e. interest on the £129 Mill > income from any signage). I dont particularly understand it logic wise, given SD will have a marketing budget and that could pay the club, whereas not taking interest hits Ashleys personal pocket versus a commercial payment from his other corporate entity which is not his personal pocket. Although I believe theres something in FPP about income from organisations closely associated with the ownership. (and yeah I know about Citeh and Etihad but think Etihad doesnt technically have a close ownership link with Mansoor could be wrong, and I suspect its a separation of convenience anyway).

 

The club continues to grow, which is good.

 

Top post overall.

 

The continuing issue, however, is the lack of investment. I don't think anyone on here is morally opposed to the idea of letting the club grow itself rather than spiraling wildly into debt through chucking away money we don't have on players as we have done in the past. The problem: we make plenty of money but we don't spend any of it on the team, which then begs the question "what exactly are we doing with it?" Hence the borehole jokes, etc., but what's a lot more worrying is the thought that our surplus is being built up solely for Ashley to enrich himself off. He's taken money out of the club, ostensibly to pay himself back, but the accounts do not reflect a commensurate decrease in the amount of his interest-free loan to the club.

 

So even nonpartisan observers (who can view Ashley's regime with parity, considering the well hasn't been poisoned for them by Ashley's horrific treatment of club legends and blatant lies to the fans) start to wonder where the money's going. We sold Carroll for 35m. Some would say we then needed an equivalent spend on transfer fees to show we had re-invested the money. Llambias popped up saying it had gone on wages, training ground improvements, etc, and was an investment into the club entire rather than just new players. OK. Let's say we buy that for a minute. The Carroll fee went into defraying our expenses. Wonderful. So all the TV money, prize money, income from the sales of other players during that time period, etc. should therefore be profit rather than having to be offset by the wages and other expenses that Carroll's sale has just paid for. We're in the black! Great! Time to use the TV money to invest on players...but that didn't happen either. So where has it gone?

 

An almighty cleaning-out is coming this summer, I think. Remy returns to QPR, Colo, Jonas, and Cisse are likely to go, Ben Arfa may as well (and may be sold anyway as he's only a year left on his contract), Shola and some other deadwood are sure to be shifted (ex. Marveaux, Obertan, Amalfitano, R. Taylor) - and all of that is notwithstanding the possible sale of key players. A major net spend will be required to offset the imminent and substantial weakening of our squad. Now we'll really see whether these "positive accounts" and "signs of growth" are good news for the club, or only for Ashley, because there's no way we'll stay up next year with another summer of loans and freebies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd be nowhere near that, Citeh with their exorbitant and "friendly" deal with Etihad "only" get £35Mill a year for Shirt/Ground naming and Training complex sponsorship. We wouldn't get the equivalent of near 30% of Citeh's deal, for signs around our ground. Really we wouldn't.

 

 

In 2012 Man City's commercial income was £121m a year

 

Liverpool £63m

 

Spurs £41m

 

Previously (2007) NUFCs was £27.6M, in 2012 it had halved to £13.8m. Below Norwich (£14m) and Sunderland (£16.8m).

 

There's no way the interest on £129m borrowing would be £13.8m a year. That's over 10%.

 

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/premier-league-201112-some-girls-are.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2012 Man City's commercial income was £121m a year

 

Liverpool £63m

 

Spurs £41m

 

Previously (2007) NUFCs was £27.6M, in 2012 it had halved to £13.8m. Below Norwich (£14m) and Sunderland (£16.8m).

 

There's no way the interest on £129m borrowing would be £13.8m a year. That's over 10%.

 

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/premier-league-201112-some-girls-are.html

We weren't talking about the total commercial income (performance of which is poor, no argument there), I was talking about the in ground signage in particular, no way that would be £10Mill all by itself, it'd be lucky to be anywhere near £2-3Mill IMO, interest would likely be circa £8 mill at round about 6-ish %

Edited by Toonpack
Link to post
Share on other sites

We could probably acheieve £8m revenue from signage. That means effectively by forfeiting it for the 'interest free loan'. We are paying £8m per annum for the loan meaning its not interest free. The club as it stands is a very cheap advertising vehicle for Sports Direct, so long as we stay premier league and attract the tv audiences globally that is how it will continue. Ashley is literally having our lives

Link to post
Share on other sites

Top post overall.

 

The continuing issue, however, is the lack of investment. I don't think anyone on here is morally opposed to the idea of letting the club grow itself rather than spiraling wildly into debt through chucking away money we don't have on players as we have done in the past. The problem: we make plenty of money but we don't spend any of it on the team, which then begs the question "what exactly are we doing with it?" Hence the borehole jokes, etc., but what's a lot more worrying is the thought that our surplus is being built up solely for Ashley to enrich himself off. He's taken money out of the club, ostensibly to pay himself back, but the accounts do not reflect a commensurate decrease in the amount of his interest-free loan to the club.

 

So even nonpartisan observers (who can view Ashley's regime with parity, considering the well hasn't been poisoned for them by Ashley's horrific treatment of club legends and blatant lies to the fans) start to wonder where the money's going. We sold Carroll for 35m. Some would say we then needed an equivalent spend on transfer fees to show we had re-invested the money. Llambias popped up saying it had gone on wages, training ground improvements, etc, and was an investment into the club entire rather than just new players. OK. Let's say we buy that for a minute. The Carroll fee went into defraying our expenses. Wonderful. So all the TV money, prize money, income from the sales of other players during that time period, etc. should therefore be profit rather than having to be offset by the wages and other expenses that Carroll's sale has just paid for. We're in the black! Great! Time to use the TV money to invest on players...but that didn't happen either. So where has it gone?

 

An almighty cleaning-out is coming this summer, I think. Remy returns to QPR, Colo, Jonas, and Cisse are likely to go, Ben Arfa may as well (and may be sold anyway as he's only a year left on his contract), Shola and some other deadwood are sure to be shifted (ex. Marveaux, Obertan, Amalfitano, R. Taylor) - and all of that is notwithstanding the possible sale of key players. A major net spend will be required to offset the imminent and substantial weakening of our squad. Now we'll really see whether these "positive accounts" and "signs of growth" are good news for the club, or only for Ashley, because there's no way we'll stay up next year with another summer of loans and freebies.

The money's staying in the club as far as I can tell (I haven't looked at the accounts in any detail though). The debt was £140Mill and went down by the £11 Mill he took in the accounts before these, he was due to take another £18 Mill form this last set, but it appears he hasn't.

 

It's all accounted for I reckon, now that said, it remains to be seen if it get's invested because we certainly MUST be cash rich as we enter the summer based upon the fact our expenditure cannot have risen significantly, from these accounts, but our income undoubtedly has leapt up.

 

I fully expect a summer of continued negativity because we won't spend £50 - £60 Mill on transfer fees, but we'd better spend £30 to £40 Mill (net) because I really think we can easily afford that and still stay within the model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...