BTRFTG

'Value' is subjective. I therefore don't follow how City 'lost' anything. Pre Covid City were free to sell players but didn't. Covid hasn't prevented City selling players, its only impacted what City (and perhaps others,) thought they might have been worth. Point being one can't lose something one never had in the first place.

Given the quality of Horse Racing this afternoon is so dire this thread's allowing me too much thinking time. I'm confident accounts include insurance premiums (if paid,) though usually not any protected benefit. Which had me thinking. What is it clubs actually insure in respect of players? Are individual players insured and, if so, is that to the extent of their contract liability or does it also include a nominal value City think the player's worth to them or others? Else, is there generic cover that pays out assuming 'x' number of players might have to be 'accounted out' during the period covered? One assumes any insurance payout is accounted for as 'miscellaneous income'? Is that how it works?

I've read through the posts and have no idea under IFRS how one might legitimately argue that Covid cost clubs anything in lost transfer income? Transfer costs are what they are, fixed and capitalised in the accounts, as they should be. There's no ability to account for player 'value' or 'worth' in the accounts, if one could the numbers would be in intangible assets and subject to debate. Given clubs may defer amortization by extending current contracts why should they be given allowance for supposedly not being able to offload players? Seems to me that's 'cake and eat it'. Accounts don't show fixed provision for future player/asset acquisition, if they did then the wholesale drop in player values might be impaired and revised to offset the position. As with anything in life once you buy something its worthless until you can find somebody who'll pay to take it off your hands. Amortization says exactly that.

You've a fair point but oh the irony of those FKWs & branded label addicts faux protesting construction deaths whilst the sweatshop generated clobber they wear is the cause of a far greater number of deaths and injuries across the globe. Will they give second thought when buying their next pair of daps or sportswear? The hell will they.

What, you've uncovered mass corruption in The Dark Continent? Hold the front page....!

As publicised at the time City went pre-season to Botswana because, er, SL had business links there. No secret. What's the next revelation? City went to Portugal because SL has a villa there; Latvia because it has a strong financial services industry? If you seriously think City playing a couple of meaningless knock-abouts opens doors in high places in corrupt regimes you're miles off the mark. I can, from bitter experience, inform the majority of those in power in African regimes don't want CoD et al. They want piles of greenback dollar bills, something SL does have in surplus.

https://www.howmanyleft.co.uk/?q=austin+allegro Only one Van Den Plas though. Just imagine if that was Red-Robbo's.

Best wishes for your trip and upcoming health appointments. Last time I was in Doha there was no alcohol at all (it being Ramadan didn't help,) but with a fine range of juices and soft drinks on offer this heavy drinker didn't miss it one bit.

That's one common distinction given the political drivers (incentives) to use the latter rather than the former.

Not when broken down, which was their usual operating state. 'The Committee' also decided the limited colour options - 'Harvest Gold' the colour of a recently congealed 'pavement pizza'.

Sorry to disappoint but the value of land, as with any asset, is subjective and goes up and down. True that in this sceptred isle depreciation is rare owing to land being a fairly static resource, but land value isn't a measure if its existence per se rather of what one may do with it AND what one has to do to use it in the desired capacity that dictates its RLV. I frequently had to discount freehold land values based on greedy local authorities flexing their ever acquired rights to extract monies where once they didn't exist.

As previous, you clearly don't understand how Enron arose and how differing accounting conventions in different jurisdictions allowed the 'scam' to perpetuate amongst those who only saw the emperor's new clothes. City's accounts are reported under one jurisdiction to one international accounting standard. Lansdown converts cash debt to equity, not matched equity to equity. The numbers are plain to see.

Answer is simple - Yes, wholly beyond reasonableness. Using your analogy the value of assets listed in the acvounts is already overstated using the type of bespoke conventions that accounting permits but the real world doesn't. What's AG worth? Nowhere near as much as stated, reason being who other than our potless neighbours wants a football stadium, or any stadium for that matter, in Bristol? Residual land value is nowhere near what folks imagine once clearance & CIL/ S106s kick in. You talk of 'greenfields' but where they and what have they to do with City Holdings? Lansdown's personal assets aren't dependant upon City hence have nothing to do with him propping up the club. So I again ask, specifically, what does Lansdown have to do to access your mythical 'cash cow' as I'm sure he'll be all ears?

Likewise, I hope he scores for fun and gets shipped out for millions. He won't though rather The Ghanaian Wolstenholme will oft be heard to say: "Blasted no kɔɔ soro wɔ bar." "Dragged no trɛw bio."

As one who once drove a 'committee designed' car (Austin Allegro) that had a rectangular steering wheel I concur you are 100% correct.

I've no issue should one wish to classify profit on transfers as revenue. I've every issue should one claim provision or impairment for lack of profit on transfers for ANY reason. For sure as hell no allowance should be made for Covid resetting the market. Its akin muppets who bemoan the value of their homes is falling. Matters only to those stupid enough to borrow against over-hyped valuations and, ultimately, the taxman. My house is worth sweet FA as it's where I live. If its value declines why should I care as it makes zero difference to me and It'll be cheaper for my kids to buy homes of their own?

Broken basketcase and your first para is akin a doctor informing a patient they've terminal cancer then attempting to providing meaningless consolation by saying, "many others are in your position..." Even the dipsticks who can't understand figures surely must be able to grasp City again lost over £28m last year. That every week of the year SL coughs up £480k such we may watch football. The conundrum - the Premier ship's arguably sailed, so why bother trying to get there as if only for a season or so your still likely to end up massively out of pocket?

Its all Lansdown. All debt is underwritten by him or is money he's invested in the club. Although his its still a huge amount of money as although SL might be happy to continue to pay what the club has to be worth to meet FFP/P&S that doesn't mean anybody else would be prepared to pay as much. Beyond football his personal wealth will have taken a hit these past few years hence why there are always overtures for others to look to invest, not anybody has yet bitten. And yes it is scary, for should he decide 'no more' City would be up The Malago without a paddle overnight.

The thing about deluded conspiracists is their wholesale lack of attachment to reality. So let's give you a chance to redeem yourself. Specifically, explain how SL will turn this hemorrhaging basketcase into your 'golden goose/cash cow'? When and by what means myst he act given the accounts, as audited by professional accountants, carry a heavy caveat as to the ongoing financial support SL MUST provide to keep City an ongoing concern. Accountants may know or care nothing about football, but accounts they live and breathe. So go on, specifics, how and by what mechanism will alchemist Lansdown turn lead to gold? Excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting for a reply.

Paranoid as well as deluded then.... Personally, like any sensible City fan, I'd like to thank SL for stumping up £240m of his own money to keep City going. As for the 'airblade' I assume you skipped the sustainability section of the accounts given your own doesn't include such.

Larry Grayson wasn't a fan else his catchphrase would have been, "Shut That Tent Flap!"

Exactly as described. Any long term loans, mortgages, debts but may also include shareholder capital that is to be repaid beyond 12 months. In theory when you buy a share in a company at its 'issue price' that's what it's worth should it ever need to be repaid. You often pay more than issue price and that's share premium (variable) and is at risk, as is share capital itself should the company go belly up. SL's regularly turned his 'loans' (have a repayment date and attract interest,) to 'share capital' (has no fixed repayment date and attracts dividends normally only if there's profit to pay them.) Gets City out of the P&S/FFP hole.

And there are still those out there who talk of SL's 'Cash Cow'.

How are City supposed to control football authorities & rail employees hell bent on preventing fans reasonable access to matches?

Your own facts and wholly incorrect. For 'ripping up' their contracts (technically a mutually agreed annulment,) they received their registrations such they could earn their living elsewhere, a cash payout & promises of future benefits. In total, from City, they received about half of that owed under the balance of their very long contracts. They also signed for new clubs and continued plying their trade (unsuccessfully.) Far from 'nothing'. You're correct though that had they not so done they would have received nothing, plus wouldn't have been able to sign for other clubs until the administrators had sold or released their registrations. Dream my a**e.