Kid in the Riot Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Just seen the Swiss Ramble has tweeted about Cardiff's financial results and predicts they may well be in breach of FFP allowance. Doesn't really matter of course as they'll now reap the benefits of a £162m+ windfall from promotion to the Premier League. The thread is also interesting though as it includes 2016/17 season results across the board so we can see where City are in terms of wage bill for example. Newcastle's results aren't in yet and they will be higher than us so that means we were 16th last season. Probably a fair assumption we are similar this season. Profit/loss: Profit on player sales (obviously a good year for us with Kodjia/Bolasie): Revenue: Match day revenue (this will dramatically improve for this season given cup run and season ticket sales): Commercial income (very impressive for us? More than double Cardiff's): Wages to turnover (this seems prudent of us?): Gross debt: Interest paid (why so high, isn't this money owed to Lansdown? Money owed to Tan by Cardiff is interest-free): Maybe the more financially literate can draw some more meaningful conclusions / answer the above questions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Won’t quote the post but thanks @Kid in the Riot For posting Interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 I knew they were in FFP breach or close to it- knew it! Thanks for posting too, I sometimes look at Swiss Ramble- accounts have/had to be projected so I'm surprised it wasn't picked up by the EFL. I'm surprised at how high QPR's commercial revenue is too! Loftus Road isn't exactly immersed with conferencing facilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZiderEyed Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Seems like Stevens building up a nice little earner off our debt, or am I very much mistaken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 @ZiderEyed I'm no accountant, but might depend if he's just receiving the interest currently IMO. If- and it's a big if- he's only receiving the interest, it might only take ooh I dunno, 114.89 years (approximated, rounded figure) to recoup his entire investment! (That's assuming all the debt City currently have is owed/due to SL). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiled Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 1 hour ago, ZiderEyed said: Seems like Stevens building up a nice little earner off our debt, or am I very much mistaken? Not if he keeps writing it off as he has done in the past #pleasedontleavesteve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZiderEyed Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, Xiled said: Not if he keeps writing it off as he has done in the past #pleasedontleavesteve Where is it all going? I thought we only had a relatively small budget for playing staff in this division? We're not in that market etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 8 minutes ago, ZiderEyed said: Where is it all going? I thought we only had a relatively small budget for playing staff in this division? We're not in that market etc. Given our wage bill is 98% of turnover...and that's actually one of the better ones both at this level and more specifically for us in recent times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Interesting....but Cardiff City’s accounts for the year ending May 2017 show players’ salaries as totalling £20.6m - bit of a discrepancy there.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Interesting stuff and doesn’t really reconcile with the ‘shoestring budget’ fallacy that people use with Cardiff as a stick to beat ourselves up with. Also interesting to those who talk about us going for Grabban or Mitrovic or similar - Villa 3x our wage budget and Fulham nearly double.... And for those who knock the ‘corporate’ side of things - only 5 clubs in the league who brought more revenue in through commercial activity. That’s some achievement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted May 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 7 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said: Interesting....but Cardiff City’s accounts for the year ending May 2017 show players’ salaries as totalling £20.6m - bit of a discrepancy there.... Strange. Is ours accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Matchday revenue also very interesting and shows how ****** we’d be without a rich backer and good corporate facilities. One of the smallest in the league. Ticket prices clearly pretty favourable compared to majority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dingbat Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Who the hell have Reading borrowed their money from? Wonga?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 What's notable (we all know it's true but to that level) on that too is how much Leeds underperform! Parachute payments clubs notwithstanding, they have a great room for growth- their wages to turnover revenue is seriously low for the division. Barnsley is another interesting one- a profit before tax of £13m, they clearly sold quite a few players when they were 7th in Jan 2017...now gone down. Perhaps a case of short term financial gains for long term on pitch losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiled Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 All of the above posts are too reasonable and balanced. The whole idea of a forum is to bash City for every decision that has turned out to be less than perfect. Forgot that massive increase in non-matchday turnover, we signed a player on loan who didn't turn out to be Messi. The club is a disgrace etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 27 minutes ago, Xiled said: All of the above posts are too reasonable and balanced. The whole idea of a forum is to bash City for every decision that has turned out to be less than perfect. Forgot that massive increase in non-matchday turnover, we signed a player on loan who didn't turn out to be Messi. The club is a disgrace etc. I blame LJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS4 on Tour... Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 2 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said: Strange. Is ours accurate? Our accounts for year ended May 2017 show salaries as being £15.9m - so another difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 The statutory accounts will be for a financial year period - do we know what the year start date is for FFP reporting? Also the framework governing statutory accounts is very inflexible/prescribed as to what does and doesn’t fall into certain disclosures - no idea what framework these FFP figures are based on and how restrictive they are but I wouldn’t expect them to tie up to stat accounts necessarily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Dawe Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 Burton - quite remarkable. Huddersfield - likewise. Brentford, Preston - bloody good going. How do they do it? Norwich, Forest - they'll be disappointed with that. Rotherham - who kept them up the year before? Give that man a job! Leeds, Sheff Weds, Derby - the bigger they are ..... Blackburn - we won't be seeing them again for a while. Cardiff - they want to find someone that can deliver on resources like that. QPR, Reading - who cares Birmingham - stupid club. Us - hmmmmm. Could do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 59 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said: The statutory accounts will be for a financial year period - do we know what the year start date is for FFP reporting? Also the framework governing statutory accounts is very inflexible/prescribed as to what does and doesn’t fall into certain disclosures - no idea what framework these FFP figures are based on and how restrictive they are but I wouldn’t expect them to tie up to stat accounts necessarily. I feel reasonably confident on FFP now, so will have a crack. FFP is now measured over three years on a rolling basis. This period for example would be 2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18. Next season the period will be starting last season, ending next season- therefore 16/17-18/19- and so on. We obviously cannot have the figures for this season, but all clubs must submit- by the end of March- projected accounts for this season. Combined with the actual results for Years 1 and 2, this will provide a total for the 3 years and after necessary and allowable deductions from losses (Academy, Community, Stadium building etc) the figure will be based on these- that is the 2 prior years actual results and this years projected ones. The reason for projected results- a new development- is so that sanctions can be applied and enforced where and when necessary before the end of the end of the existing season, whereas before it would come out a year later and the side would be far away in the PL. Now that on paper at least, is no longer an option. If these figures are correct- IF- then they have gone over by £10m- as the figures in the opening post state- so why the inaction from the EFL? Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Rob Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 39 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: I feel reasonably confident on FFP now, so will have a crack. FFP is now measured over three years on a rolling basis. This period for example would be 2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18. Next season the period will be starting last season, ending next season- therefore 16/17-18/19- and so on. We obviously cannot have the figures for this season, but all clubs must submit- by the end of March- projected accounts for this season. Combined with the actual results for Years 1 and 2, this will provide a total for the 3 years and after necessary and allowable deductions from losses (Academy, Community, Stadium building etc) the figure will be based on these- that is the 2 prior years actual results and this years projected ones. The reason for projected results- a new development- is so that sanctions can be applied and enforced where and when necessary before the end of the end of the existing season, whereas before it would come out a year later and the side would be far away in the PL. Now that on paper at least, is no longer an option. If these figures are correct- IF- then they have gone over by £10m- as the figures in the opening post state- so why the inaction from the EFL? Interesting. Because they too thought it was better off ignoring it until after they'd signed Tomlin! Talking of which, I guess that with Cardiff promoted, some of the fee related clauses must kick in now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottishRed Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 44 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Because they too thought it was better off ignoring it until after they'd signed Tomlin! Talking of which, I guess that with Cardiff promoted, some of the fee related clauses must kick in now. Would depend on the terms, there could easily be a caveat that he had to be at the club for the whole season they were promoted. If indeed there was a promotion add-on. It would not be a surprise if there wasn’t as when the deal was done the likelihood of them being promoted probably was not considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 57 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: Because they too thought it was better off ignoring it until after they'd signed Tomlin! Talking of which, I guess that with Cardiff promoted, some of the fee related clauses must kick in now. You mean Cardiff or? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 1 hour ago, Bristol Rob said: Because they too thought it was better off ignoring it until after they'd signed Tomlin! Talking of which, I guess that with Cardiff promoted, some of the fee related clauses must kick in now. They do. Work with a Bolton fan, he is convinced they get another million for Gary “no goals” Madine now. Nothing will be done about this we know, it just shows what liars Warnock & the Welsh media are when they kept saying they had a small budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 11 minutes ago, GrahamC said: They do. Work with a Bolton fan, he is convinced they get another million for Gary “no goals” Madine now. Nothing will be done about this we know, it just shows what liars Warnock & the Welsh media are when they kept saying they had a small budget. Was fairly blatant they didn't have a small budget. Barnsley last season when 7th and playing decent football by mid Jan? That was achieving with a small or moderate budget. Likewise Millwall this year, Preston in a variety of ways and Brentford likewise. Cardiff? Definitely not. We were for a decent chunk of the season too, albeit our budget is higher than Barnsley (of last season's example), Brentford, Millwall and Preston. Cardiff or should I say Warnock still did well to get 2nd though given Wolves, Villa, Boro, Fulham, Derby- but yeah it was no shoestring! Madine? No goals...but 2 assists. Those assists led to points, without which they may not have got 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 6 hours ago, Dingbat said: Who the hell have Reading borrowed their money from? Wonga?! Russian owner no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 3 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said: The statutory accounts will be for a financial year period - do we know what the year start date is for FFP reporting? Also the framework governing statutory accounts is very inflexible/prescribed as to what does and doesn’t fall into certain disclosures - no idea what framework these FFP figures are based on and how restrictive they are but I wouldn’t expect them to tie up to stat accounts necessarily. It is directly linked to the annual accounting period of each club, so City’s is 1st June to 31st May. The only caveat is that if a club has an annual accounting period outside of the end of May, end of June, or end of July, they are asked to submit interim accounts. It is rare for a football club to have an accounting period outside the 3 examples I give. No current Champ club does! The tweet confirms most of the stuff I did in my spreadsheet, with perhaps that bit better depth of understanding, mine is pretty much the figures laid bare. It does prove that Cardiff / Warnock aren’t doing it on a stalker budget, as many on here suggested!! The figures don’t lie. Just as well Tan isn’t asking for interest! And for those asking why didn’t SL pump in £30m in January.....because we already owe him £71m! All interesting stuff. Thanks @Kid in the Riot For posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted May 10, 2018 Report Share Posted May 10, 2018 I thought that SL had turned the losses he'd funded into shares. Anyone know true or false? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.