We get around £40-50m a season from Etihad, maybe a bit higher. That's for the campus, shirt, stadium. The best thing that could happen for City is Etihad folding because we'd get a lot more money on the open market. For the shirt.Etihad Airways are in dire financial straits, and are even looking into a partnership of sorts with Emirates.
Anyone concerned that the rather large commercial investment they have in City will dry up?
£3.5B in 2 years is not an insignificant loss, nor does them working with Boeing and Airbus to delay and/or cancel billions in aircraft orders bode well for future growth.
They are in SEVERE retrenchment mode. One wonders if we are going to need a rather large new commercial sponsorship in the near future... one that is not directly tied to Abu Dhabi would be preferable, esp. from a FFP perspective.
If that was the case, would we not simply “buy” ourselves out of such a horrible contract (our largest, I believe) and simply take this new, much better deal that is rating to go?We get around £40-50m a season from Etihad, maybe a bit higher. That's for the campus, shirt, stadium. The best thing that could happen for City is Etihad folding because we'd get a lot more money on the open market. For the shirt.
If that was the case, would we not simply “buy” ourselves out of such a horrible contract (our largest, I believe) and simply take this new, much better deal that is rating to go?
No, because we have links to Etihad through the ownership and they've built a lot of goodwill up. You don't fuck over business partners in that sense. Kick people on your way up...If that was the case, would we not simply “buy” ourselves out of such a horrible contract (our largest, I believe) and simply take this new, much better deal that is rating to go?
Not if it's repaid before the end of the financial year, which it should be if it's secured against 2018/19 TV revenue.Will the size of the loan be revealed ?
It'll be in contingencies in the 17/18 accounts anyway I reckon, it's early enough in the financial year.Not if it's repaid before the end of the financial year, which it should be if it's secured against 2018/19 TV revenue.
It'll be in either the 17/18 or 18/19 year end accounts, probably the 17/18 accounts.
Yeah it'll have to go in the notes at that magnitude, sounds fairly close to 20% of yearly revenue.Don't know if any money was received before the y/e but there will be something about it in the next set of accounts, even if no cash had been drawn down, in the strategic report and or post balance sheet events note.
Not if it's repaid before the end of the financial year, which it should be if it's secured against 2018/19 TV revenue.
Yeah it'll have to go in the notes at that magnitude, sounds fairly close to 20% of yearly revenue.
Have City released cashflow statements that detailed?It should be revealed because it should appear in the cash flow statement as both and inflow and an outflow.
Yes of course it will.It should be revealed because it should appear in the cash flow statement as both and inflow and an outflow.
Have City released cashflow statements that detailed?
For a public company, City are private and making voluntary publications. I don't actually know tbh as I've only ever had an eye for the P&L due to FFP.It should be part the financing section of any normal published cash flow statement. Cash flows are supposed to be shown gross so proceeds and repayments should not be netted off.
For a public company, City are private and making voluntary publications. I don't actually know tbh as I've only ever had an eye for the P&L due to FFP.
Fair enough. As I said, it's never what I've been looking for in the accounts, cash has been the least of our problems since 2008.They have adopted IFRS and have not taken any FRS 101 exemption on IAS7 requirements.
No it can't be used to disguise a transfer if that is what you mean.So can someone clarify. Could the loan money be used against a transfer which will show against the books at a later date.
“Colin Bell’s Boots” said:Perhaps we wouldn't want to go down that route with Etihad being one of our major supporters following the takeover. But if Etihad were to collapse, then a move to a more financially advantageous deal might be acceptable to the owner ?
No, because we have links to Etihad through the ownership and they've built a lot of goodwill up. You don't fuck over business partners in that sense. Kick people on your way up...