United Thread | 2024/25

[zandvoort blue]

According to the papers today, Frank will hijack the rags' attempt to take Mbueno to the swamp, if he is appointed as Spurs head coach.

That would be piss funny.

Already thought this as soon as Frank was linked to the job. If there's no serious movement from the Rags by closure of the initial transfer window on Tuesday this story will run.
It'd be so poignant if the Rags ended up with Brennan Johson instead.

 

[r.soleofsalford]

Thank you relating the pain. Great job Colin

 

[Roachy]

Just had a look at their third quarter accounts and, as usual, I look closely at their cashflow statement. That shows the actual cash generated and used by the business over the period, and is generally a more accurate guide to how sustainable a company is, because if you haven't got the cash, you can't pay the bills.

Over the nine months, cash inflow from their normal operating activities was -£27.6m and they paid out a further £230m net, which includes £195m net on players. That means they've gone through nearly £260m cash in 9 months (compared to £205m in thr 9 months to March 20247).

They made that shortfall up by a mixture of borrowing (i.e. their overdraft) and the sale of shares (to Scruffy Jim). In the 9 months to March 2024 that involved net inflows of £200m, and that went up to £260m in the same period this year.

They're living beyond their means on borrowed money, a bit like we were prior to the takeover, except their numbers are much bigger. That is the very opposite of sustainable.

Would you be able to give any opinion on a realistic situation that would be a "straw that breaks the camels back" type scenario with these clowns?

 

[asahartford1]

Title of thread should be changed to red football Ltd.

 

[give it to gordon]

Just had a look at their third quarter accounts and, as usual, I look closely at their cashflow statement. That shows the actual cash generated and used by the business over the period, and is generally a more accurate guide to how sustainable a company is, because if you haven't got the cash, you can't pay the bills.

Over the nine months, cash inflow from their normal operating activities was -£27.6m and they paid out a further £230m net, which includes £195m net on players. That means they've gone through nearly £260m cash in 9 months (compared to £205m in the 9 months to March 2024).

They made that shortfall up by a mixture of borrowing (i.e. their overdraft) and the sale of shares (to Scruffy Jim). In the 9 months to March 2024 that involved net inflows of £200m, and that went up to £260m in the same period this year.

They're living beyond their means on borrowed money, a bit like we were prior to the takeover, except their numbers are much bigger. That is the very opposite of sustainable.

But still within the pl psr/ffp rules

 

[Shirley]

Ask them who is the assigned reporter for City, because it seems Stone attends all our press conferences.

He also gets to ask the first question

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

But still within the pl psr/ffp rules

Which is why they simply aren't fit for purpose.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Would you be able to give any opinion on a realistic situation that would be a "straw that breaks the camels back" type scenario with these clowns?

I'd say the same scenario that nearly sent us into administration in June 2008. They have to pay instalments due on transfers and don't have the available cash. Or they simply run out of cash part way through the year and can't pay wages, HMRC or other suppliers.

 

[waspish]

According to the papers today, Frank will hijack the rags' attempt to take Mbueno to the swamp, if he is appointed as Spurs head coach.

That would be piss funny.

Won't happen because spurs won't pay the wages the rags will unless he is willing to take 100k less

 

[deegee33]

Which is why they simply aren't fit for purpose.

The rags or the financial rules?

 

[Tracking back]

Larry David likes this post.

No pun or plug intended.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The rags or the financial rules?

If your purpose as a football club is to be successful, then it's probably both.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Would you be able to give any opinion on a realistic situation that would be a "straw that breaks the camels back" type scenario with these clowns?

This time next year and still their fans do not require a passport for the 26 / 27 season (apart from those rags travelling to home games, obviously)

 

[Roachy]

I'd say the same scenario that nearly sent us into administration in June 2008. They have to pay instalments due on transfers and don't have the available cash. Or they simply run out of cash part way through the years and can't pay wages, HMRC or other suppliers.

Cheers.

 

[JASR]

Just had a look at their third quarter accounts and, as usual, I look closely at their cashflow statement. That shows the actual cash generated and used by the business over the period, and is generally a more accurate guide to how sustainable a company is, because if you haven't got the cash, you can't pay the bills.

Over the nine months, cash inflow from their normal operating activities was -£27.6m and they paid out a further £230m net, which includes £195m net on players. That means they've gone through nearly £260m cash in 9 months (compared to £205m in the 9 months to March 2024).

They made that shortfall up by a mixture of borrowing (i.e. their overdraft) and the sale of shares (to Scruffy Jim). In the 9 months to March 2024 that involved net inflows of £200m, and that went up to £260m in the same period this year.

They're living beyond their means on borrowed money, a bit like we were prior to the takeover, except their numbers are much bigger. That is the very opposite of sustainable.

 

[deano ou812]

And again strange that the likes of PB can break down the finances of the rags and how they are possibly heading into choppy waters going forward,yet at the moment no articles from any of the hacks on this or how they are avoiding possible sanctions regards PSR or FFP, I wonder why.

 

[hertsblue]

And again strange that the likes of PB can break down the finances of the rags and how they are possibly heading into choppy waters going forward,yet at the moment no articles from any of the hacks on this or how they are avoiding possible sanctions regards PSR or FFP, I wonder why.

There really needs to be a Panorama investigation into the PL and the Rags finances. Twice they have been bailed out by the PL.
1st was years ago when the PL quietly reduced some of the rules inc wage increase % the exact same time the Rags had 4-5 key players contracts up for renewals and also spent heavily ie Maquire in the transfer market. Co-incidence perhaps but the timing was very suspicious and no one in the media picked up the story.
Then last season, after the 3rd huge losses in a row, far over the allowed limit, they were let off with being allowed to put in over the top claims re covid other other stuff.
And of course the token UEFA fine for failing UEFA FFP where the media kept telling us "it was only just over"

 

[halfcenturyup]

Here is a question for any accountants out there (any that are interested, anyway).

I had a look at Red Football's 2024 accounts. It seems the accounts were approved by the board in October, but they were then corrected for an incomplete disclosure, presumably after the auditors noticed, around non-audited subsidiaries.

For some reason, it took four months to make this change and the accounts were approved again in March, with an audit opinion also dated March.

But this is the thing. The accounts don't take into account any developments from October to March. They have been approved in March on the basis of information available in October. And what's more, the auditors have given their opinion in March on the same basis.

They have used an emphasis of matter paragraph to get around it, but isn't that ..... err, unusual. Unusual in the sense of unethical?

Maybe I am out of touch (it's been a while), but that wouldn't have happened in my PwC days ....

 

[give it to gordon]

Here is a question for any accountants out there (any that are interested, anyway).

I had a look at Red Football's 2024 accounts. It seems the accounts were approved by the board in October, but they were then corrected for an incomplete disclosure, presumably after the auditors noticed, around non-audited subsidiaries.

For some reason, it took four months to make this change and the accounts were approved again in March, with an audit opinion also dated March.

But this is the thing. The accounts don't take into account any developments from October to March. They have been approved in March on the basis of information available in October. And what's more, the auditors have given their opinion in March on the same basis.

They have used an emphasis of matter paragraph to get around it, but isn't that ..... err, unusual. Unusual in the sense of unethical?

Maybe I am out of touch (it's been a while), but that wouldn't have happened in my PwC days ....

I miss talking football I struggle with trying to be an accountant and a lawyer.

In my simple brain it's the rags books that should be used psr.
I don't understand how red football Ltd accounts are used instead.

 

[Cumbie Blue]

As explained from a finance bod at work: final straw will be the settlement figure for dual representation for transfer dealings from HMRC. They want paid and will not go away.

They simplified it for me last week. Agents fees are 1 million, paid by the player and tax / NI due at around 60% to HMRC. If the agent acts for the club and the player this drops to around 30%. How? Agent paid 500k by the club which avoids the tax charges (don't ask, I don't know how but it does), 500k by the player that dues are aid on. Now I'm assuming a 50/50 split here, could be more either way

300k paid as opposed to the £600k that should have been per million. Quick google and its around £25 million on agents fees a season around 2020, been a foot note in the accounts for what 3 years so lets assume (dangerous) that its 3 seasons worth and some is exempt as genuine so we'll say £40 million of creative tax avoidance so £20 million to be paid when HMRC says so, not over 100 instalments. Fucked if that bill comes in before 30/6....... tick, tick......