15/16 financial results - £20.5m profit announced

[Kinkys Left Foot]

I'm not an Accountant sage by any means but does anyone who is think that the lack of growth in the Commercial Sector this year will be addressed in the next years accounts?
I don't think the ever so small rise this year is an accident and gives the bean counters much more room for manoeuvre or wiggle room next year.
I feel we may well be in a position to self-fund the North Stand Expansion if we address the Etihad deal and kit deal as well as new substantial commercial sponsors as opposed to having it funded by our owner. FFP was the main reason last time as it didn't include infrastructure expenditure in the numbers, as it still doesn't.

 

[Golden Silva]

For those interested, Swiss Ramble has done his usual insightful review of City’s financial numbers.

There is a conspicuous lack of comments from wannabe Gooner accountants!! It looks like there is finally an acceptance that they have lost the battle!! I, for one, miss them :)

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/manchester-city-my-aim-is-true.html#comment-form

 

[christened at st marks]

 

[waspish]

Brilliantly Explained.

 

[oakiecokie]

A brilliantly easily explained post to help most fans understand the financial workings of our Club.

 

[OB1]

IAS would class it as a sale on the date it was activated. You could be creative and count it earlier but we didn't have a reason to imo.

Have you got a reference to an IAS or IFRS to back that up?

I don't think FRS102 would lead to your conclusion.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

That's really excellent. Covers the key points brilliantly.

 

[Kinkladze 1]

What a fantastic illustration! Well done Joe.

 

[aguero93:20]

Have you got a reference to an IAS or IFRS to back that up?

I don't think FRS102 would lead to your conclusion.

It would be IAS37 bud, they're not delaying the cash part of the transaction but the purchase/sale, there's enough of a likelihood of it becoming income to count it as a contigent asset, but if the other party is moving the purchase to a different accounting period we really shouldn't be counting it as income in earlier periods imo. We could if we needed to, but looking at the last two sets of reports we haven't needed to.

 

[jrb]

OK, it's the Daily Star via News Now, but they are reporting City want and are after a new kit deal, comparable to what other club's have recently signed.

So the Etihad club are already looking ahead and know that their replica shirt sales of 370,000 last year, the fourth highest in the Premier League, makes them an attractive proposition.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/fo...ter-City-look-to-tie-up-mega-bucks-shirt-deal