City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

Fuzzy80 said:
Whilst I’m sure I’ll get a abuse for this and it is unbelievable what the owners have done.

We have in recent history competed with United on boardcasting and commercial.

Where we struggle to compete is the match day revenue aspect, so with that basically removed for all clubs I would expect us to be above them (especially given the success in CL of both teams that season).

Whilst it makes great reading, a true measurement for me would be next season when matchday is back and I believe United will move back in front.

Regardless of this our owners run business on a level I would struggle to understand, United’s would struggle running a corner shop successfully. This can be seen clearly on the pitch and that’s where it really matters!!
Click to expand...

If there full stadiums last season we would still be above them we will next season too.
 
LucahArchie10 said:
Question for PB or anyone was Torres money in the accounts or will thry be next years?

also if we did dplash out on Kane would that have fucked us in the long run?

So when these cnuts start saying City spending £mmmmmm & Oil money bla bla bla its actually not its Man City spending there own income now after a very very successful season on & off the pitch
Surely next years accounts will be even better with this seasons results & new sponsorship from Dubai?
Now for our final piece of the jigsaw signing Haaland yes please
Click to expand...
Torres not in the accounts as they are to the 30th June 2021
 
Remember that last season was an exceptional season for City. We got to the CL final.

Man Utd are in our wing mirrors now if they are not in the CL.
 
Marvin said:
Torres not in the accounts as they are to the 30th June 2021
Click to expand...
So we have a great season again 2021-22, sell Ake, Sterling, Porro, Braff, we are also ok to be £30m over spent I think, wages have gone up based on being successfull so for the right reasons that's OK with me although wages have always been mad but winning eases that pain

City could if wanted based on the season & the Dubai 2 new sponsors go balls deep for both Haaland & Rice & still have change??
 
LucahArchie10 said:
Question for PB or anyone was Torres money in the accounts or will thry be next years?

also if we did dplash out on Kane would that have fucked us in the long run?

So when these cnuts start saying City spending £mmmmmm & Oil money bla bla bla its actually not its Man City spending there own income now after a very very successful season on & off the pitch
Surely next years accounts will be even better with this seasons results & new sponsorship from Dubai?
Now for our final piece of the jigsaw signing Haaland yes please
Click to expand...
These results are last season which ended 30-Jun-21 and hence pre torres, grealish, kane

Key changes this season:
Torres money is in this season at an approx profit of £40m.
Grealish transfer fee is in this season at an approx £(17)m cost.
Assume net nil on salaries with Aguero (and others) out, Grealish in (and new contracts).
Stadiums back with fans so extra £60m revenue but will come with costs so assume m to profit.
Last year benefitted by every domestic game being televised and extra games from delayed 19/20 season, so revert to 2 years ago and lose around £(20)m.

There may be other key movements that others are aware of but this years results we should be slightly up if we repeat last years success and hence probably could have afforded Kane and still turned a breakeven result.

However UEFA revenues are critical.
Last year we get to final and receive £115m
18/19 we got to qf and received £85m
 
Some results to beat 18/19 revenue yet lose out on c£40m of Matchday income… next year we go again. This club has been fantastically well run it has to be said. Notwithstanding the Covid-19 profit hit most clubs faced.
 
LucahArchie10 said:
So we have a great season again 2021-22, sell Ake, Sterling, Porro, Braff, we are also ok to be £30m over spent I think, wages have gone up based on being successfull so for the right reasons that's OK with me although wages have always been mad but winning eases that pain

City could if wanted based on the season & the Dubai 2 new sponsors go balls deep for both Haaland & Rice & still have change??
Click to expand...
The 2 sponsor are worth less than a million each. Braaf will fetch nothing. Porro is worth 8m. Why would we sell Ake? Sterling maybe but who can afford him.
 
DorisBlue said:
These results are last season which ended 30-Jun-21 and hence pre torres, grealish, kane

Key changes this season:
Torres money is in this season at an approx profit of £40m.
Grealish transfer fee is in this season at an approx £(17)m cost.
Assume net nil on salaries with Aguero (and others) out, Grealish in (and new contracts).
Stadiums back with fans so extra £60m revenue but will come with costs so assume m to profit.
Last year benefitted by every domestic game being televised and extra games from delayed 19/20 season, so revert to 2 years ago and lose around £(20)m.

There may be other key movements that others are aware of but this years results we should be slightly up if we repeat last years success and hence probably could have afforded Kane and still turned a breakeven result.

However UEFA revenues are critical.
Last year we get to final and receive £115m
18/19 we got to qf and received £85m
Click to expand...
Re CL money
We should be up on this compared to the same stage of last season
This year we entered as league champions which pays an extra 10% of the initial money
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
It has. This line caught my eye:

An impairment charge of £18.7m has been recognised based on an assessment of first team players that are not expected to be a member of the first team playing squad.

I wonder who that could be referring to?
Click to expand...
Does saying we don't expect the player in question to not be part of the squad suggest that we think he won't be coming back inferring we think he will be otherwise engaged for the next 10 years? That can't help his case and could influence the outcome if his own employer have basically found him guilty.
In theory, if he was free in summer he would be back with the 1st team squad.
 
117 M34 said:
Does saying we don't expect the player in question to not be part of the squad suggest that we think he won't be coming back inferring we think he will be otherwise engaged for the next 10 years? That can't help his case and could influence the outcome if his own employer have basically found him guilty.
In theory, if he was free in summer he would be back with the 1st team squad.
Click to expand...
City may have already paid him off
 
117 M34 said:
Does saying we don't expect the player in question to not be part of the squad suggest that we think he won't be coming back inferring we think he will be otherwise engaged for the next 10 years? That can't help his case and could influence the outcome if his own employer have basically found him guilty.
In theory, if he was free in summer he would be back with the 1st team squad.
Click to expand...
Was he charged last year (this is the financial year prior?) or depending on the outcome we will be pursuing claiming that back for breach of contract etc?
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:

Online
MonsLibpool​

  • Legacy Fan
  • *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
  • Posts: 1,558
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
xx.gif

Re: Man City - the Lisbon Lyons, the Porto Pussycats, the Faro Financial Fairplayers​

« Reply #19830 on: Today at 05:22:53 pm »

I'm a professional accountant and I don't normally bother about the financial statements of clubs. There is absolutely no way these should turn a profit last season in "normal circustances".

They pay big wages and spent big money last season and their matchday revenue was insignificant because games were being played behind closed doors. However, common sense doesn't seemingly apply to these oil clubs because it's dodgy and should ordinarily alert regulators.

I'll give their account a read and revert.

We’re fucked. RAWK have an accountant on the case. Lol.
Click to expand...
Anyone who describes themselves tautologically as a ‘professional accountant’ manifestly isn’t at the top of his or her…err..profession.
 
117 M34 said:
Does saying we don't expect the player in question to not be part of the squad suggest that we think he won't be coming back inferring we think he will be otherwise engaged for the next 10 years? That can't help his case and could influence the outcome if his own employer have basically found him guilty.
In theory, if he was free in summer he would be back with the 1st team squad.
Click to expand...
I suspect his contract will be cancelled regardless of the outcome
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top