City's 2016 financial results

[Prestwich_Blue]

Doesn't the money from Chinese come into account. How does this affect the figures?

Doesn't impact the profit & loss account at all. It's a balance sheet transaction.

 

[Marvin]

We're bound to save a bit of dosh if we let go of Yaya and Kolarov, who came in when we were offering abnormally large wages.

Which is why they wont go.

Very impressive figures, but then the whole of the Premier League is rolling in money apart from a few basket case clubs. It's not surprising that a cub at the top of the pile has done well out of the richest ever period for successful football clubs and Premier League clubs.

I am surprised that so far City have been unable to pull off the lucrative deals that other clubs have landed. We received much criticism for our Abu Dhabi deals but seems to me that they are undervalued.

 

[dickie davies]

Where's he ever said that? That's just assumed. He will eventually want city and the city group in general to be a money making business if you ask me.

100%

Always about sustainability. There's never been anything said about profit

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/fo...oon-Al-Mubarak-slams-UEFA-over-FFP-punishment

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Doesn't the money from Chinese come into account. How does this affect the figures?

They bought into the holding company so the money doesn't go directly to any club

 

[SWP's back]

Where's he ever said that? That's just assumed. He will eventually want city and the city group in general to be a money making business if you ask me.

Why would he wish to take an income?

He's already in profit on his capital.

Taking an income rather than having profits reinvested for further capital growth makes zero sense for a man whose personal income wouldn't be budged 1% by taking a profit of £50m out of the club.

 

[bugsyblue]

Why would he wish to take an income?

He's already in profit on his capital.

Taking an income rather than having profits reinvested for further capital growth makes zero sense for a man whose personal income wouldn't be budged 1% by taking a profit of £50m out of the club.

Perhaps. I just think it's a tad naive to expect him to never want to take yearly profit from city, despite the capital growth. That will hit a ceiling at some point I imagine.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

Football clubs are trophy assets – you don’t own them to make money (although you can make/lose massive amounts) you own them because of the profile they bring.

It’s like owning the Ritz (in London not the nightclub), you don’t own the Ritz because it makes x% profit you own it because it’s the Ritz and the best hotel in London!

It would not surprise me if our owners inten to hold the club for the next 50 years without ever taking 1p out!

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Perhaps. I just think it's a tad naive to expect him to never want to take yearly profit from city, despite the capital growth. That will hit a ceiling at some point I imagine.

There's a difference between making a profit, which I'm sure ADUG want to do, and taking some or all of that profit out via dividends, which I'm sure they won't be interested in doing.

Unlike our friends in Trafford/Florida/Delaware/The Cayman Islands.

 

[willipp]

Perhaps. I just think it's a tad naive to expect him to never want to take yearly profit from city, despite the capital growth. That will hit a ceiling at some point I imagine.

I'm no expert at all, but is it neccessarily about him making profits directly from the club? Arent they investing in housing around east manchester? I can only imagine how much they will make from that based on the regeneration of the area based on what he has done at City. I imagine the value of the club will be massively over what they payed for it, investments in other areas of east manchester will make them a fortune and the club being profitable looks pretty rosey for them.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Perhaps. I just think it's a tad naive to expect him to never want to take yearly profit from city, despite the capital growth. That will hit a ceiling at some point I imagine.

Im not sure what the end game is but I cant imagine he is ever thinking he will recoup the £1 billion ish he has ploughed into City group even the sale to the Chinese wasn't for money but rather market breaking. This has never been about wealth making he does that with other things like turning over a £1 billion profit on Barclays shares.

 

[moomba]

Im not sure what the end game is but I cant imagine he is ever thinking he will recoup the £1 billion ish he has ploughed into City group even the sale to the Chinese wasn't for money but rather market breaking. This has never been about wealth making he does that with other things like turning over a £1 billion profit on Barclays shares.

I don't really get this billion thing. He spent around £200m buying the club. We've lost maybe £300-400m since the takeover. Take out a fair chunk of the Chinese investment (say £150m) and he's £350-450m down.

Reckon he'll make that back within a decade, and have a billion quid asset for nothing.

Or have I got my sums all wrong.

 

[SWP's back]

Perhaps. I just think it's a tad naive to expect him to never want to take yearly profit from city, despite the capital growth. That will hit a ceiling at some point I imagine.

They want City to be the biggest club in the world. That will only happen with reinvestment of profit. It won't happen is cash is taken out of the club and makes no sense to do so when he has no need for the income.

If in 20 years, we achieve that goal then he may well start to take some out and by then no one will give a fuck.

 

[dickie davies]

Im not sure what the end game is but I cant imagine he is ever thinking he will recoup the £1 billion ish he has ploughed into City group even the sale to the Chinese wasn't for money but rather market breaking. This has never been about wealth making he does that with other things like turning over a £1 billion profit on Barclays shares.

We all know what the end game is
The Premier league is the most watched sports league in the world. No one really knew where Abu Dhabi was before the Sheikh bought City and by owning and investing into what is now a high profile successful Premier League team, this is a huge advertisement for Abu Dhabi, it's companies and it's potential for overseas investments
What has been invested into City cannot be measured against the benefits and profile Abu Dhabi has received since HRH's ownership

 

[SWP's back]

I don't really get this billion thing. He spent around £200m buying the club. We've lost maybe £300-400m since the takeover. Take out a fair chunk of the Chinese investment (say £150m) and he's £350-450m down.

Reckon he'll make that back within a decade, and have a billion quid asset for nothing.

Or have I got my sums all wrong.

He's already got a £2bn asset if the Chinese investment is market rate.

He could only have that asset for nothing if he takes money back out of the club which I can't see him going anywhere near.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Im not sure what the end game is but I cant imagine he is ever thinking he will recoup the £1 billion ish he has ploughed into City group even the sale to the Chinese wasn't for money but rather market breaking. This has never been about wealth making he does that with other things like turning over a £1 billion profit on Barclays shares.

First of all, welcome back to Blighty. Hope you enjoyed your travels.

Whatever the reason for the Chinese deal (and it's far more likely to have been about trading/political relationships between the UAE and China than anything else) it had the benefit that it put a definable value on CFG.

Selling that 13% stake valued the group at £2bn so he has every chance of showing a return on his capital, particularly if the brand value continues to grow.

But as you say, we don't know what the end game is.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Football clubs are trophy assets – you don’t own them to make money (although you can make/lose massive amounts) you own them because of the profile they bring.

It’s like owning the Ritz (in London not the nightclub), you don’t own the Ritz because it makes x% profit you own it because it’s the Ritz and the best hotel in London!

It would not surprise me if our owners inten to hold the club for the next 50 years without ever taking 1p out!

Your thinking is anachronistic. I think you underestimate the commercial power of football in the decades ahead..

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

First of all, welcome back to Blighty. Hope you enjoyed your travels.

Whatever the reason for the Chinese deal (and it's far more likely to have been about trading/political relationships between the UAE and China than anything else) it had the benefit that it put a definable value on CFG.

Selling that 13% stake valued the group at £2bn so he has every chance of showing a return on his capital, particularly if the brand value continues to grow.

But as you say, we don't know what the end game is.

Yeah cheers I had a great time. Life changing as all the gap year people say :)

You dont think The china deal will to be with making Man City the first English club to break in to the money out there then?

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

I don't really get this billion thing. He spent around £200m buying the club. We've lost maybe £300-400m since the takeover. Take out a fair chunk of the Chinese investment (say £150m) and he's £350-450m down.

Reckon he'll make that back within a decade, and have a billion quid asset for nothing.

Or have I got my sums all wrong.

Well I was guessing he stumped up all the cash for the stadium and training facilities as well
He also changed all the debt into shares, now Im not 100% sure how that works but it is around £500 million
I dont care if he has ploughed 29 billion in and none of us should im just saying I dont think he has ever been in this for direct profit off of Man City
All the other money investments the publicity owning it brings is something else

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I don't really get this billion thing. He spent around £200m buying the club. We've lost maybe £300-400m since the takeover. Take out a fair chunk of the Chinese investment (say £150m) and he's £350-450m down.

Reckon he'll make that back within a decade, and have a billion quid asset for nothing.

Or have I got my sums all wrong.

He's not just had to cover losses though. He's had to put in the cash for the various items of capital spend (CFA, new stand, etc) plus front the cash required for transfers.

This financial year could be the first one we don't require any external financing but it was also the year in which we bought KDB, Sterling & Otamendi so had to find about £125m to fund those. I believe we're paying in instalments these days though, which helps our cash flow.

 

[S04]

Well I was guessing he stumped up all the cash for the stadium and training facilities as well
He also changed all the debt into shares, now Im not 100% sure how that works but it is around £500 million
I dont care if he has ploughed 29 billion in and none of us should im just saying I dont think he has ever been in this for direct profit off of Man City
All the other money investments the publicity owning it brings is something else

The issued share capital is £1,3bn... What we got to show for it as shareholders equity is £676m, which simply is all our assets less all our liabilities.
As for what City is worth really, impossible to calculate as investors look at what they think a company might be worth in the future.