Manchester City releases 2023-24 Annual Report | Record £715m revenue, profit of £73m

[chris85mcfc]

I am confused I thought people where saying it’s not mentioned but it’s mentioned above

It's not mentioned in the bit that actually matters!

 

[Silva2021]

Is there a possibility that we have posted these accounts a little later as we waited for the hearing to be over, so we could get our legal team to advise BDO on the hearing/ chances etc. allowing us to have them taken out.

Surely not having them in helps with investment, sponsors etc. for the club.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

OK mate, so showing the corporate world year on year increases in profit isn't important then..

Gotcha.

I have'nt finished.

I only listed 4 of my 5 points.

Corporate price increase were going to be my 5th point.

Gottcha !!

 

[chris85mcfc]

Is there a possibility that we have posted these accounts a little later as we waited for the hearing to be over, so we could get our legal team to advise BDO on the hearing/ chances etc. allowing us to have them taken out.

Surely not having them in helps with investment, sponsors etc. for the club.

Could well be the case.

Fairly certain that they'd have 9 months to publish their accounts, following their accounting year end (30th June 2024), so technically they could have waited another few months.

Does feel as though they've waited until the case has finished so that they can ensure they've got the chance to remove this if that is the advice they've been given by lawyers/legal team.

Either way, auditors wouldn't have signed off without all necessary information, so it does feel positive one way or another.

I'm still waiting to read a sensible alternative view on it.

 

[cheekybids]

But this is the problem isn't it?

People like you who have no idea how to read a financial report, commenting on stuff you don't understand.

I know it sounds harsh, and I doubt you care, but this is how hyperbolic stories start amongst fanbases.

Fancy trying to discuss how we pay Corporation Tax, which is one of the trickier sides of accounting, and then saying you never made it past page one of the annual report.

I’d file his comment under “honest summary” unlike most of the cunts who comment.

 

[Silva2021]

Could well be the case.

Fairly certain that they'd have 9 months to publish their accounts, following their accounting year end (30th June 2024), so technically they could have waited another few months.

Does feel as though they've waited until the case has finished so that they can ensure they've got the chance to remove this if that is the advice they've been given by lawyers/legal team.

Either way, auditors wouldn't have signed off without all necessary information, so it does feel positive one way or another.

I'm still waiting to read a sensible alternative view on it.

I was referring to the fact we seemed to have historically posted in November time.

We also seem to have submitted/ published ours just as the IC has finished.

I think it’s something but as you say there may be another reasoning which is not quite as good news but can’t work it out.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Could well be the case.

Fairly certain that they'd have 9 months to publish their accounts, following their accounting year end (30th June 2024), so technically they could have waited another few months.

Does feel as though they've waited until the case has finished so that they can ensure they've got the chance to remove this if that is the advice they've been given by lawyers/legal team.

Either way, auditors wouldn't have signed off without all necessary information, so it does feel positive one way or another.

I'm still waiting to read a sensible alternative view on it.

@Prestwich_Blue ?

 

[City Raider]

Panic buying will cost us double in the Jan window

I knew he was good but they’ve but him in charge of transfers now as well?!!

 

[ChicagoBlue]

They also state ‘the club was fined £49m for breaking UEFA's FFP rules, of which £32m was suspended.’

I’m sure that was a settlement figure, which also means we didn’t break UEFA FFP rules

The “rule breaking” was the bullshit “non-cooperation” charges, which were mostly suspended as a stick to make you do as they say going forward.

It was NOT a FINANCIAL FAIR PLAY fine, at all. It was related to the case, not for any financial shenanigans!

Words matter.

 

[HelloCity]

The “rule breaking” was the bullshit “non-cooperation” charges, which were mostly suspended as a stick to make you do as they say going forward.

It was NOT a FINANCIAL FAIR PLAY fine, at all. It was related to the case, not for any financial shenanigans!

Words matter.

You’re talking about the 2020 CAS case. He’s talking about the 2014 fine & settlement.