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

[halfcenturyup]

Morning all,

Unsure if this is the done thing/even allowed but we have, just this morning, produced an in-depth, c.7k word analysis of Manchester City's latest accounts - and the wider circumstances of both the club and football generally - which you can read here if of interest:

Club financial analysis: Manchester City FC 2023/24

Game State's analysis of Manchester City FC's 2023/24 financial results.

gamestate.substack.com

Thoughts/critiques always welcome

All the best

GS

Analysis is fine, but if I was to give advice: don't supplement your analysis with bullshit conspiracies.

People don't believe Newton Investments is a wholly-owned private Mansour investment vehicle?

People are suspicious of the number and amount of AD sponsorships?

People don't believe City earn more than United or Liverpool?

City benefitted from pre-FFP spending but now other clubs can't?

And, worst of all, asterisks?

None of those add much to your analysis, other than as a nod to rival fans neuroses, which was presumably the point. Shame.

 

[Maly]

Morning all,

Unsure if this is the done thing/even allowed but we have, just this morning, produced an in-depth, c.7k word analysis of Manchester City's latest accounts - and the wider circumstances of both the club and football generally - which you can read here if of interest:

Club financial analysis: Manchester City FC 2023/24

Game State's analysis of Manchester City FC's 2023/24 financial results.

gamestate.substack.com

Thoughts/critiques always welcome

All the best

GS

If you’d kept to facts instead of giving us your daft opinions, it wouldn’t have been bad mate

Shame. Check out BlueBrain or Swiss Ramble to see how professionals do it

 

[cheekybids]

Analysis is fine, but if I was to give advice: don't supplement your analysis with bullshit conspiracies.

People don't believe Newton Investments is a wholly-owned private Mansour investment vehicle?

People are suspicious of the number and amount of AD sponsorships?

People don't believe City earn more than United or Liverpool?

City benefitted from pre-FFP spending but now other clubs can't?

And, worst of all, asterisks?

None of those add much to your analysis, other than as a nod to rival fans neuroses, which was presumably the point. Shame.

The analysis was very good & then he ignored what the evidence was showing with innuendo.

Record TV revenue - maybe commercial partners want their brand on the telly box.

Only premier league club to qualify for champions league for the last 14 years - maybe commercial partners want to be associated with the champions league than minor competition.

Treble winner, super cup, World Cup & 4 in a row, Ballon Dor winner, Premier league player of the year & record goalscoring Viking - maybe commercial partners want their brand associated with success.

 

[W11Nchenko]

Morning all,

Unsure if this is the done thing/even allowed but we have, just this morning, produced an in-depth, c.7k word analysis of Manchester City's latest accounts - and the wider circumstances of both the club and football generally - which you can read here if of interest:

Club financial analysis: Manchester City FC 2023/24

Game State's analysis of Manchester City FC's 2023/24 financial results.

gamestate.substack.com

Thoughts/critiques always welcome

All the best

GS

alright then

your website’s background colour is a bit ugly, and two donation buttons on the same page looks a bit desperate

hope this was helpful

 

[BungleBear]

Morning all,

Unsure if this is the done thing/even allowed but we have, just this morning, produced an in-depth, c.7k word analysis of Manchester City's latest accounts - and the wider circumstances of both the club and football generally - which you can read here if of interest:

Club financial analysis: Manchester City FC 2023/24

Game State's analysis of Manchester City FC's 2023/24 financial results.

gamestate.substack.com

Thoughts/critiques always welcome

All the best

GS

"without successful player trading, the club wouldn’t be profitable. In the last decade, their cumulative operating loss stands at £406 million, or £780,000 a week."

Without player trading City made £105m. City's player trading cost £30m last year, that is why city only made £75m, as only one side of player trading is reflected in the operating profit (buying/amortization) but selling isn't.

How can a £30m loss be successful player trading?

 

[Damocles]

Morning all,

Unsure if this is the done thing/even allowed but we have, just this morning, produced an in-depth, c.7k word analysis of Manchester City's latest accounts - and the wider circumstances of both the club and football generally - which you can read here if of interest:

Club financial analysis: Manchester City FC 2023/24

Game State's analysis of Manchester City FC's 2023/24 financial results.

gamestate.substack.com

Thoughts/critiques always welcome

All the best

GS

A stale and predictable analysis filled with the usual half baked opinions regurgitated by the football pseudo-intelligentsia, that adds no value or any novel thought into the equation

 

[Gordyola]

Morning all,

Unsure if this is the done thing/even allowed but we have, just this morning, produced an in-depth, c.7k word analysis of Manchester City's latest accounts - and the wider circumstances of both the club and football generally - which you can read here if of interest:

Club financial analysis: Manchester City FC 2023/24

Game State's analysis of Manchester City FC's 2023/24 financial results.

gamestate.substack.com

Thoughts/critiques always welcome

All the best

GS

In turn, it provided a base from which the club could spring forward, in a manner clubs nowadays can’t. The obvious example here is Newcastle United, whose own state ownership cannot be fully exploited as a result of the rulings put in place ostensibly as a result of City’s mammoth spending in the early 2010s. Whether that’s right or wrong is another matter, but it’s hard to deny City have benefited from both lax regulation then and tightening restrictions now.

This is not unique to City lots of clubs benefited from investment from external sources Liverpool had investment from the Moores family when in second division obscurity

City are one of just two EPL clubs to top £300 million in commercial revenue, the other being local rivals United. Seeing City lead United in this income stream, by £42 million no less, is jarring, particularly when we consider the long-known global appeal of United. City’s appeal has obviously grown too following years of on-field success, but there’s a reason many raise any eyebrow at the club’s commercial figures.

Care to explain more as to the raised eyebrow?

Perhaps the starkest way to highlight City’s huge commercial income in recent years is to look at clubs’ combined turnover across the last decade. Here, United come out on top, generating nearly £2.7 billion. That’s not really a surprise, but what is is that City are only around £130 million behind them. The gap to third-placed Liverpool is £773 million, or nearly £80 million a season for 10 years

Would this not be explained by the unprecedented onfield success?

A noteworthy point here is how City’s wage bill was growing rapidly until 2013, the year City Football Group was incorporated. Though no wrongdoing is suggested, it’s notable that the club’s wage bill dropped them, likely due to them being able to charge some administrative salaries centrally.
City’s other expenses rose to a club record too, hitting £190 million, a £15 million and eight per cent increase on 2023. Pretty much all of that increase came in the ‘other external charges’ category, the definition of which is murky but doubtless includes costs recharged from CFG to the club for services provided. Other expenses have risen by nearly 50 per cent in just two years for City.

So ultimately the drop off in salary costs are recharged by Group

Manchester City received no funding from shareholders last season (contentious sponsorship deals aside)

What contentious deals?

Also ADUG has had a name change to Newton Investments

So, overall a well constructed analysis and put together well, prefer the format to Swiss Rambles spreadsheet look
Spoilt by the usual rhetoric when discussing City's finances and the few digs at the end about the derby which I don't think are relevant but hey-ho

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Morning all,

Unsure if this is the done thing/even allowed but we have, just this morning, produced an in-depth, c.7k word analysis of Manchester City's latest accounts - and the wider circumstances of both the club and football generally - which you can read here if of interest:

Club financial analysis: Manchester City FC 2023/24

Game State's analysis of Manchester City FC's 2023/24 financial results.

gamestate.substack.com

Thoughts/critiques always welcome

All the best

GS

Would have been a decent analysis if you'd stuck to the figures. But there's plenty of snide and unfounded digs in that piece, which totally undermines it.

How can you not understand that the most consistently successful English club by some considerable distance over the last 10+ seasons will have the highest commercial revenues? And you cast doubt over where the non-Abu Dhabi revenues come from but all you need to do is look at the relevant part of the official site, where there's a list of global and regional sponsors, the majority unconnected to our owner or the UAE.

These sponsors pay for their names to be seen during PL & CL games and regardless of united's history, they get that from City currently.

Also you say our matchday revenues are behind united, Liverpool and the London clubs, which is true. But OT and Anfield have bigger capacities currently, at 75k and nearly 62k respectively. On a pro-rata basis we're therefore pretty comparable.

Ticket pricing is not just a City problem, as you seem to imply. While many of us aren't happy about City's approach to ticket pricing, City have at least retained major concessions for younger and older fans, whereas other clubs haven't. Over-65's like me py jut 50% of the full price for our season tickets and we also offer a far wider range of season ticket prices than any other major club. You can pay anything from £315 up to nearly £1,500 for a normal season ticket at the Etihad.

Stick to the facts please, rather than unfounded speculation and your analysis will go down much better. Carry on being snide though, and you can fuck right off.

 

[Maly]

In turn, it provided a base from which the club could spring forward, in a manner clubs nowadays can’t. The obvious example here is Newcastle United, whose own state ownership cannot be fully exploited as a result of the rulings put in place ostensibly as a result of City’s mammoth spending in the early 2010s. Whether that’s right or wrong is another matter, but it’s hard to deny City have benefited from both lax regulation then and tightening restrictions now.

This is not unique to City lots of clubs benefited from investment from external sources Liverpool had investment from the Moores family when in second division

Sounds like a United fan on the wind up having read it again

But this part always amuses me

Remember the £13.5m team we spanked 5-1?

That money was borrowed from the banks & if memory servers (cba checking), equated to 84% of their turnover across the 2 years they splurged that cash in tte late 80’s

Imagine us spending 84% of our turnover on players in the next 2 seasons ;)

 

[Damocles]

This is good if anyone wants a proper analysis btw from a non-City fan

Manchester City FC: 2023/24 Financial Results

Overview of P&L, Investment, Cash Flow, and Debt

gregcordell.substack.com