United Thread 2015/16

[Vienna_70]

I looked at those financial statements quickly and there are some interesting things in there.

5) Servicing their debts is still costing them around £50m a year.

And yet they're still immune from FFPR sanctions.

It doesn't seem right, does it?

 

[dave_blue12]

I looked at those financial statements quickly and there are some interesting things in there.

1) They made a small loss of just under £1.2m, even on that level of turnover.

2) That loss was after a player trading profit of £23.6m and a reduction in staff costs of over £11m.

3) They've reduced staff numbers by over 100 from last year to achieve that reduction in staff costs. That's 1 in 8 staff.

4) They had a refinancing (sale of shares I assume) that raised £272.5m but only used £228m of that to repay debt. So they kept back nearly £45m which I assume was to help their cashflow and pay for players or service their debt.

5) Servicing their debts is still costing them around £50m a year.

6) Player amortisation is up to nearly £100m a year from £55m last year.

It's clear that the year outside the CL hurt them badly, whatever spin they want to put on the figures. Cash appears to have been tight, which is supported by the stories of them paying for players on instalments. Had they not scraped in this season, they'd have really started to feel the pinch. Let's hope Italy take our fourth CL spot and they miss out on a regular basis.

Clearly the failure to qualify for the CL hit them hard reducing both match day and broadcast revenue but with their Adidas and GM sponsorship deals kicking in they are surely set for a big revenue jump in the next set of figs.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

And yet they're still immune from FFPR sanctions.

It doesn't seem right, does it?

If you can service your debts out of profits then there should be no problem. The scandal is that the Glazers were allowed to buy the club in a leveraged transaction and load the debt onto the club. Why that sort of thing wasn't outlawed by FFP is a complete mystery to me as that's the main cause of clubs failing. So if FFP was really about protecting clubs, that's the first thing that should have been tackled. The Glazers would certainly not have been allowed to do that with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. NFL rules only allow franchises to secure £130m of debt on their assets. Any more that that and it has to be unsecured (usually via a securitisation of future revenue).

The Atlanta Falcons were recently granted permission to borrow an extra $850m to help finance a new stadium. The owners had to vote on that and one voted gainst as he thought it was too much of a risk.

 

[-nibz-]

http://www.theguardian.com/football...ed-malcolm-glazer-children-15m-year?CMP=fb_gu

Manchester United to pay Malcolm Glazer’s six children £15m every year

Rising to £20m after 5 appearances.

 

[aguero93:20]

Clearly the failure to qualify for the CL hit them hard reducing both match day and broadcast revenue but with their Adidas and GM sponsorship deals kicking in they are surely set for a big revenue jump in the next set of figs.

Those deals won't be as big if they're not in the Champions League though.

 

[SilverFox2]

I looked at those financial statements quickly and there are some interesting things in there.

1) They made a small loss of just under £1.2m, even on that level of turnover.

2) That loss was after a player trading profit of £23.6m and a reduction in staff costs of over £11m.

3) They've reduced staff numbers by over 100 from last year to achieve that reduction in staff costs. That's 1 in 8 staff.

4) They had a refinancing (sale of shares I assume) that raised £272.5m but only used £228m of that to repay debt. So they kept back nearly £45m which I assume was to help their cashflow and pay for players or service their debt.

5) Servicing their debts is still costing them around £50m a year.

6) Player amortisation is up to nearly £100m a year from £55m last year.

It's clear that the year outside the CL hurt them badly, whatever spin they want to put on the figures. Cash appears to have been tight, which is supported by the stories of them paying for players on instalments. Had they not scraped in this season, they'd have really started to feel the pinch. Let's hope Italy take our fourth CL spot and they miss out on a regular basis.

Hi PB thanks for that breakdown.

It is also worth noting that last years interest charges rose substantially as a result of dollar to pound fluctuations.
MUFC must be the only company that does not set its forward selling / buying of the exchange rate to avoid exactly that fluctuation.

I have always been taught that its hard enough making a profit with your line of business without acting like a bank.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Just looking at the UEFA coefficients and unless they do something spectacular in the CL this season, they could easily be in Pot 3 next season.

Assuming that one of Barca or Real wins La Liga, Bayern win the Bundesliga, PSG win La Ligue and one of us, Arsenal or Chelsea wins the PL. That means one of Barca or Real will be in Pot 2 along with two English clubs, plus probably Atletico Madrid, Dortmund & Valencia and one of Benfica or Porto. If Juve don't win Serie A then that's 8 teams with higher coefficients than them as things stand. If Zenit don't win the Russian league then they have a higher co-efficient as do Napoli & Sevilla.

No easy pickings from that lot.

 

[Vienna_70]

Just looking at the UEFA coefficients and unless they do something spectacular in the CL this season, they could easily be in Pot 3 next season.

Assuming that one of Barca or Real wins La Liga, Bayern win the Bundesliga, PSG win La Ligue and one of us, Arsenal or Chelsea wins the PL. That means one of Barca or Real will be in Pot 2 along with two English clubs, plus probably Atletico Madrid, Dortmund & Valencia and one of Benfica or Porto. If Juve don't win Serie A then that's 8 teams with higher coefficients than them as things stand. If Zenit don't win the Russian league then they have a higher co-efficient as do Napoli & Sevilla.

No easy pickings from that lot.

That's assuming the STCs qualify, of course.

Personally, I think they will, as none of the potential candidates to replace them seems strong enough.

Though Everton have started well and could give them a run for their money.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Prestwich - No worse than City really.

The current ranking points don't include any to be picked up this season. Get out of the group, and both will probably be OK for pot 2. MU are only 6 pts off 16th now, and that will probably do.

 

[KentBlue]

That's assuming the STCs qualify, of course.

Personally, I think they will, as none of the potential candidates to replace them seems strong enough.

Though Everton have started well and could give them a run for their money.

I dare say Michael Oliver and a few others will ensure the rags are 'looked after'.