It's weird for me, as arsenal will always be our biggest rivalry, and yet I would never want them to dissolve into oblivion.......chelsea, on the other hand, I would quite happily piss on their corporate grave stone!
That is crazy talk - the only possible metric I can find in which they exceed Bayern is in number of twatter followers (and that's besides lagging miles behind in every other social media platform.......and we all know the sort of plebian reprobate that twatter attracts).
It's worth contextualising this against the competition. Not many PL clubs have anywhere near the leeway that we have, and most are in a somewhat awkward predicament that will entail them selling off assets in the final few weeks of this coming June........in that context, a stable position has...
I'll try to be brief and simple - hold the cheeky comments :cautious: :shifty: :D
You're on the right lines, but not exactly - the P&S tables are notoriously difficult to lay in a manner that's comprehendable.
What it is saying is that (purely for P&S purposes) we have a profit of £103m...
Do you not think more money and better squads are two sides of the same coin? We need a better squad, and therefore require more money.......how we get that money is a combination of commercial nouse and prioritising resource expenditure where it is most profitable.
Besides, in that same time...
It's worth understanding that depreciation is purely a balance sheet adjustment (and not cashflow affecting)......and one that isn't quite as simple as you might imagine when you have commercial assets that appreciate or depreciate at varying rates.
Tottenham will set out their accounting policy...
Swiss Ramble correctly identifies it at 46%?
Are you referring to the squad cost ratio of 60% for UEFA rules? If so, then that includes player amortisation and impairment costs as well as wages.
Worth noting that Profit & Sustainability is a rolling 3 year period, so the P&S headroom of £208m will reduce substantially as we'll lose the £86m from the Covid period (which averaged out 2020 and 2021 and introduced some leeway). However, we still have a lot of headroom moving...
That has Tottenham Hotel written all over it - linked to the club a 180 room hotel could increase revenue by ~£10m+ a year, especially linked to conference and events at the stadium. Combine it with residential apartments and you could get a lot of the initial capital investment back on sale of...
It's quite often done with untraded shares with the ultimate owner underwriting the new share release......that way, they can increase market capitalisation without actually diluting ownership.
Perhaps it is curious that it all comes at a time when Joe Lewis was under investigation and...
A lot depends on how they structure any investment.
Simplified:
If they are looking to increase Capital then it would probably not be ordinary shares - purely selling existing shares does not increase capital and the issue of new ordinary shares would dilute ownership as well as reduce the...
Not if there is better use of that Capital elsewhere........as long as the rates are secure, then it would be daft to pay it down at the moment, at least until inflation settles (all about the NPV/NPC).
If our gearing is at a low rate, then they would be mad to pay it down during a period of high inflation - it's a bit like your mortgage, in that it will be inflated away as a percentage of income.
A loan in itself is perfectly acceptable for P&S (up to £35m a year).....however, interest would normally be charged against the clubs accounts at market rates, and they would be unable to spend it without increasing income by an equitable amount - that is why Newcastle have some unstuck (with...
I'm not certain, but I suspect that isn't a loan in the traditional sense, but leveraged ownership - (very simplified) a company borrows money to buy the club, and once bought, they effectively transfer the loan into the clubs name......the interest on the loan then becomes a charge against the...
I believe Chelsea are a PLC (albeit through a diverse corporate structure), which in essence is a legal entity in it's own right. Deemed "ownership" by whoever buys the shares in that company is irrelevent.....so I don't really see why chelsea fans and the press keep quoting "previous owners" as...
A reminder to those browsing without an account, it's quick and easy to Register Here. Come and join the fun!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.