how much is your club in the red...

x in the city

so Rangers are in the red to the tune of a nice £31.1million.

seems every club now is fubared. Is there any links with evidence of clubs and what they own. ?

I think it will make things interesting as if the tabloids are to believed super mega rich duper Man U are now even struggling to compete
It might signal the end of spiraling ridiculous fees and contracts which would not be a bad thing.

Everton, are very much reluctant to do the Leeds United thing and for that I think Moye's should be praised, he has a strict policy at the club.

(ie free or flee..) :rolleyes:

Look at the likes of jo, 19M City, thank you very much sirs.

There are some (rare) exceptions like Fellaini, but he doesn't want the club to run up even worse financial figure's with massive outlaying, and you cant blame him.


Im not having a pip at Liverpool here (well, ok a small one). but it seems they could be the first victims of this.

The jury is still out on Spurs, City and Villa. For starters none have a hope in hell of winning a title, and second they would struggle in the CL.

x in the city

x in the city wrote: »

Im not having a pip at Liverpool here (well, ok a small one). but it seems they could be the first vistims of this.

.

JPA

The jury is still out on Spurs, City and Villa. For starters none have a hope in hell of winning a title, and second they would struggle in the CL

What does this sentence mean in the context of this thread?

dreamers75

St Pats 4 million or so to our owner but in some convuluted way that we avoid licence issues as its on the ownership of the ground and cant be sued/shutdown for it back.

Portsmouth in England would be most likely to not exist soon, just needs one player to go to court for unpaid monies.

Zebra3

Like our shirts, very.

Though we're more in the brown stuff than anything red tbh.

super_furry

Shamrock Rovers - they're in the black.

invincibleirish

Villa are something like £70m+ in the red as of earlier this year, you can probably add another 10-20 million onto that from the summers transfer spending. AFAIK the debt is owed in its entirety to a Randy Lerner company he uses to give the club his money and seeing as he has the club crest tattoed on his arse* then i can't see it becoming an issue unless SKY collapses or some such.


*actually his ankle

Fratton Fred

I don't think Pompey owe an excessive amount, we just don't have any money. There is something very very dodgy going on at the club at the moment. There is even talk of Portsmouth City FC being set up ala manchester and wimbledon.

spockety

x in the city wrote: »

There are some (rare) exceptions like Fellaini, but he doesn't want the club to run up even worse financial figure's with massive outlaying, and you cant blame him.


Im not having a pip at Liverpool here (well, ok a small one). but it seems they could be the first victims of this.

You haven't researched exactly how or why Liverpool have such massive debt, have you?

stovelid

super_furry wrote: »

Shamrock Rovers - they're in the black.

Whatever blah blah blah council built a stadium and put a green and white bow-tie on it blah blah blah 4% blah blah blah

spockety wrote: »

You haven't researched exactly how or why Liverpool have such massive debt, have you?

They've spent more money than they generate in income?

jesus_thats_gre

I don't understand all the excitement about Rangers owing 31 million. Compared to the 250m that Liverpool owe and the 600m that United owe, it's nothing! I know that they don't have anywhere near the same revenues but I would be stunned if 31m sinks them.

Fratton Fred

I guess it depends who they owe 31mil to. If it is their chairman then it won't, if it is the taxman then it well could.

It seems to me that football is going the same way as the Irish economy. The clubs may well now be paying for the boom years.

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I guess it depends who they owe 31mil to. If it is their chairman then it won't, if it is the taxman then it well could.

It seems to me that football is going the same way as the Irish economy. The clubs may well now be paying for the boom years.

I think the problem is David Murray the owner has big debt problems with his company Murray International Holdings (MIH) which is massively in the red - £760m last count.


The story is here http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/scotland/article6897695.ece

It seems MH owns 60% of Rangers.

x in the city

spockety wrote: »

You haven't researched exactly how or why Liverpool have such massive debt, have you?

Their stadium is a non runner, they are looking for (more) investors, they have zero money for players like Torres et al.

mike65

Chelsea "owe" quite a bit potentially. Man Utds PIKs could be about to bite them in the arse.

cson

Come on, if you're going to make claims about other clubs at least back it up with figures. Hell, even provide figures for your own club for a start.

Instant Karma

Man City have zero debt. And I would say the chances of a title in teh next 3 to 5 years is high.

Gavin "shels"

Chelsea and Man Utds combined debt was over £1 billion debt a while back according to a few newspaper articles.

As for Shels, we're in the red overall but that's mainly due to past wrong doings, each year since we've been demoted we've been decreasing our loss each year. We really need to get out of Tolka to pay off all the existing Ollie debts.

antomorro-sei

Watford, financially ****ed, again. :rolleyes:

Think we need to raise £5.5million altho, one of the Russo's will give £1million, I think.

Nemanja91

UTD 700million baby

~Rebel~

stovelid wrote: »

They've spent more money than they generate in income?

I believe pool posted operating profit last season. The problem is the 300+ million which was needlessly dumped on the club by G&H buying in. Pool's debt has nought to do with overspending and all to do with irresponsible ownership (carrying out practices which would be illegal in their home country might i add).

cson

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I believe pool posted operating profit last season. The problem is the 300+ million which was needlessly dumped on the club by G&H buying in. Pool's debt has nought to do with overspending and all to do with irresponsible ownership (carrying out practices which would be illegal in their home country might i add).

+1

I deplore the practice of effectively using the club to buy itself for you.

jesus_thats_gre

cson wrote: »

+1

I deplore the practice of effectively using the club to buy itself for you.

I wish I had of thought of it first I think I would awesome in the directors box

The Volt

Everton's situation is a bad one. Very similar to how Arsenal couldn't get any profit from Highbury, we can'r from Goodison. We've already spent our TV money for next season through ban guarantees. Kenwright is broke to say the least.

x in the city

Voltwad wrote: »

Everton's situation is a bad one. Very similar to how Arsenal couldn't get any profit from Highbury, we can'r from Goodison. We've already spent our TV money for next season through ban guarantees. Kenwright is broke to say the least.

Redevelop Goodison, its a pretty non-brainer.

The newest stand, the park end has the potential to be extended, the capacity can be upped to nearer 46,000+.

Its a short term solution, but better than fook all..

we are still left with 3 odd thousand obstructed views tho....

The Volt

x in the city wrote: »

Redevelop Goodison, its a pretty non-brainer.

The newest stand, the park end has the potential to be extended, the capacity can be upped to nearer 46,000+.

Its a short term solution, but better than fook all..

we are still left with 3 odd thousand obstructed views tho....

Which the club charges full whack for. Goodison's redevelopment isn't an option simply due to lack of funds

That_Guy

Newcastle.... No idea.

leninbenjamin

invincibleirish wrote: »

Villa are something like £70m+ in the red as of earlier this year, you can probably add another 10-20 million onto that from the summers transfer spending. AFAIK the debt is owed in its entirety to a Randy Lerner company he uses to give the club his money and seeing as he has the club crest tattoed on his arse* then i can't see it becoming an issue unless SKY collapses or some such.

Chelsea are in a similar situation. I think that's done for tax avoidance purposes, i.e. the clubs would face a hefty tax bill if that loan is forgiven.

Bandit12

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

I don't understand all the excitement about Rangers owing 31 million. Compared to the 250m that Liverpool owe and the 600m that United owe, it's nothing! I know that they don't have anywhere near the same revenues but I would be stunned if 31m sinks them.

Liverpool owe 265m and Manchester United owe almost 700m. Both are hoping for a sugar daddy billionaire owner. Rangers owe 31m and are only hoping for a lotto winner.

CHD

mike65 wrote: »

Chelsea "owe" quite a bit potentially. Man Utds PIKs could be about to bite them in the arse.

We were given the money, sure its a present, pay it back when we have it

DazMarz

Mr Blue: How many dicks is that?
Mr White: A lot

smog

That_Guy wrote: »

Newcastle.... No idea.

NUFC's debt – displayed as net current liabilities – is £22.6m and the club last year made a loss of £20.3m as of Jan 09.

Everything that Ashley puts in is added to this figure so who knows what it is now nearly a year later

Seaneh

A.C. Milan, - Debt; Zero. Club is run at a massive loss though, expenditure is something like 147% of turnover.

We are also owned by Satan.

Xavi6

Maybe all the debt ridden clubs can send our sheikh a friendly letter asking for a bail out. He could cover it all using his interest alone :cool:

Fenix

To be fair, City and Chelsea are sitting pretty now, but the minute the sugar daddy gets bored.... :eek:

CHD

Fenix wrote: »

To be fair, City and Chelsea are sitting pretty now, but the minute the sugar daddy gets bored.... :eek:

And sells it on to another sugar daddy then they will be sitting just as pretty. Really think they'd just leave?

Fenix

Just saying, a lot of teams are in bad shape, but potentially worse are the likes of City and Chelsea if thier owner gets bored. Nothing more, nothing less.

CHD

Chelsea' loan is interest free and have a good few years to pay back if/when asked for it. The Club would also be sold, so there wouldn't be millions to spend but the club would be grand. I think City have an even sweeter deal and their owner hasn't even noticed the cash he already splashed, mega rich.

event

no idea who much we would be in debt.

seeing as no one knows who really owns us, and uncle ken doesnt seem to be telling, there's no real way of knowing

Spiritoftheseventies

x in the city wrote: »

so Rangers are in the red to the tune of a nice £31.1million.

seems every club now is fubared. Is there any links with evidence of clubs and what they own. ?

I think it will make things interesting as if the tabloids are to believed super mega rich duper Man U are now even struggling to compete
It might signal the end of spiraling ridiculous fees and contracts which would not be a bad thing.

Everton, are very much reluctant to do the Leeds United thing and for that I think Moye's should be praised, he has a strict policy at the club.

(ie free or flee..) :rolleyes:

Look at the likes of jo, 19M City, thank you very much sirs.

There are some (rare) exceptions like Fellaini, but he doesn't want the club to run up even worse financial figure's with massive outlaying, and you cant blame him.


Im not having a pip at Liverpool here (well, ok a small one). but it seems they could be the first victims of this.

The jury is still out on Spurs, City and Villa. For starters none have a hope in hell of winning a title, and second they would struggle in the CL.

surprise surprise. Liverpool mentioned in first post

Bandit12

bayviewclose wrote: »

surprise surprise. Liverpool mentioned in first post

Well to be fair X in the city is right. liverpool are in a terrible position but when you look at it compared to Man utd's it's actually not anywhere near as bad. Which club is more likely to get a sugar daddy(if ever) is up for debate.

Keano

At May 31st 2008 the club was in debt to the tune of £43.8 million. Of this figure, £3.6 million is owed to Nottingham City Council, and £40.2 million is owed to the Chairman in loans. Not to sure the current situation but I know it has improved.

2009 update: Chairman is on record as saying "sorted out the finances (we are now ostensibly debt free)"

Whatever that means!!

Spiritoftheseventies

Bandit12 wrote: »

Well to be fair X in the city is right. liverpool are in a terrible position but when you look at it compared to Man utd's it's actually not anywhere near as bad. Which club is more likely to get a sugar daddy(if ever) is up for debate.

Rafa says club is worth 500 milllion (from a lower figure when he took over) but Dunphy says thats an inflated figure.
Pool will have no shortage of interested parties when Yanks walk away into the sunset.

anonymous_joe

bayviewclose wrote: »

Rafa says club is worth 500 milllion (from a lower figure when he took over) but Dunphy says thats an inflated figure.
Pool will have no shortage of interested parties when Yanks walk away into the sunset.

From where? Dubai? There's a recession on, dude.

United fan, our debt's somewhere between 400 and 800 million afaik.

Highlighting the utter folly of spending that amount of money to buy a company absolutely maximising its profits in an industry where no team actually makes a profit, because all profit is spent on improving the team...

Spiritoftheseventies

anonymous_joe wrote: »

From where? Dubai? There's a recession on, dude.

United fan, our debt's somewhere between 400 and 800 million afaik.

Highlighting the utter folly of spending that amount of money to buy a company absolutely maximising its profits in an industry where no team actually makes a profit, because all profit is spent on improving the team...

If sheiks can cough up on City and an oil barren/oligarch can cough up on Chelsea, then there is money out there.

Bandit12

anonymous_joe wrote: »

From where? Dubai? There's a recession on, dude.

United fan, our debt's somewhere between 400 and 800 million afaik.

Highlighting the utter folly of spending that amount of money to buy a company absolutely maximising its profits in an industry where no team actually makes a profit, because all profit is spent on improving the team...

AFAIK Man Utd's debt is 680-700m. There is'nt much difference between the way our two clubs have been fooked over aside from United consistently winning things since the glaziers took over so this tends to detract from the size of the debt. Something will have to give at either club very soon as their owners realise it does'nt make good business sense to try and compete with Man City and Chelsea in the long term.

therokerroar

Sunderland supporter and thanks to Ellis Short taking complete control we have very little debt, certainly one of the very few clubs in the Premier League who's financial future is sorted even if the worst happens and we go down again.

We purchased the Stadium of Light for a pittance too and it's now worth about £80m which also helps.

rossie1977

premier league debts in 2007/08 http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/table/2009/jun/03/premier-league-turnover-wages-debt

i think liverpool and man utd fans would be most upset with those considering most of the debt was used to "buy" those clubs, chelsea and arsenal's debt at least was spent on physical assets, players (in chelsea's case) and stadium/apartments (in arsenals case)