| Championship spending - we're top of the league! 09:40 - Jun 7 with 12718 views | Ashdown_Ranger |
In terms of profit for 2016-17, according to Deloittes.
Blimey, are we doing things right at last!!!???
|  | | |  |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 01:31 - Jun 10 with 2820 views | timcocking |
And yet our management was sacked... |  | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 07:35 - Jun 10 with 2790 views | WokingR |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 21:43 - Jun 7 by Bluce_Ree |
I miss Rob Green. |
Surely you were quoting him?
"I miss."
Signed Rob Green |  | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 07:43 - Jun 10 with 2784 views | distortR |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 18:48 - Jun 9 by 1JD |
Let me play this back to you... you are saying Deloitte, one of the worlds leading accountancy firms, are wrong with their figures. And yet you must be right with your back of the fag packet guestimations.
The information is correct, you are the one that is wrong. Fact, not opinion. Either understand finances, and understand FFP, or simply don’t comment so outlandishly on a topic you so clearly know so very little about! !
There is a saying “Engage brain before opening mouth”.... [Post edited 9 Jun 2018 18:50]
|
And you're telling us that accountancy firms tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?! |  | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 08:33 - Jun 10 with 2756 views | 1JD |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 07:43 - Jun 10 by distortR |
And you're telling us that accountancy firms tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?! |
Lol I’ll give you that one! 😂😂😂
But in all seriousness, in this instance yes....It’s pretty clear the figures are correct if you have an appreciation of business finance.
What I find incredible is the utterance of fact, in the complete absence of knowledge.
In this case, pointing out the figures are indeed “clearly wrong”, in the main due to a complete lack of insight. Quite the opposite is true! | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 10:06 - Jun 10 with 2677 views | JamesB1979 |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 08:33 - Jun 10 by 1JD |
Lol I’ll give you that one! 😂😂😂
But in all seriousness, in this instance yes....It’s pretty clear the figures are correct if you have an appreciation of business finance.
What I find incredible is the utterance of fact, in the complete absence of knowledge.
In this case, pointing out the figures are indeed “clearly wrong”, in the main due to a complete lack of insight. Quite the opposite is true! |
On the other hand I have seen similar tables stating that we were in the top 10 most in debted clubs in Europe. Figures of nearly 300m.....yet actual figure is less than 10m (including cash). | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 12:11 - Jun 10 with 2634 views | 1JD |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 10:06 - Jun 10 by JamesB1979 |
On the other hand I have seen similar tables stating that we were in the top 10 most in debted clubs in Europe. Figures of nearly 300m.....yet actual figure is less than 10m (including cash). |
Yeah from tabloids like the sun..and the daily mail. Written by misinformed journos who are paid to generate stories via click bait, not professional accountants like Deloitte whose entire reputation is based on professionalism, accuracy, etc. Huge difference
FWIW: actual figure of debt is not 10m. It’s circa 50m. And approx 4m is owed a bank but the majority is all shareholder debt. Approx 250m of debt has been accumulated by the owners since taking over, much of which has been written off (60m) and converted to shares, leaving about 50m remaining current day. | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 12:16 - Jun 10 with 2628 views | JamesB1979 |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 12:11 - Jun 10 by 1JD |
Yeah from tabloids like the sun..and the daily mail. Written by misinformed journos who are paid to generate stories via click bait, not professional accountants like Deloitte whose entire reputation is based on professionalism, accuracy, etc. Huge difference
FWIW: actual figure of debt is not 10m. It’s circa 50m. And approx 4m is owed a bank but the majority is all shareholder debt. Approx 250m of debt has been accumulated by the owners since taking over, much of which has been written off (60m) and converted to shares, leaving about 50m remaining current day. |
Shareholder loans are not net debt. | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 12:20 - Jun 10 with 2626 views | JamesB1979 |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 12:11 - Jun 10 by 1JD |
Yeah from tabloids like the sun..and the daily mail. Written by misinformed journos who are paid to generate stories via click bait, not professional accountants like Deloitte whose entire reputation is based on professionalism, accuracy, etc. Huge difference
FWIW: actual figure of debt is not 10m. It’s circa 50m. And approx 4m is owed a bank but the majority is all shareholder debt. Approx 250m of debt has been accumulated by the owners since taking over, much of which has been written off (60m) and converted to shares, leaving about 50m remaining current day. |
Just to make it clear for you. 11m gross debt in 2017 accounts and 4m gross debt in 2018 accounts. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 13:38 - Jun 10 with 2569 views | terryb |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 18:48 - Jun 9 by 1JD |
Let me play this back to you... you are saying Deloitte, one of the worlds leading accountancy firms, are wrong with their figures. And yet you must be right with your back of the fag packet guestimations.
The information is correct, you are the one that is wrong. Fact, not opinion. Either understand finances, and understand FFP, or simply don’t comment so outlandishly on a topic you so clearly know so very little about! !
There is a saying “Engage brain before opening mouth”.... [Post edited 9 Jun 2018 18:50]
|
And yet the accounts lodged with Companies House show a loss of £6.4 million for the year ending 31/5/17 for QPR Holdings Ltd.
How does the near £10 million difference occur?
I'm not saying that Deloiitte are wrong. I just don't understand this discrepancy! | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 14:45 - Jun 10 with 2533 views | 1JD |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 12:20 - Jun 10 by JamesB1979 |
Just to make it clear for you. 11m gross debt in 2017 accounts and 4m gross debt in 2018 accounts. |
And herein lies the original point which seems to have been lost on you.... Net vs gross. Same for the P&L. Just to make it clear to you. Lol 😂 | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 14:57 - Jun 10 with 2530 views | 1JD |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 13:38 - Jun 10 by terryb |
And yet the accounts lodged with Companies House show a loss of £6.4 million for the year ending 31/5/17 for QPR Holdings Ltd.
How does the near £10 million difference occur?
I'm not saying that Deloiitte are wrong. I just don't understand this discrepancy! |
Terry, this is why finances are a right ol confusing malarkey...Accounting practices are often designed to confuse at will. Main point to look at from a financial health POV is cash from operations. Actual money that is changing hands, and whether we are generating cash or losing it, (not accounting practices e.g. GAAP, FFP), which is what Deloitte have zeroed in on.
Simply put, if one cannot pay its annual expenses, it’s losing money - which needs to be found from somewhere else I.e. debt and loans. The point is, we are now making money, so do not need to be bankrolled by owners cash (and increase out debt levels as a result). In other words, we are self-sustainable. At least for now, but things also looking good in the future post parachute era.
A remarkable turnaround! | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 15:55 - Jun 10 with 2502 views | JamesB1979 |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 14:45 - Jun 10 by 1JD |
And herein lies the original point which seems to have been lost on you.... Net vs gross. Same for the P&L. Just to make it clear to you. Lol 😂 |
Suggest you speak to Deloittes and they’ll explain it to you. Gross debt excludes cash, net debt is afte cash. So our net debt is less than 4m today.
And the write off of shareholder loan was to have a p&l impact for FFP. It nothing to do with the the balance sheet and net debt position. | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 16:32 - Jun 10 with 2477 views | DylanP |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 18:48 - Jun 9 by 1JD |
Let me play this back to you... you are saying Deloitte, one of the worlds leading accountancy firms, are wrong with their figures. And yet you must be right with your back of the fag packet guestimations.
The information is correct, you are the one that is wrong. Fact, not opinion. Either understand finances, and understand FFP, or simply don’t comment so outlandishly on a topic you so clearly know so very little about! !
There is a saying “Engage brain before opening mouth”.... [Post edited 9 Jun 2018 18:50]
|
Well that was a dickish post, wasn't it?
There is a saying "don't post dickish posts" |  |
| |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 17:53 - Jun 11 with 2315 views | Ashdown_Ranger |
OK, Nottingham Forest, third highest spenders in the Championship in 2016-17 (a reported loss of £21.9m, finishing 21st) according to Deloittes are apparently on the verge of signing Benfica midfielder Joao Carvalho for a club-record fee of £10m...
FFP, FFS !??
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44444089 | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 18:28 - Jun 11 with 2297 views | rsonist |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 17:53 - Jun 11 by Ashdown_Ranger |
OK, Nottingham Forest, third highest spenders in the Championship in 2016-17 (a reported loss of £21.9m, finishing 21st) according to Deloittes are apparently on the verge of signing Benfica midfielder Joao Carvalho for a club-record fee of £10m...
FFP, FFS !??
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44444089 |
FFP doesn't stop you from getting yourself into trouble in the first place... I agree it appears a completely reckless all-or-nothing move.
Carvalho and the other kid they're supposedly bringing in are Mendes clients (as is Karanka their manager). Looks like he's got a taste for Championship desperation brokering now. Part of me is glad the FL don't get to sweep the rotten Wolves situation last year (and their disgusting adjudication that Mendes is not a relevant party) under the carpet... not that they'll do anything mind.
The other kid's transfer is also following the Wolves model of season loan paid off on promotion, designed explicitly to get round FFP... |  | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 18:46 - Jun 11 with 2283 views | qprd |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 18:48 - Jun 9 by 1JD |
Let me play this back to you... you are saying Deloitte, one of the worlds leading accountancy firms, are wrong with their figures. And yet you must be right with your back of the fag packet guestimations.
The information is correct, you are the one that is wrong. Fact, not opinion. Either understand finances, and understand FFP, or simply don’t comment so outlandishly on a topic you so clearly know so very little about! !
There is a saying “Engage brain before opening mouth”.... [Post edited 9 Jun 2018 18:50]
|
I think I know finance, and FFP (FFP is not relevant at all to the conversation, but whatever).
But more relevantly, i have another skill: I can use the Google machine on my computer. I suggest you google QPR's companies house page. Their annual financial statements are public record.
Take a look at page 7. QPR recorded a loss of 6.4m
Take a look at page 6. QPR's auditor, in its capacity as accountant, provided a signed opinion as to the accuracy of the financial statements. The auditor actually bears some liability for messing up the opinion.
Deloitte did not audit QPR's financial statements. The Big 4 (Deloitte, ey, etc) are professional services firsm who do a lot of random crap that is totally unrelated to accountancy. You can hire companies Deloitte to do consulting, manage diversity at your workplace, fix your IT systems or hand out envelopes at the Oscars as PWC did two years ago. The Deloitte division that prepared any report like this was not the auditing wing, just as an FYI.
Charts that show profit or loss are ultimately kind of useless. The problem with looking at football club's P&L statements has to do with something called depreciation or impairment. I won't bore anyone with the details, but basically it gives clubs a lot of room to wiggle around with their profit and loss statement as they can impair the value of the players they have under contract. Some clubs probably exploit this to "trade losses", which means they carry forward a loss to reduce their tax bill in the future.
The most relevant thing to look at to assess a club's performance is something called EBTIDA.
This is the best source of information on football finances:
http://swissramble.blogspot.com | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 19:04 - Jun 11 with 2263 views | qprd |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 14:57 - Jun 10 by 1JD |
Terry, this is why finances are a right ol confusing malarkey...Accounting practices are often designed to confuse at will. Main point to look at from a financial health POV is cash from operations. Actual money that is changing hands, and whether we are generating cash or losing it, (not accounting practices e.g. GAAP, FFP), which is what Deloitte have zeroed in on.
Simply put, if one cannot pay its annual expenses, it’s losing money - which needs to be found from somewhere else I.e. debt and loans. The point is, we are now making money, so do not need to be bankrolled by owners cash (and increase out debt levels as a result). In other words, we are self-sustainable. At least for now, but things also looking good in the future post parachute era.
A remarkable turnaround! |
JD, i don't want to be a d*ck, but you are saying so many incorrect things that are confusing and likely misleading people.
Just a few statements that you said that are incorrect:
-"Main point to look at from financial health POV is cash from operations"
Yet you referred to the Deloitte study, which looks at profit/loss. This includes non-cash items.
But if you are looking at cash flow from operations, pls refer to page 11 of the accounts. QPR's net cash outflow from operations was 5.95m
-("Not accounting practices e.g., GAAP, FFP)."
FFP is not an accounting practice. GAAP is the accounting standards used in the US, and none of the football's financials were audited under GAAP.
""whether we are generating cash or losing it ... which is what Deloitte have zeroed in on"
False, Deloitte looked at the profit and loss statement, and not at the cash flow statement
"we are now making money, so do not need to be bankrolled by owners cash"
This is naive for a few reasons. Read up on "working capital"; this is why shareholders have to inject cash before the start of the season- because spend cash (i.e. to buy players) before they are realy generating revenue (which only starts once matches are played).
Also, QPR has continued to receive shareholder loans to finance its operations, even after Lee Hoos was hired. This explains why QPRs shareholders ownership keeps changing.
"and increase our debt levels as a result"
Shareholder loans aren't really debt, as was indicated earlier in this thread. If my debt to American Express or the bank that provided me a mortgage comes due and i don't pay, they're going to collect. If a shareholder loan comes due, its very different- in the case of the QPR owners, they just convert the debt into shares. [Post edited 11 Jun 2018 19:13]
| | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 19:10 - Jun 11 with 2247 views | kensalriser |
OK, cards on the table.
Who's a professional/qualified accountant? |  |
| |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 19:16 - Jun 11 with 2240 views | distortR |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 19:10 - Jun 11 by kensalriser |
OK, cards on the table.
Who's a professional/qualified accountant? |
Me. I am. Definitely.
oh, hang on, no, I pick up dog shit for a living. | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 19:17 - Jun 11 with 2231 views | GroveR |
"You can hire companies Deloitte to do consulting, manage diversity at your workplace, fùck your IT systems or hand out envelopes at the Oscars as PWC did two years ago."
FTFY. |  | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 21:17 - Jun 11 with 2172 views | BrianMcCarthy |
It makes for great reading one way or the other. Couldn't be happier with how the club is going off the pitch. |  |
| |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 11:17 - Jun 12 with 2067 views | 1JD |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 18:46 - Jun 11 by qprd |
I think I know finance, and FFP (FFP is not relevant at all to the conversation, but whatever).
But more relevantly, i have another skill: I can use the Google machine on my computer. I suggest you google QPR's companies house page. Their annual financial statements are public record.
Take a look at page 7. QPR recorded a loss of 6.4m
Take a look at page 6. QPR's auditor, in its capacity as accountant, provided a signed opinion as to the accuracy of the financial statements. The auditor actually bears some liability for messing up the opinion.
Deloitte did not audit QPR's financial statements. The Big 4 (Deloitte, ey, etc) are professional services firsm who do a lot of random crap that is totally unrelated to accountancy. You can hire companies Deloitte to do consulting, manage diversity at your workplace, fix your IT systems or hand out envelopes at the Oscars as PWC did two years ago. The Deloitte division that prepared any report like this was not the auditing wing, just as an FYI.
Charts that show profit or loss are ultimately kind of useless. The problem with looking at football club's P&L statements has to do with something called depreciation or impairment. I won't bore anyone with the details, but basically it gives clubs a lot of room to wiggle around with their profit and loss statement as they can impair the value of the players they have under contract. Some clubs probably exploit this to "trade losses", which means they carry forward a loss to reduce their tax bill in the future.
The most relevant thing to look at to assess a club's performance is something called EBTIDA.
This is the best source of information on football finances:
http://swissramble.blogspot.com |
Sorry, D. Here to set the record straight and NOT CONFUSE other readers. As per my original intention.
FFP is entirely relevant and this is what Deloitte DID NOT include in their calculations. You have a very basic understanding of FFP given your comments about the Newcastle transfers. 2+2 does not equal 4 in FFP. Read up on player trading rules.
As per my original comments, the key is in the cash items on the P&L, and not the "NON-CASH" items which includes DEBT (loans), and FFP (depreciation of assets).
Deloitte zoned in on CASH ITEMS and rightly so - it gives a great indication of financial health. Also known as EBIDTA. Earnings before interest tax and depreciation.
The REASON there is a large discrepancy in QPR accounts, and Deloitte accounts, is due to the above.
So, even though you can Google QPRs recorded loss of £6.4m 16/17, I suggest you also Google the term Accounting 101.
Once again, the major takeaway, is that QPR are making MONEY in 16/17 on a cash basis. The "loss" is attributed to FFP rules, and shareholder loans. Both of which are increasingly a moot point given our positive cash outlook, and our reduced transfer dealings.
More here: https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/forum/224358/3-year-pro
Still find it amazing how you insist on calling out an accountancy firm Deloitte figures as wrong, and yet yours are right. Then get in a deeper muddle trying to prove a point. Have you even read their 32 page report? https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/sports-business-group/articles/annual-revi
Listen, I am not interested in arguing, simply interested in highlighting to all QPR fans we are in a positive financial situation. I took umbrage to your post since it was factually incorrect.
As for James- as D would say "whatever" - we have a debt position of circa £50m on the balance sheet, however which way you wish to look at it. At some point it needs to be resolved, probably after promotion to the Premier :) | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 13:12 - Jun 12 with 1996 views | qprd |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 11:17 - Jun 12 by 1JD |
Sorry, D. Here to set the record straight and NOT CONFUSE other readers. As per my original intention.
FFP is entirely relevant and this is what Deloitte DID NOT include in their calculations. You have a very basic understanding of FFP given your comments about the Newcastle transfers. 2+2 does not equal 4 in FFP. Read up on player trading rules.
As per my original comments, the key is in the cash items on the P&L, and not the "NON-CASH" items which includes DEBT (loans), and FFP (depreciation of assets).
Deloitte zoned in on CASH ITEMS and rightly so - it gives a great indication of financial health. Also known as EBIDTA. Earnings before interest tax and depreciation.
The REASON there is a large discrepancy in QPR accounts, and Deloitte accounts, is due to the above.
So, even though you can Google QPRs recorded loss of £6.4m 16/17, I suggest you also Google the term Accounting 101.
Once again, the major takeaway, is that QPR are making MONEY in 16/17 on a cash basis. The "loss" is attributed to FFP rules, and shareholder loans. Both of which are increasingly a moot point given our positive cash outlook, and our reduced transfer dealings.
More here: https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/forum/224358/3-year-pro
Still find it amazing how you insist on calling out an accountancy firm Deloitte figures as wrong, and yet yours are right. Then get in a deeper muddle trying to prove a point. Have you even read their 32 page report? https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/sports-business-group/articles/annual-revi
Listen, I am not interested in arguing, simply interested in highlighting to all QPR fans we are in a positive financial situation. I took umbrage to your post since it was factually incorrect.
As for James- as D would say "whatever" - we have a debt position of circa £50m on the balance sheet, however which way you wish to look at it. At some point it needs to be resolved, probably after promotion to the Premier :) |
I should be spending my time doing something more productive like Wikipediaing the 2006-2007 Middlesborough squad or what teams Bobby Zamora went on loan to in the early 2000s.
In any event, I'll say my peace and just summarize a few points:
EBITDA:
I agree EBITDA is a better financial metric for assessing a club's financial performance. The Deloitte chart referenced does not refer to EBITDA; it does not state the non-cash items are stripped out. It specifically says "profit or loss". I am not sure how you are reaching these conclusions based on what's presented.
The report said that QPR had a profit of 3.5million. Let me assume that you are right, and that Deloitte actually meant EBITDA when it wrote "profit" or "loss".
This is QPR's EBTIDA calculation for the relevant period (in millions GBP)
Income (loss) from continuing operations: (6.4m)
Net finance costs: (5.7m) (from fin expense of (6.04m), net fin income of .4m
Tax: (0.003m)
Depreciation/amortization: 0m
Adding back finance cost, tax and depreciation, QPR's EBITDA for 16-17 was approximately negative .7million. This is pretty good for a football club, but its very different than a profit of 3.4 million.
Also, please note that Newcastle recorded impairment charges of 35m in the relevant period, yet those weren't taken out of the Newcastle information presented in the chart.
In short, you are essentially saying that the chart presented EBITDA (even though it says profit/loss), and that Deloitte excluded certain items for QPR's accounts but not for others like Newcastle.
FFP:
Again, FFP is not relevant in discussing a club's consolidated financial statements. When QPR publishes its financial statements, it is reflecting all financial activity recorded at QPR. For instance, if QPR spends 5 million building a stadium or 7 million on the academy, that is reflected in its P&L and cash flow statement. . If AirAsia pays QPR 1 billion dollars for sponsorship, that is reflected in P&L and cash flow.
However, FFP specifically excludes quite a few things. For instance, amounts spent on an academy are not counted as a loss for purposes of FFP. If Man City fraudulently enters into crazy sponsorship deals with Ethiad to circumvent FFP, those revenues are not counted.
My point is that QPRs financial statements reflect the consolidated business, and don't reflect all of the FFP considerations.
You are arbitrarily saying what is/isn't excluded; we don't know this- its not public information. Deloitte is not in a position to assess what is excluded/included from an FFP perspective.
Random things you're wrong about:
-interest and tax are not necessarily non-cash items, by the way.
-debt does not appear on a P&L; its a balance sheet item
-FFP is not relevant to the discussion of depreciation of assets
-QPR did not make money on a cash basis- they had a cash outflow from operating activities of 5.9m in the relevant period
How you possibly intuit what was or was not excluded from the random Deloitte chart is truly beyond me. There are no footnotes, no explanatory notes. How you try to make these conclusions is reckless
The Deloitte report you linked to does not reference QPRs profit/loss. Pointing to a random chart pulled out of thin air and then sending links to random publications is not a way to support an argument.
QPR's financial outlook is better. Wages are down, transfer fees are down; we're also likely to sell some of our better players. On the flip side, revenues from parachute payments will go away, and attendance figures continue to slide. QPR is much better off now than 1 or 2 years ago, but the chart is not accurate. The future is better, but its still rocky ahead.
Now I am off to wallow on the sad state of my life.... | | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 13:16 - Jun 12 with 1983 views | FDC |
I don't think I've ever seen someone get so defensive over an accountancy firm. |  | | |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 13:25 - Jun 12 with 1949 views | LunarJetman |
| Championship spending - we're top of the league! on 13:16 - Jun 12 by FDC |
I don't think I've ever seen someone get so defensive over an accountancy firm. |
An argument over accountancy really is as boring as you'd expect it would be.... |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
