Latest Accounts

[evertonarntwe]

not the worst thing to read isit, have to wonder if we can get a better sponsor though, £8mill a year is absolute buttons these days... dont united get like 100million just to have there training kit sponsored over a couple of years? ( no saying where anything like united sponsor wise because were obviously not) but either way...

 

[Dymak]

OK so we made a profit but we're not paying down the gross debt with it? If I have a £500 overdraft and win £100 on the horses I've made a profit but unless I put that towards the debt it remains the same.

But the gross debt is increased by £1m to £49m. There hasn't been a reduction in the amount we actually owe others at all.
The £17m we may well have used for Lukaku so it's listed as cash but hasn't it just 'rested'?

The club are reporting that a 17 million pound reduction has been made to our debt, and it has. They also overseen the recruitment of Lukaku, etc. Both things have taken place. We were able to do both of these things because a lucrative return from player sales almost directly coincided with the increase in TV money.

On top of our 28 million pound debt we have this 20 million pound pay-day loan facility, we have had them for years but I imagine they may be increasing in value due to the increase in future TV revenues. Prior accounts had a 45 million pound debt, plus the short-term loans on broadcasting revenues..

Another 60 million, plus extra Europa League money, plus player sales is all on its way. Money should be available to invest.

 

[ianefc]

Luke O'Farrell ‏@lukeofarrell 18m18 minutes ago
Shirt sponsorship highlights commercial gap. Arsenal, Man City, Man Utd, L'pool, Spurs and Chelsea earn more in a year than Everton do in 3.

 

[EverBlue86]

Chang take the Pee I would actually to them give us atleast £12 mil per year/invest in the new stadium or do one

 

[SerenityNigh]

Updated:

 

[SerenityNigh]

Updated:

 

[Visitor22]

The club are reporting that a 17 million pound reduction has been made to our debt, and it has. They also overseen the recruitment of Lukaku, etc. Both things have taken place. We were able to do both of these things because a lucrative return from player sales almost directly coincided with the increase in TV money.

On top of our 28 million pound debt we have this 20 million pound pay-day loan facility, we have had them for years but I imagine they may be increasing in value due to the increase in future TV revenues. Prior accounts had a 45 million pound debt, plus the short-term loans on broadcasting revenues..

Another 60 million, plus extra Europa League money, plus player sales is all on its way. Money should ready and available to invest.

This really isn't the way it works. Company accounts are a snapshot of a single day in the company and net debt is a measure of your ability to pay debts, not a measure of the actual debt. So....


Let's say I have a loan from the bank of £100 and no money in my pocket. My net debt is £100

I work for a day and get paid £100 cash, I still have a loan for £100. My net debt on that day is zero, even though I have not given the money to the bank and paid them the debt.

I decide that I want to spend my cash and buy £100 of Belgian waffles ;-). I still have the debt of £100 to the bank because I did not give them the money to pay back the loan.

On the day I got paid (the snapshot of a single day) I made a profit of £100 and was completely debt-free in net terms. But, am I now any better off than I was before? (except that I had delicious Belgian waffles)

 

[SerenityNigh]

This really isn't the way it works. Company accounts are a snapshot of a single day in the company and net debt is a measure of your ability to pay debts, not a measure of the actual debt. So....


Let's say I have a loan from the bank of £100 and no money in my pocket. My net debt is £100

I work for a day and get paid £100 cash, I still have a loan for £100. My net debt on that day is zero, even though I have not given the money to the bank and paid them the debt.

I decide that I want to spend my cash and buy £100 of Belgian waffles ;-). I still have the debt of £100 to the bank because I did not give them the money to pay back the loan.

On the day I got paid (the snapshot of a single day) I made a profit of £100 and was completely debt-free in net terms. But, am I now any better off than I was before? (except that I had delicious Belgian waffles)

I'm still learning your Britischer accounting language--Net Cash/Debt is the same as Net Assets/Liability?

 

[LinekersLegs]

This really isn't the way it works. Company accounts are a snapshot of a single day in the company and net debt is a measure of your ability to pay debts, not a measure of the actual debt. So....


Let's say I have a loan from the bank of £100 and no money in my pocket. My net debt is £100

I work for a day and get paid £100 cash, I still have a loan for £100. My net debt on that day is zero, even though I have not given the money to the bank and paid them the debt.

I decide that I want to spend my cash and buy £100 of Belgian waffles ;-). I still have the debt of £100 to the bank because I did not give them the money to pay back the loan.

On the day I got paid (the snapshot of a single day) I made a profit of £100 and was completely debt-free in net terms. But, am I now any better off than I was before? (except that I had delicious Belgian waffles)

But to continue your anology, instead of spending the 100 cash on Belgium waffles we have have spent it on a Belgium player - Lukaku. Unlike waffles, which are a depreciating asset, Lukaku is hopefully a rapidly appreciating asset whose sale could potentially be used at a later date to offset that debt.

 

[Azza]

 

[ianefc]

Chang tastes like Pee I would actually to them give us atleast £12 mil per year/invest in the new stadium or do one

Fixed

 

[Visitor22]

But to continue your anology, instead of spending the 100 cash on Belgium waffles we have have spent it on a Belgium player - Lukaku. Unlike waffles, which are a depreciating asset, Lukaku is hopefully a rapidly appreciating asset whose sale could potentially be used at a later date to offset that debt.

That's the problem with players. Every day they are on a training pitch they could injure themselves and reduce their value to zero or learn a new skill that makes them worth £100m. It's just impossible to know, which is why, despite Bill's protestations, the net book value of the team is about £40m at the moment

 

[Visitor22]

I'm still learning your Britischer accounting language--Net Cash/Debt is the same as Net Assets/Liability?

Sorry, I've tried to simplify everything. Roughly yes, the language I've used here relates directly to the terms that appear in the annual accounts so that they can be traced back if you can be bothered to read them all

 

[Dymak]

This really isn't the way it works. Company accounts are a snapshot of a single day in the company and net debt is a measure of your ability to pay debts, not a measure of the actual debt. So....


Let's say I have a loan from the bank of £100 and no money in my pocket. My net debt is £100

I work for a day and get paid £100 cash, I still have a loan for £100. My net debt on that day is zero, even though I have not given the money to the bank and paid them the debt.

I decide that I want to spend my cash and buy £100 of Belgian waffles ;-). I still have the debt of £100 to the bank because I did not give them the money to pay back the loan.

On the day I got paid (the snapshot of a single day) I made a profit of £100 and was completely debt-free in net terms. But, am I now any better off than I was before? (except that I had delicious Belgian waffles)

I'm aware it's a snapshot of a particular time, but from the way I am reading it Everton have now actually paid 17 million pound back to their creditors in order reduce their debt by 17 million? They have also bought Lukaku. Is this not the case?

If it is the case, then all it shows is that the accumulation of player sales and new TV money was enough for Everton to buy Lukaku and reduce our debt. We have two more tranches of extra TV money coming our way, and we are more than capable of servicing any form of debt that we currently have, and therefore I think there should be money to spend.

 

[LinekersLegs]

That's the problem with players. Every day they are on a training pitch they could injure themselves and reduce their value to zero or learn a new skill that makes them worth £100m. It's just impossible to know, which is why, despite Bill's protestations, the net book value of the team is about £40m at the moment

Where do you get that figure from?