Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:59 pm  

fun time frankie wrote:

I was talking to my brother in law who’s a massive city fan (he loves to tell me on CC final day 1980 he was at city) that they’ve taken upwards of 80 million out of the club during there time and could actually hand the club over virtually for nothing and that there not that interested in a sale as such

City currently owe the allams £63m and the smc debt is £16m with around £15 net transfer fees due and £30m or so in parachute payments left so they're far from repaid

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:20 pm  

[quote="Jake the Peg"]City currently owe the allams £63m and the smc debt is £16m with around £15 net transfer fees due and £30m or so in parachute payments left so they're far from repaid[/quote]




Since the allams took over City have received at a conservative estimate about £500 million from the premier league and they haven’t exactly gone on a spending spree

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:22 pm  

… and their loans to city have generated a tidy sum in interest.

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:07 pm  

fun time frankie wrote:

Since the allams took over City have received at a conservative estimate about £500 million from the premier league and they haven’t exactly gone on a spending spree

They've had nowhere near £500m. It was only in their 2016 season that the big money came in and in any case how much do you think they've spent on wages, transfer fees and other running costs in the same period?. Last season they actually made a trading loss despite the parachute payment and it was only transfer fees that resulted in the annual profit.
I'm sure the allams are levying interest and management fees but the fact remains that city and the SMC owe them a huge amount of money and he won't walk away from it

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:17 pm  

I'll be careful and state from the off that I'm sure that it is all within the letter of the law, but the one thing the Allam's have been good at is moving around money to ensure that the maximum moves to themselves and the minimum to anyone else, including the taxman. It's being very good to them and paper losses are good at minimising tax bills - look at Amazon for example.

Nobody's idea of benefactors to society.

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:34 am  

Jake the Peg wrote:

They've had nowhere near £500m. It was only in their 2016 season that the big money came in and in any case how much do you think they've spent on wages, transfer fees and other running costs in the same period?. Last season they actually made a trading loss despite the parachute payment and it was only transfer fees that resulted in the annual profit.
I'm sure the allams are levying interest and management fees but the fact remains that city and the SMC owe them a huge amount of money and he won't walk away from it

They’ve received near to a £100 million 3 times as the money pre 2016 wasn’t small it was near enough the same so believe me what the allams are owed on paper is only on paper as well as this money there are also all the other revenue streams this isn’t RL

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:33 am  

fun time frankie wrote:

They’ve received near to a £100 million 3 times as the money pre 2016 wasn’t small it was near enough the same so believe me what the allams are owed on paper is only on paper as well as this money there are also all the other revenue streams this isn’t RL

I can't be assed to even look but "near to" £300m (and I reckon it's nearer £250m) is a fair way off the £500m you originally quoted plus how much have they spent on wages, transfer fees and running costs in the interim and how much did they spend to bale city out?

I don't like the allams and have no doubt they've taken what they can back out of city but the fact remains there is best part of £80m debt on the club owed to the allams and they won't walk away from it

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Sat Sep 15, 2018 11:29 am  

[quote="Jake the Peg"]I can't be assed to even look but "near to" £300m (and I reckon it's nearer £250m) is a fair way off the £500m you originally quoted plus how much have they spent on wages, transfer fees and running costs in the interim and how much did they spend to bale city out?

I don't like the allams and have no doubt they've taken what they can back out of city but the fact remains there is best part of £80m debt on the club owed to the allams and they won't walk away from it[/quote]




Like I said football has a lot more revenue in sponsorship and the like the fact is city have had a hell of a lot of money and to me in the beginning the allams put a lot in but the last few seasons they’ve been working on a shoestring while still raking in a fortune I’m not particularly bothered as I’m a Leeds Utd fan but there is a reason why they didn’t sell when they had a chance while they where a PL club

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Sat Sep 15, 2018 11:51 am  

fun time frankie wrote:

Like I said football has a lot more revenue in sponsorship and the like the fact is city have had a hell of a lot of money and to me in the beginning the allams put a lot in but the last few seasons they’ve been working on a shoestring while still raking in a fortune I’m not particularly bothered as I’m a Leeds Utd fan but there is a reason why they didn’t sell when they had a chance while they where a PL club

Are you from Leeds “fun time Frankie”

Re: O/Tish City/Allams again : Sat Sep 15, 2018 2:01 pm  

[quote="Riderofthepalehorse"]Are you from Leeds “fun time Frankie”[/quote]




No Hull