DavyMcL Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 With all the talk about debts on another thread, does anyone know who the last team to win a trophy AND be debt free in the same season were? (I don't - it's an honest question.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I'm trying to even think of a club who even in recent years, is debt free... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troonjambo Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 hibs for starters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Celtic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Are they really debt free though ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Before the Glazers took over, Manchester United were "debt free". The Glazers bought the club outright, then loaded all the borrowings they used to buy the club onto United as debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Are they really debt free though ? Hibs aren't. I don't think any trophy-winning club, in Scotland anyway, has actually been debt-free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Hibs aren't. I don't think any trophy-winning club, in Scotland anyway, has actually been debt-free. celtic are, or at least were recently, pretty close I think they had 5 or 6M million debt, which is basically nothing to a club there size...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Hibs aren't. I don't think any trophy-winning club, in Scotland anyway, has actually been debt-free. Yeah - that's what I thought.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyMcL Posted May 20, 2008 Author Share Posted May 20, 2008 What about other countries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I cant think of a professional football club in England, Scotland or Wales that are debt free. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 What about other countries? Don't think Barca are in debt as they are owned by the city and it's people,think money just gets moved around as in it being debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean counter Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I thought Aberdeen were debt free before they built the Richard Donald stand ( can't remember when it was built ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I thought Aberdeen were debt free before they built the Richard Donald stand ( can't remember when it was built ) Your hearing is a bit dodgy. They sing stand free not debt free. The stand was most definitely not free. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 With all the talk about debts on another thread, does anyone know who the last team to win a trophy AND be debt free in the same season were? (I don't - it's an honest question.) http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/docstore/tottenham_interim_2007.pdf Spurs have actually been consistently profitable for many years now. They were always the second most profitable English club after Man Utd before Glazer came along; and even with the substantial outlay on players under Daniel Levy and ENIC, the enormous revenue they receive courtesy mainly of SKY ensures they're still running at a comfortable profit now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Harris Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 arsenal are an example of a very well run club financially speaking, the amount they have paid out in transfers is staggering(for the opposite reason it would usually be). They have a large debt due to the stadium construction but other than that they seem to achieve a lot while spending relatively little(at least in terms of transfers, I've no doubt the players are on very good money.) Tis all relative though, for a high flying premiership side they have done well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 arsenal are an example of a very well run club financially speaking, the amount they have paid out in transfers is staggering(for the opposite reason it would usually be). They have a large debt due to the stadium construction but other than that they seem to achieve a lot while spending relatively little(at least in terms of transfers, I've no doubt the players are on very good money.) Tis all relative though, for a high flying premiership side they have done well. A very good point. Incredibly, Arsenal have spent around half that of Tottenham on net transfer fees over the past 10 or 12 years: what Wenger has achieved has been little short of miraculous, and what's so impressive about him is he's just as concerned with maintaining stable finances behind the scenes as with building a winning team. Mind you, it must be doubtful how much further this can take them. Flamini's move to Milan, Hleb's anticipated exit and Fabregas' possible one are all consequences of the reality that, while Arsenal have some of the best young players in the world, and enjoy Champions League revenue year-in, year-out, they don't pay Champions League wages. Maintaining a balanced wage structure has been integral to their success - but if their best players start looking for moves to better-paying, bigger clubs, there may be trouble ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/docstore/tottenham_interim_2007.pdf Spurs have actually been consistently profitable for many years now. They were always the second most profitable English club after Man Utd before Glazer came along; and even with the substantial outlay on players under Daniel Levy and ENIC, the enormous revenue they receive courtesy mainly of SKY ensures they're still running at a comfortable profit now. Did you actually read that Page 07: Unaudited consolidated balance sheet as at 31 December 2007 Non-current liabilities Interest bearing loans and borrowings 48,546,000 Current liabilities Interest bearing loans and borrowings 6,702,000 Page 14: Notes to the consolidated interim statements 9. Loan facility In October 2007, the Group arranged a loan facility of up to ?75,000,000 secured by a floating charge over certain freehold and leasehold properties. In November 2007, there was an initial drawdown of ?11,250,000. The loan is being repaid over ten years in six-monthly instalments. Interest will be charged quarterly on the outstanding amount of the loan, at a rate which tracks LIBOR. The loan is included in the financial information net of ?275,000 of associated loan arrangement costs which are being amortised over the term of the loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Did you actually read that Page 07: Unaudited consolidated balance sheet as at 31 December 2007 Non-current liabilities Interest bearing loans and borrowings 48,546,000 Current liabilities Interest bearing loans and borrowings 6,702,000 Page 14: Notes to the consolidated interim statements 9. Loan facility In October 2007, the Group arranged a loan facility of up to ?75,000,000 secured by a floating charge over certain freehold and leasehold properties. In November 2007, there was an initial drawdown of ?11,250,000. The loan is being repaid over ten years in six-monthly instalments. Interest will be charged quarterly on the outstanding amount of the loan, at a rate which tracks LIBOR. The loan is included in the financial information net of ?275,000 of associated loan arrangement costs which are being amortised over the term of the loan. I did - but thought it was covered by the net assets figure - no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo83 Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Hibs seem to think they are debt free because they only have a mortgage?! Most people's largest debt is their mortgage ffs! And they talk about us being deluded..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommythejambo Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Arsenal were debt free until they built the Emirates I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I did - but thought it was covered by the net assets figure - no? Net assets is not the same as net debt ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Net assets is not the same as net debt ... Yes, you and TC are quite right. Years of staring bleary eyed at horrific financial results of SPL clubs appears to have convinced me, in a moment of utter plankdom, that if a club's assets exceed its liabilities, it's in the black! Er, no Shaun: it just means it's not technically insolvent. God I'm thick. Two conclusions can be drawn from this: 1. That old line about historians not having the first clue about economics is clearly spot on. 2. Judging by my last few posts on here, I seem to have swallowed an entire jar of stupid pills today. I think my stomach needs to be pumped... Incidentally, I was searching for a net debt figure, but couldn't find one quoted anywhere. Are PLCs obliged to declare it on the balance sheet, or do they just fail to mention it if it doesn't make pretty reading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I did - but thought it was covered by the net assets figure - no? I think you're confusing "Debt free" with "Solvent". BTW I did mean to go back and edit out the "Did you actually read that" line but got sidetracked and it's too late now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I think you're confusing "Debt free" with "Solvent". BTW I did mean to go back and edit out the "Did you actually read that" line but got sidetracked and it's too late now See above! And no worries: you were quite right to respond like that. I completely outdid myself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Yes, you and TC are quite right. Years of staring bleary eyed at horrific financial results of SPL clubs appears to have convinced me, in a moment of utter plankdom, that if a club's assets exceed its liabilities, it's in the black! Er, no Shaun: it just means it's not technically insolvent. God I'm thick. Two conclusions can be drawn from this: 1. That old line about historians not having the first clue about economics is clearly spot on. 2. Judging by my last few posts on here, I seem to have swallowed an entire jar of stupid pills today. I think my stomach needs to be pumped... Incidentally, I was searching for a net debt figure, but couldn't find one quoted anywhere. Are PLCs obliged to declare it on the balance sheet, or do they just fail to mention it if it doesn't make pretty reading? Quick and dirty net debt figure - Borrowings minus cash and equivalents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim Tall Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Chelsea, ever sinse Abramovich. Debt got paid off the minute he joined and hasn't been added to sinse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taffin Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Chelsea, ever sinse Abramovich. Debt got paid off the minute he joined and hasn't been added to sinse. that is not even close to true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim Tall Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 that is not even close to true Why? The club isn't in debt, it's not making money, but it's not in debt either. Every penny's coming out of Abramovich's pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del1812 Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 When Partick Thistle were relegated from the SPL the last time they were up, they were officially the only team in the division that wasn't in debt, yet the finished bottom by a long distance. Make of that what you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarhead Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Why? The club isn't in debt, it's not making money, but it's not in debt either. Every penny's coming out of Abramovich's pocket. I had the impresion that Chelseas debt worked much the same way as Hearts in that the owner continued to tot up his spending as debt against the club but as this debt is not owed to a third party in theory it could be written off. Don't expect this to happen any time soon at Hearts but it was mooted at the AGM that this could be done via a share issue. Chelseas debt, like Hearts, is very real but also virtual in a way (if that makes sense). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del1812 Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Why? The club isn't in debt, it's not making money, but it's not in debt either. Every penny's coming out of Abramovich's pocket. As stated in the report about Chelsea, RA is not just giving the money to Chelsea, he is doing it as a loan. If you don't think that counts as debt then by that same logic, Hearts aren't in any debt as the money going into the club is coming from the company that owns us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.