One thing I've learn on this thread is that you're all
* high flying executives who deals with your own business accounts;
* FFP gurus;
* are at your own club's board level in order to access accounts; and
* financial warriors who can find loopholes in pretty much anything.
I can't fathom how you all find time to bicker on a web-forum to be honest.
"Is Chelsea FC in debt?"
Again, you tell us.
And again, the reason I ask is because I do not have access to the source material on Chelsky.
"I do not have access to the source material on Chelsky."
Everyone does. The reports say: "profit : £1.4m"
No debts at this football club
mancWoohoo :
Your flippancy is amusing.
But it specifically fails because I am director of a one man band Ltd company. Therefore by definition am :
- one who deals with my own business accounts
- at "board level" in order to access accounts
And is compounded by the fact that all big football club financial records are in the public domain (I myself have read Spurs from 2001 to 2011) .
"profit : £1.4m"
ANNUAL, or NET ??
Assuming you have grasped the fundamental difference of course ...
Net profit of £1.4m as none of the previous losses are included with football club company's financial report
So..
..under these new rules it's ok for a club to borrow money to buy players but the owner isn't allowed to use his own money to buy said players.
I see why Barclays were so keen to sponsor the Premier League now.
http://metro.co.uk/2012/11/09/chelsea-announce-annual-profit-for-first-time-in-roman-abramovichs-tenure-616615/
And that is VERY basic.
As I suspected Fat Ron, you haven't got a clue about the basics of Ltd company balance sheets.
Chelsea FC company is not Ltd
it has no debts
"Chelsea FC company is not Ltd"
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/01965149
"it has no debts"
As we can see from the VERY basic info in the Metro, if the MAXIMUM NET debt level for the yr prior to the most recent filed accounts was -1.4m, you are indeed correct.
"The latest Annual Accounts submitted to Companies House for the year up to 30/06/2011 reported 'cash at bank' of £5,000, 'liabilities' worth £132,037,000, 'net worth' of £-629,655,000 and 'assets' worth £2,523,000. Chelsea Football Club Limited's Risk Score was amended on 10/04/2012."
My company has TWICE as much "cash at bank" as Chelsky !!!
Chelsea Ltd does NOT represent the clubs finances each year it is a completely unrelated company
Hence we have posted a net profit of £1.4m this year and a net loss of £60m last year and a net loss of £70m the year before yet none of these numbers effect each other
"Chelsea Ltd does NOT represent the clubs finances each year it is a completely unrelated company"
Please, please, please ...
Educate us as to who is the REAL CORPORATE ENTITY that "represent the clubs finances each yr" .
Chelsea FC Plc hence why losses from each of the last 11 years have no baring on the figures this year
I have no idea what any of this means, but does it suit United??
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/02536231
Chelsea Fc Plc is an Active business incorporated in England & Wales on 3rd September 1990. Their business activity is recorded as Activities Of Head Offices. Chelsea Fc Plc is run by 3 current directors and 1 company secretary. 1 Shareholders own the total shares within the company. It is also part of a group. The latest Annual Accounts submitted to Companies House for the year up to 30/06/2011 reported 'cash at bank' of £9,880,000, 'liabilities' worth £132,531,000, 'net worth' of £-124,049,000 and 'assets' worth £33,557,000. Chelsea Fc Plc's Risk Score was amended on 15/10/2012.
SAME liabilities.
Companies House have obviously seen thru the corporate subterfuge.
"I have no idea what any of this means, but does it suit United??"
1. Spoken like a true fan.
2. Hardly
^Hardly ^Hardly an issue for your lot
Its a genuine wonder Chelsea FC haven't been liquidated yet since you seem to believe it's tied down to that debt
"Its a genuine wonder Chelsea FC haven't been liquidated yet since you seem to believe it's tied down to that debt"
Spurs are 70 odd million in debt and haven't been liquidated either.
But at least I can tell outsiders EXACTLY what the ANNUAL/NET profit/debts for my club are, and where I got the information from.
You get owned by half a page of print in the Metro.
It's not the same company
"Chelsea Fc Plc is run by 3 current directors and 1 company secretary. 1 Shareholders own the total shares within the company. It is also part of a group."
300 comments on explaining to Fat Ron the notion of a corporate GROUP.
Anyone ??
Is chelsea fc £700m in debt? Yes or no
'liabilities' worth £132,531,000, 'net worth' of £-124,049,000
Yes or no ??
Sign in if you want to comment
Premier League clubs agree new cost control
Page 14 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17
posted on 18/12/12
One thing I've learn on this thread is that you're all
* high flying executives who deals with your own business accounts;
* FFP gurus;
* are at your own club's board level in order to access accounts; and
* financial warriors who can find loopholes in pretty much anything.
I can't fathom how you all find time to bicker on a web-forum to be honest.
posted on 18/12/12
learnt*
posted on 18/12/12
"Is Chelsea FC in debt?"
Again, you tell us.
And again, the reason I ask is because I do not have access to the source material on Chelsky.
posted on 18/12/12
"I do not have access to the source material on Chelsky."
Everyone does. The reports say: "profit : £1.4m"
No debts at this football club
posted on 18/12/12
mancWoohoo :
Your flippancy is amusing.
But it specifically fails because I am director of a one man band Ltd company. Therefore by definition am :
- one who deals with my own business accounts
- at "board level" in order to access accounts
And is compounded by the fact that all big football club financial records are in the public domain (I myself have read Spurs from 2001 to 2011) .
posted on 18/12/12
"profit : £1.4m"
ANNUAL, or NET ??
Assuming you have grasped the fundamental difference of course ...
posted on 18/12/12
Net profit of £1.4m as none of the previous losses are included with football club company's financial report
posted on 18/12/12
So..
..under these new rules it's ok for a club to borrow money to buy players but the owner isn't allowed to use his own money to buy said players.
I see why Barclays were so keen to sponsor the Premier League now.
posted on 18/12/12
http://metro.co.uk/2012/11/09/chelsea-announce-annual-profit-for-first-time-in-roman-abramovichs-tenure-616615/
And that is VERY basic.
As I suspected Fat Ron, you haven't got a clue about the basics of Ltd company balance sheets.
posted on 18/12/12
Chelsea FC company is not Ltd
it has no debts
posted on 18/12/12
"Chelsea FC company is not Ltd"
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/01965149
"it has no debts"
As we can see from the VERY basic info in the Metro, if the MAXIMUM NET debt level for the yr prior to the most recent filed accounts was -1.4m, you are indeed correct.
posted on 18/12/12
"The latest Annual Accounts submitted to Companies House for the year up to 30/06/2011 reported 'cash at bank' of £5,000, 'liabilities' worth £132,037,000, 'net worth' of £-629,655,000 and 'assets' worth £2,523,000. Chelsea Football Club Limited's Risk Score was amended on 10/04/2012."
My company has TWICE as much "cash at bank" as Chelsky !!!
posted on 18/12/12
Chelsea Ltd does NOT represent the clubs finances each year it is a completely unrelated company
Hence we have posted a net profit of £1.4m this year and a net loss of £60m last year and a net loss of £70m the year before yet none of these numbers effect each other
posted on 18/12/12
"Chelsea Ltd does NOT represent the clubs finances each year it is a completely unrelated company"
Please, please, please ...
Educate us as to who is the REAL CORPORATE ENTITY that "represent the clubs finances each yr" .
posted on 18/12/12
Chelsea FC Plc hence why losses from each of the last 11 years have no baring on the figures this year
posted on 18/12/12
I have no idea what any of this means, but does it suit United??
posted on 18/12/12
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/02536231
Chelsea Fc Plc is an Active business incorporated in England & Wales on 3rd September 1990. Their business activity is recorded as Activities Of Head Offices. Chelsea Fc Plc is run by 3 current directors and 1 company secretary. 1 Shareholders own the total shares within the company. It is also part of a group. The latest Annual Accounts submitted to Companies House for the year up to 30/06/2011 reported 'cash at bank' of £9,880,000, 'liabilities' worth £132,531,000, 'net worth' of £-124,049,000 and 'assets' worth £33,557,000. Chelsea Fc Plc's Risk Score was amended on 15/10/2012.
SAME liabilities.
Companies House have obviously seen thru the corporate subterfuge.
posted on 18/12/12
"I have no idea what any of this means, but does it suit United??"
1. Spoken like a true fan.
2. Hardly
posted on 18/12/12
^Hardly ^Hardly an issue for your lot
posted on 18/12/12
Its a genuine wonder Chelsea FC haven't been liquidated yet since you seem to believe it's tied down to that debt
posted on 18/12/12
"Its a genuine wonder Chelsea FC haven't been liquidated yet since you seem to believe it's tied down to that debt"
Spurs are 70 odd million in debt and haven't been liquidated either.
But at least I can tell outsiders EXACTLY what the ANNUAL/NET profit/debts for my club are, and where I got the information from.
You get owned by half a page of print in the Metro.
posted on 18/12/12
It's not the same company
posted on 18/12/12
"Chelsea Fc Plc is run by 3 current directors and 1 company secretary. 1 Shareholders own the total shares within the company. It is also part of a group."
300 comments on explaining to Fat Ron the notion of a corporate GROUP.
Anyone ??
posted on 18/12/12
Is chelsea fc £700m in debt? Yes or no
posted on 18/12/12
'liabilities' worth £132,531,000, 'net worth' of £-124,049,000
Yes or no ??
Page 14 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17