" DOES THE PREMIER LEAGUE GUARANTEE YOUR CLUB ? "

Does the Premier League Guarantee your club a good future or even a future?

Just look at Pompey now.

Plus look at Bolton after 9 years up there.

' Bolton Wanderers debt figure rises to £136.5m '

Bolton Wanderers recorded a loss of £22.1m in the last financial year, taking their total debt to £136.5m.
However, £125m of the debt is owed to owner Eddie Davies, which has been refinanced into a long-term loan.
"It is a huge vote of confidence and underlines the on-going support and commitment he has for our club," said chairman Phil Gartside.
The club's parent company, Burnden Leisure, revealed losses were down from the previous figure of £26.1m in 2011.
The figures take in the 12 months up to 30 June, 2012 and were helped by Bolton being able to recoup about £10m from player sales, including the departure of England defender Gary Cahill to Chelsea in January.
Wanderers were relegated from the Premier League in May, ending their 11-year stay in the top flight.
Gartside told the club website: "We continue to face a tough economic climate, but we have continued to invest across the business, and for the second year we have reduced our losses.
"Key to this set of figures is the fact Eddie Davies has converted his investment in our club from short-term to long-term debt.
"To lose our place in the Barclays Premier League was hugely disappointing for all of us - fans, staff and players, and our aim is to return at the first opportunity."

It does if you run your club right,sensible wages and transfer targets.A good academy helps with one or two players comming through.If we go up I rekon we will need 2 strikers,2 midfielders + 2 fullbacks

the answer is yes and no !!!
if you enter the prem league without any debt it will allow you to compete and stay there with a sound financial footing to help guarantee your clubs future ( ie - hate saying it but swansea )
if you enter the prem league in debt like we would at this moment , after player wages and bonuses , plus paying to upgrade the squad , extra policeing at games and all the added extras there isnt a lot left to add to your profit in the first 2 years+ . if your lucky enough to have a basic squad and stay there (ie wigan ) it can be quite profitable and keep your club healthy financially but that is very rarely done .
teams that get up and go all out signing big money players straight away tend to struggle ( ie qpr and southampton this year ) . so called yoyo teams like west brom tend to bounce around for a few seasons then eventually slowly build a squad overtime good enough to compete in the league and stay up . its the teams who try buying instant success that are the ones that struggle later . look at leeds and portsmouth tried spending there way to the top then implode and fall down the league crippled by debt . unless youve got stupid money to spend like man city they should build slowly .
bolton are a bit of an exception because theyve been solid for years but have just been managed badly financially , i see them a lot like rangers in scotland .
realistically if city were to go up we would earn roughly 50 mill for being in the prem first year with a 16th place finish hopefully to just stay up . to do that im sure sam would have to be paid which is last time i heard 25mill ?? so theres half gone allready , then we would need at least 20 mill to spend on the squad especially the defence , leaves 5 mill which would be swallowed up by extra wages and promotion bonuses , extra matchday staff due to bigger attendances , plus all the other overheads that go with it there would be no profit for at least 3 seasons whilst they build a squad good enough to comfortably stay there .
the premier league guarantees nothing . they call the play off final the 100mill game ! thats only because if u get relegated you get 4x 15mill parachute payments over 4 years . some people seem to believe you get it in cash straight away which you dont it all depends on how mant times your on tv and what position you end up in the table .
if we do go up and its not managed properly it could spell the end of cardiff city .
if we do go up and the malaysians are as good financially as we hope they are it could be the start of very exciting times .

the answer is yes and no !!!
if you enter the prem league without any debt it will allow you to compete and stay there with a sound financial footing to help guarantee your clubs future ( ie - hate saying it but swansea )
if you enter the prem league in debt like we would at this moment , after player wages and bonuses , plus paying to upgrade the squad , extra policeing at games and all the added extras there isnt a lot left to add to your profit in the first 2 years+ . if your lucky enough to have a basic squad and stay there (ie wigan ) it can be quite profitable and keep your club healthy financially but that is very rarely done .
teams that get up and go all out signing big money players straight away tend to struggle ( ie qpr and southampton this year ) . so called yoyo teams like west brom tend to bounce around for a few seasons then eventually slowly build a squad overtime good enough to compete in the league and stay up . its the teams who try buying instant success that are the ones that struggle later . look at leeds and portsmouth tried spending there way to the top then implode and fall down the league crippled by debt . unless youve got stupid money to spend like man city they should build slowly .
bolton are a bit of an exception because theyve been solid for years but have just been managed badly financially , i see them a lot like rangers in scotland .
realistically if city were to go up we would earn roughly 50 mill for being in the prem first year with a 16th place finish hopefully to just stay up . to do that im sure sam would have to be paid which is last time i heard 25mill ?? so theres half gone allready , then we would need at least 20 mill to spend on the squad especially the defence , leaves 5 mill which would be swallowed up by extra wages and promotion bonuses , extra matchday staff due to bigger attendances , plus all the other overheads that go with it there would be no profit for at least 3 seasons whilst they build a squad good enough to comfortably stay there .
the premier league guarantees nothing . they call the play off final the 100mill game ! thats only because if u get relegated you get 4x 15mill parachute payments over 4 years . some people seem to believe you get it in cash straight away which you dont it all depends on how mant times your on tv and what position you end up in the table .
if we do go up and its not managed properly it could spell the end of cardiff city .
if we do go up and the malaysians are as good financially as we hope they are it could be the start of very exciting times .

Soory Thomasblue , but you have got a few important figures wrong in your post , and are also confusing profits and cashflow which are two entirely different things.

From next season onwards , even finishing bottom of the Premier will guarantee a minimum of £61m in TV money alone even with the minimum number of televised games and in total CCFC could expect to have total income of over £75m with gate money , sponsorship etc added , not the £50m figure you state.

And parachute payments are £16m a year for 2 seasons followed by £8m a year for years 3 and 4 following a relegation - a total of £48m , not the £60m you state as 4x£15m.

With income over £75m even for finishing bottom (would go up by another £750k for each finishing place above bottom) , then a club should make a profit. CCFC latest filed accounts for 2010/11 show a wage bill of £16m and other running costs of £12m so , even if the wage bill were to treble on promotion , there would still be a profit made as other costs will not go up much as they mainly relate to the costs of running the stadium , Academy etc.

Some of the cash generated by those profits may well (and should) go towards paying off old debts , but that is a use of cashflow matter not a profit one and would improve the balance sheet.

I agree with your general point that a promoted club should not enter a rash spending programme as this would use up too much cash. But spending £20m on new players would not use up £20m a year in profits , but only £5m a year for each of the 4 years of those players` contracts.

If we got promoted , spent £20m on new players, trebled our 2010/11 wage levels , and finished just above the 3 relegation places , then our profits would be about as follows:-

Income £77m ,less £68m(wages £48m , other costs £15m , player cost write-offs £5m) =profit £9m.

If you sensible and things go for you, then yes it can. Look at us, we're able to fund our a stadium expansion, acadamy and new training facility as well as improving our side dramatically in the short term and long term.

However, a lot more clubs make profits in the Championship then they do in the Premier League and the reality is that if a club goes in to the Premier League with debt that debt is only going to increase (Pompy, Wigan, Bolton all great examples of this happening) as owners feel the need to put more and more cash in to the club and pay higher and higher wages for players so take out bigger and bigger loans.

the answer is yes and no !!!
if you enter the prem league without any debt it will allow you to compete and stay there with a sound financial footing to help guarantee your clubs future ( ie - hate saying it but swansea )
if you enter the prem league in debt like we would at this moment , after player wages and bonuses , plus paying to upgrade the squad , extra policeing at games and all the added extras there isnt a lot left to add to your profit in the first 2 years+ . if your lucky enough to have a basic squad and stay there (ie wigan ) it can be quite profitable and keep your club healthy financially but that is very rarely done .
teams that get up and go all out signing big money players straight away tend to struggle ( ie qpr and southampton this year ) . so called yoyo teams like west brom tend to bounce around for a few seasons then eventually slowly build a squad overtime good enough to compete in the league and stay up . its the teams who try buying instant success that are the ones that struggle later . look at leeds and portsmouth tried spending there way to the top then implode and fall down the league crippled by debt . unless youve got stupid money to spend like man city they should build slowly .
bolton are a bit of an exception because theyve been solid for years but have just been managed badly financially , i see them a lot like rangers in scotland .
realistically if city were to go up we would earn roughly 50 mill for being in the prem first year with a 16th place finish hopefully to just stay up . to do that im sure sam would have to be paid which is last time i heard 25mill ?? so theres half gone allready , then we would need at least 20 mill to spend on the squad especially the defence , leaves 5 mill which would be swallowed up by extra wages and promotion bonuses , extra matchday staff due to bigger attendances , plus all the other overheads that go with it there would be no profit for at least 3 seasons whilst they build a squad good enough to comfortably stay there .
the premier league guarantees nothing . they call the play off final the 100mill game ! thats only because if u get relegated you get 4x 15mill parachute payments over 4 years . some people seem to believe you get it in cash straight away which you dont it all depends on how mant times your on tv and what position you end up in the table .
if we do go up and its not managed properly it could spell the end of cardiff city .
if we do go up and the malaysians are as good financially as we hope they are it could be the start of very exciting times .

Soory Thomasblue , but you have got a few important figures wrong in your post , and are also confusing profits and cashflow which are two entirely different things.

From next season onwards , even finishing bottom of the Premier will guarantee a minimum of £61m in TV money alone even with the minimum number of televised games and in total CCFC could expect to have total income of over £75m with gate money , sponsorship etc added , not the £50m figure you state.

And parachute payments are £16m a year for 2 seasons followed by £8m a year for years 3 and 4 following a relegation - a total of £48m , not the £60m you state as 4x£15m.

With income over £75m even for finishing bottom (would go up by another £750k for each finishing place above bottom) , then a club should make a profit. CCFC latest filed accounts for 2010/11 show a wage bill of £16m and other running costs of £12m so , even if the wage bill were to treble on promotion , there would still be a profit made as other costs will not go up much as they mainly relate to the costs of running the stadium , Academy etc.

Some of the cash generated by those profits may well (and should) go towards paying off old debts , but that is a use of cashflow matter not a profit one and would improve the balance sheet.

I agree with your general point that a promoted club should not enter a rash spending programme as this would use up too much cash. But spending £20m on new players would not use up £20m a year in profits , but only £5m a year for each of the 4 years of those players` contracts.

If we got promoted , spent £20m on new players, trebled our 2010/11 wage levels , and finished just above the 3 relegation places , then our profits would be about as follows:-

Income £77m ,less £68m(wages £48m , other costs £15m , player cost write-offs £5m) =profit £9m.

in 2011/12 season the bottom club ( wolves) recieved 39m in tv rights the top club man city recieved 60.5m for finishing top ?? so why you think the bottom club will recieve at least 61m is a mystery to me . it would mean the tv deals would have to rise by nearly 40% for payments to reach that , as most countrys are struggling financially i seriously doubt that happening . the parachute payments were wrong i was about 12 mill out i thought they were worth more than that ( i dont agree with them anyway its unfair you should look after your finances properly not get bailed out if you fail )
so with the lower tv money we would make a loss just like most other prem teams do . we would expect to make a loss aswell if we want to clear debt and become self sufficiant

the answer is yes and no !!!
if you enter the prem league without any debt it will allow you to compete and stay there with a sound financial footing to help guarantee your clubs future ( ie - hate saying it but swansea )
if you enter the prem league in debt like we would at this moment , after player wages and bonuses , plus paying to upgrade the squad , extra policeing at games and all the added extras there isnt a lot left to add to your profit in the first 2 years+ . if your lucky enough to have a basic squad and stay there (ie wigan ) it can be quite profitable and keep your club healthy financially but that is very rarely done .
teams that get up and go all out signing big money players straight away tend to struggle ( ie qpr and southampton this year ) . so called yoyo teams like west brom tend to bounce around for a few seasons then eventually slowly build a squad overtime good enough to compete in the league and stay up . its the teams who try buying instant success that are the ones that struggle later . look at leeds and portsmouth tried spending there way to the top then implode and fall down the league crippled by debt . unless youve got stupid money to spend like man city they should build slowly .
bolton are a bit of an exception because theyve been solid for years but have just been managed badly financially , i see them a lot like rangers in scotland .
realistically if city were to go up we would earn roughly 50 mill for being in the prem first year with a 16th place finish hopefully to just stay up . to do that im sure sam would have to be paid which is last time i heard 25mill ?? so theres half gone allready , then we would need at least 20 mill to spend on the squad especially the defence , leaves 5 mill which would be swallowed up by extra wages and promotion bonuses , extra matchday staff due to bigger attendances , plus all the other overheads that go with it there would be no profit for at least 3 seasons whilst they build a squad good enough to comfortably stay there .
the premier league guarantees nothing . they call the play off final the 100mill game ! thats only because if u get relegated you get 4x 15mill parachute payments over 4 years . some people seem to believe you get it in cash straight away which you dont it all depends on how mant times your on tv and what position you end up in the table .
if we do go up and its not managed properly it could spell the end of cardiff city .
if we do go up and the malaysians are as good financially as we hope they are it could be the start of very exciting times .

Soory Thomasblue , but you have got a few important figures wrong in your post , and are also confusing profits and cashflow which are two entirely different things.

From next season onwards , even finishing bottom of the Premier will guarantee a minimum of £61m in TV money alone even with the minimum number of televised games and in total CCFC could expect to have total income of over £75m with gate money , sponsorship etc added , not the £50m figure you state.

And parachute payments are £16m a year for 2 seasons followed by £8m a year for years 3 and 4 following a relegation - a total of £48m , not the £60m you state as 4x£15m.

With income over £75m even for finishing bottom (would go up by another £750k for each finishing place above bottom) , then a club should make a profit. CCFC latest filed accounts for 2010/11 show a wage bill of £16m and other running costs of £12m so , even if the wage bill were to treble on promotion , there would still be a profit made as other costs will not go up much as they mainly relate to the costs of running the stadium , Academy etc.

Some of the cash generated by those profits may well (and should) go towards paying off old debts , but that is a use of cashflow matter not a profit one and would improve the balance sheet.

I agree with your general point that a promoted club should not enter a rash spending programme as this would use up too much cash. But spending £20m on new players would not use up £20m a year in profits , but only £5m a year for each of the 4 years of those players` contracts.

If we got promoted , spent £20m on new players, trebled our 2010/11 wage levels , and finished just above the 3 relegation places , then our profits would be about as follows:-

Income £77m ,less £68m(wages £48m , other costs £15m , player cost write-offs £5m) =profit £9m.

in 2011/12 season the bottom club ( wolves) recieved 39m in tv rights the top club man city recieved 60.5m for finishing top ?? so why you think the bottom club will recieve at least 61m is a mystery to me . it would mean the tv deals would have to rise by nearly 40% for payments to reach that , as most countrys are struggling financially i seriously doubt that happening . the parachute payments were wrong i was about 12 mill out i thought they were worth more than that ( i dont agree with them anyway its unfair you should look after your finances properly not get bailed out if you fail )
so with the lower tv money we would make a loss just like most other prem teams do . we would expect to make a loss aswell if we want to clear debt and become self sufficiant

The figures I quote are from the Sky TV deal for next season which has already been agreed and signed - and yes it is for a ridiculous 40% increase.

If we want to clear debt , we must make a profit. I don`t understand why you say we would expect to make a loss if we want to clear debt (?)

Thomas, what are your opinions on the £700m debt Manchester Utd are in?

P. S. Not sure if you're last to hear it but next seasons Prem League promotion for a championship club is worth more than £100m due to the latest deal struck with sky on TV rights (mainly)

Wouldn't bother arguing with this chap, he's very clued up

If you make a profit i.e swansea

Why dont you pay your debts....remember your creditors you payed 10p in the £.

Scrupples eh.

Thomas, what are your opinions on the £700m debt Manchester Utd are in?

P. S. Not sure if you're last to hear it but next seasons Prem League promotion for a championship club is worth more than £100m due to the latest deal struck with sky on TV rights (mainly)

Wouldn't bother arguing with this chap, he's very clued up

im not argueing with him he sounds like he knows what hes talking about and yes probably knows more than me about figures by the sound of it , i dont quite agree its as easy as he makes out to make his £9m profit though , history suggests that most teams that go up struggle for the first 1/2 years financially especially if they were servicing big debts like we are currently ( birmingham and wolves to name two ),. yes its worth £100m but that figure includes parachute payments if relegated and the economy holding up for the duration of the contract and beyond . personally i dont believe the worlds economys will be able to keep pumping out these kind of payments long term ,at some point the bubble will burst and it will leave a lot of clubs in trouble . his figures were also based on city trebling there wage bill and spreading payments for players over 4 year contracts . If city fail to stay up and dont get promotion straight away that could have devastating repercussions on the financial future of the club ( birmingham again and possibly bolton this year although i know theyve been loaned the money to cover there debt similar to us ) .
as far as man utd go , its much more complicated than people think but as i believe to be true the debt is the glazers and the parent company of man utd . obviously club money is being used to service these debts but i believe if the glazers sell up the debt is no longer on the club ?? might be wrong though theres so many different opinions on that subject i dont think even the glazers know the truth , now that is a mess that makes langston look like a disputed bar tab lol

Pompey/Bolton are bad examples. Wolves/West Brom are good examples. Depends which example the owners of a new premiership club follow.

If we were to reach the premier league we will be in a much better position financial. We will be able to attract more fans on match day, Selling the 'red' shirts in Asia will help the club.
As long as we don't overspend in the transfer window and have silly wages on players then the club will be better off.

The question you say to yourself is, Will Tan still be at the club if we don't reach the premier league? He may walk away if City don't get promotion.

If you make a profit i.e swansea

Why dont you pay your debts....remember your creditors you payed 10p in the £.

Scrupples eh.

We don't have any debts, they agreed to pay 10p to the £1.

They were also left £65,000 short of what we originally owed them, whilst you currently owe nearly £100,000,000

Does the Premier League Guarantee your club a good future or even a future?

Just look at Pompey now.

Plus look at Bolton after 9 years up there.

' Bolton Wanderers debt figure rises to £136.5m '

Bolton Wanderers recorded a loss of £22.1m in the last financial year, taking their total debt to £136.5m.
However, £125m of the debt is owed to owner Eddie Davies, which has been refinanced into a long-term loan.
"It is a huge vote of confidence and underlines the on-going support and commitment he has for our club," said chairman Phil Gartside.
The club's parent company, Burnden Leisure, revealed losses were down from the previous figure of £26.1m in 2011.
The figures take in the 12 months up to 30 June, 2012 and were helped by Bolton being able to recoup about £10m from player sales, including the departure of England defender Gary Cahill to Chelsea in January.
Wanderers were relegated from the Premier League in May, ending their 11-year stay in the top flight.
Gartside told the club website: "We continue to face a tough economic climate, but we have continued to invest across the business, and for the second year we have reduced our losses.
"Key to this set of figures is the fact Eddie Davies has converted his investment in our club from short-term to long-term debt.
"To lose our place in the Barclays Premier League was hugely disappointing for all of us - fans, staff and players, and our aim is to return at the first opportunity."

annis it depends how you spend.people forget that if you sign a player for say 6m his wages will be 20/30 grand a week at a team like blues.those wages are for three years normally.if the team stays up then happy days.if they don,t then they have to be offloaded.the year we went down we spent most of what we earned on wages.if we had stayed up i think a trimming would have been in order anyway.the chinese ,for their faults would have believed we would have stayed up 100%.we should never have gone down with the players we had even with dann and ziggy unfit.too negative.
i think w.b.a did it right .they built a team,went down ,sold any who were too good for the champ and eventually have become an almost established prem team.they buy footballers with potential and make them into good prem performers.don,t forget they have a coach/manager who can make a player.so could woy and mowbury.going to have to say it but the jacks are doing it the right way too .i read somewhere blues debt now is 20/25 m after the offloading last season.prime to be brought in jan .hope the new owners have a plan not just chucking money at it.carsson yueng in court soon.if he gets not guilty then it will be very interesting who he goes after for compo

Thomas, what are your opinions on the £700m debt Manchester Utd are in?

P. S. Not sure if you're last to hear it but next seasons Prem League promotion for a championship club is worth more than £100m due to the latest deal struck with sky on TV rights (mainly)

Wouldn't bother arguing with this chap, he's very clued up

im not argueing with him he sounds like he knows what hes talking about and yes probably knows more than me about figures by the sound of it , i dont quite agree its as easy as he makes out to make his £9m profit though , history suggests that most teams that go up struggle for the first 1/2 years financially especially if they were servicing big debts like we are currently ( birmingham and wolves to name two ),. yes its worth £100m but that figure includes parachute payments if relegated and the economy holding up for the duration of the contract and beyond . personally i dont believe the worlds economys will be able to keep pumping out these kind of payments long term ,at some point the bubble will burst and it will leave a lot of clubs in trouble . his figures were also based on city trebling there wage bill and spreading payments for players over 4 year contracts . If city fail to stay up and dont get promotion straight away that could have devastating repercussions on the financial future of the club ( birmingham again and possibly bolton this year although i know theyve been loaned the money to cover there debt similar to us ) .
as far as man utd go , its much more complicated than people think but as i believe to be true the debt is the glazers and the parent company of man utd . obviously club money is being used to service these debts but i believe if the glazers sell up the debt is no longer on the club ?? might be wrong though theres so many different opinions on that subject i dont think even the glazers know the truth , now that is a mess that makes langston look like a disputed bar tab lol

no debt belongs to club it was way the glasiers did it! they made 75 mil on floatation recently that money was theres not clubs, there was interesting discussion on talk radio recently on subject, glasziers just waiting for best time to sell then they will, and pocket zillions leaving club with debt, not that it will happen soon because of cost to take over club! so glaziers happy as they got initial cost back at one stroke with floatation and because club income is so great its servicing debt, while glasziers sit back and count the money as was said great bit buisness if can get it!!!

Annis I think that was his reasoning behind changing to red. We need extra money in as our crowds will never be at a united or arsenal level to make us profitable that way. Whether it will work or not is another debate but as we were it wouldn't have been possible to be profitable even if we got to the premiership.

It all goes down to the board.

I can trust the owners on this if we make it because they have had plans for when we get to the premier league for ages.

the answer is yes and no !!!
if you enter the prem league without any debt it will allow you to compete and stay there with a sound financial footing to help guarantee your clubs future ( ie - hate saying it but swansea )
if you enter the prem league in debt like we would at this moment , after player wages and bonuses , plus paying to upgrade the squad , extra policeing at games and all the added extras there isnt a lot left to add to your profit in the first 2 years+ . if your lucky enough to have a basic squad and stay there (ie wigan ) it can be quite profitable and keep your club healthy financially but that is very rarely done .
teams that get up and go all out signing big money players straight away tend to struggle ( ie qpr and southampton this year ) . so called yoyo teams like west brom tend to bounce around for a few seasons then eventually slowly build a squad overtime good enough to compete in the league and stay up . its the teams who try buying instant success that are the ones that struggle later . look at leeds and portsmouth tried spending there way to the top then implode and fall down the league crippled by debt . unless youve got stupid money to spend like man city they should build slowly .
bolton are a bit of an exception because theyve been solid for years but have just been managed badly financially , i see them a lot like rangers in scotland .
realistically if city were to go up we would earn roughly 50 mill for being in the prem first year with a 16th place finish hopefully to just stay up . to do that im sure sam would have to be paid which is last time i heard 25mill ?? so theres half gone allready , then we would need at least 20 mill to spend on the squad especially the defence , leaves 5 mill which would be swallowed up by extra wages and promotion bonuses , extra matchday staff due to bigger attendances , plus all the other overheads that go with it there would be no profit for at least 3 seasons whilst they build a squad good enough to comfortably stay there .
the premier league guarantees nothing . they call the play off final the 100mill game ! thats only because if u get relegated you get 4x 15mill parachute payments over 4 years . some people seem to believe you get it in cash straight away which you dont it all depends on how mant times your on tv and what position you end up in the table .
if we do go up and its not managed properly it could spell the end of cardiff city .
if we do go up and the malaysians are as good financially as we hope they are it could be the start of very exciting times .

Soory Thomasblue , but you have got a few important figures wrong in your post , and are also confusing profits and cashflow which are two entirely different things.

From next season onwards , even finishing bottom of the Premier will guarantee a minimum of £61m in TV money alone even with the minimum number of televised games and in total CCFC could expect to have total income of over £75m with gate money , sponsorship etc added , not the £50m figure you state.

And parachute payments are £16m a year for 2 seasons followed by £8m a year for years 3 and 4 following a relegation - a total of £48m , not the £60m you state as 4x£15m.

With income over £75m even for finishing bottom (would go up by another £750k for each finishing place above bottom) , then a club should make a profit. CCFC latest filed accounts for 2010/11 show a wage bill of £16m and other running costs of £12m so , even if the wage bill were to treble on promotion , there would still be a profit made as other costs will not go up much as they mainly relate to the costs of running the stadium , Academy etc.

Some of the cash generated by those profits may well (and should) go towards paying off old debts , but that is a use of cashflow matter not a profit one and would improve the balance sheet.

I agree with your general point that a promoted club should not enter a rash spending programme as this would use up too much cash. But spending £20m on new players would not use up £20m a year in profits , but only £5m a year for each of the 4 years of those players` contracts.

If we got promoted , spent £20m on new players, trebled our 2010/11 wage levels , and finished just above the 3 relegation places , then our profits would be about as follows:-

Income £77m ,less £68m(wages £48m , other costs £15m , player cost write-offs £5m) =profit £9m.

Nowhere in that are promotion bonuses paid to clubs for previous transfers or promotion on uses for players.... Bellamy has £1m alone.

It does if you run your club right,sensible wages and transfer targets.A good academy helps with one or two players comming through.If we go up I rekon we will need 2 strikers,2 midfielders + 2 fullbacks

This is so true.

Long gone are the days when 'getting there' was a golden ticket and investing in expensive players to stay there was all a a rage... now clubs have to be smart and instead of investing in very expensive players they need to be investing in good youth systems, scouting networks, training facilities and becoming sustainable regardless of what division you are in.... something we have not been good at over the years.

the answer is yes and no !!!
if you enter the prem league without any debt it will allow you to compete and stay there with a sound financial footing to help guarantee your clubs future ( ie - hate saying it but swansea )
if you enter the prem league in debt like we would at this moment , after player wages and bonuses , plus paying to upgrade the squad , extra policeing at games and all the added extras there isnt a lot left to add to your profit in the first 2 years+ . if your lucky enough to have a basic squad and stay there (ie wigan ) it can be quite profitable and keep your club healthy financially but that is very rarely done .
teams that get up and go all out signing big money players straight away tend to struggle ( ie qpr and southampton this year ) . so called yoyo teams like west brom tend to bounce around for a few seasons then eventually slowly build a squad overtime good enough to compete in the league and stay up . its the teams who try buying instant success that are the ones that struggle later . look at leeds and portsmouth tried spending there way to the top then implode and fall down the league crippled by debt . unless youve got stupid money to spend like man city they should build slowly .
bolton are a bit of an exception because theyve been solid for years but have just been managed badly financially , i see them a lot like rangers in scotland .
realistically if city were to go up we would earn roughly 50 mill for being in the prem first year with a 16th place finish hopefully to just stay up . to do that im sure sam would have to be paid which is last time i heard 25mill ?? so theres half gone allready , then we would need at least 20 mill to spend on the squad especially the defence , leaves 5 mill which would be swallowed up by extra wages and promotion bonuses , extra matchday staff due to bigger attendances , plus all the other overheads that go with it there would be no profit for at least 3 seasons whilst they build a squad good enough to comfortably stay there .
the premier league guarantees nothing . they call the play off final the 100mill game ! thats only because if u get relegated you get 4x 15mill parachute payments over 4 years . some people seem to believe you get it in cash straight away which you dont it all depends on how mant times your on tv and what position you end up in the table .
if we do go up and its not managed properly it could spell the end of cardiff city .
if we do go up and the malaysians are as good financially as we hope they are it could be the start of very exciting times .

Soory Thomasblue , but you have got a few important figures wrong in your post , and are also confusing profits and cashflow which are two entirely different things.

From next season onwards , even finishing bottom of the Premier will guarantee a minimum of £61m in TV money alone even with the minimum number of televised games and in total CCFC could expect to have total income of over £75m with gate money , sponsorship etc added , not the £50m figure you state.

And parachute payments are £16m a year for 2 seasons followed by £8m a year for years 3 and 4 following a relegation - a total of £48m , not the £60m you state as 4x£15m.

With income over £75m even for finishing bottom (would go up by another £750k for each finishing place above bottom) , then a club should make a profit. CCFC latest filed accounts for 2010/11 show a wage bill of £16m and other running costs of £12m so , even if the wage bill were to treble on promotion , there would still be a profit made as other costs will not go up much as they mainly relate to the costs of running the stadium , Academy etc.

Some of the cash generated by those profits may well (and should) go towards paying off old debts , but that is a use of cashflow matter not a profit one and would improve the balance sheet.

I agree with your general point that a promoted club should not enter a rash spending programme as this would use up too much cash. But spending £20m on new players would not use up £20m a year in profits , but only £5m a year for each of the 4 years of those players` contracts.

If we got promoted , spent £20m on new players, trebled our 2010/11 wage levels , and finished just above the 3 relegation places , then our profits would be about as follows:-

Income £77m ,less £68m(wages £48m , other costs £15m , player cost write-offs £5m) =profit £9m.

in 2011/12 season the bottom club ( wolves) recieved 39m in tv rights the top club man city recieved 60.5m for finishing top ?? so why you think the bottom club will recieve at least 61m is a mystery to me . it would mean the tv deals would have to rise by nearly 40% for payments to reach that , as most countrys are struggling financially i seriously doubt that happening . the parachute payments were wrong i was about 12 mill out i thought they were worth more than that ( i dont agree with them anyway its unfair you should look after your finances properly not get bailed out if you fail )
so with the lower tv money we would make a loss just like most other prem teams do . we would expect to make a loss aswell if we want to clear debt and become self sufficiant

The figures I quote are from the Sky TV deal for next season which has already been agreed and signed - and yes it is for a ridiculous 40% increase.

If we want to clear debt , we must make a profit. I don`t understand why you say we would expect to make a loss if we want to clear debt (?)

Exactly. I think where teams have gone wrong previously is assuming they will stay in the EPL make make investments accordingly so they end up still paying for their hugely expensive investments when they get relegated

the answer is yes and no !!!
if you enter the prem league without any debt it will allow you to compete and stay there with a sound financial footing to help guarantee your clubs future ( ie - hate saying it but swansea )
if you enter the prem league in debt like we would at this moment , after player wages and bonuses , plus paying to upgrade the squad , extra policeing at games and all the added extras there isnt a lot left to add to your profit in the first 2 years+ . if your lucky enough to have a basic squad and stay there (ie wigan ) it can be quite profitable and keep your club healthy financially but that is very rarely done .
teams that get up and go all out signing big money players straight away tend to struggle ( ie qpr and southampton this year ) . so called yoyo teams like west brom tend to bounce around for a few seasons then eventually slowly build a squad overtime good enough to compete in the league and stay up . its the teams who try buying instant success that are the ones that struggle later . look at leeds and portsmouth tried spending there way to the top then implode and fall down the league crippled by debt . unless youve got stupid money to spend like man city they should build slowly .
bolton are a bit of an exception because theyve been solid for years but have just been managed badly financially , i see them a lot like rangers in scotland .
realistically if city were to go up we would earn roughly 50 mill for being in the prem first year with a 16th place finish hopefully to just stay up . to do that im sure sam would have to be paid which is last time i heard 25mill ?? so theres half gone allready , then we would need at least 20 mill to spend on the squad especially the defence , leaves 5 mill which would be swallowed up by extra wages and promotion bonuses , extra matchday staff due to bigger attendances , plus all the other overheads that go with it there would be no profit for at least 3 seasons whilst they build a squad good enough to comfortably stay there .
the premier league guarantees nothing . they call the play off final the 100mill game ! thats only because if u get relegated you get 4x 15mill parachute payments over 4 years . some people seem to believe you get it in cash straight away which you dont it all depends on how mant times your on tv and what position you end up in the table .
if we do go up and its not managed properly it could spell the end of cardiff city .
if we do go up and the malaysians are as good financially as we hope they are it could be the start of very exciting times .

Soory Thomasblue , but you have got a few important figures wrong in your post , and are also confusing profits and cashflow which are two entirely different things.

From next season onwards , even finishing bottom of the Premier will guarantee a minimum of £61m in TV money alone even with the minimum number of televised games and in total CCFC could expect to have total income of over £75m with gate money , sponsorship etc added , not the £50m figure you state.

And parachute payments are £16m a year for 2 seasons followed by £8m a year for years 3 and 4 following a relegation - a total of £48m , not the £60m you state as 4x£15m.

With income over £75m even for finishing bottom (would go up by another £750k for each finishing place above bottom) , then a club should make a profit. CCFC latest filed accounts for 2010/11 show a wage bill of £16m and other running costs of £12m so , even if the wage bill were to treble on promotion , there would still be a profit made as other costs will not go up much as they mainly relate to the costs of running the stadium , Academy etc.

Some of the cash generated by those profits may well (and should) go towards paying off old debts , but that is a use of cashflow matter not a profit one and would improve the balance sheet.

I agree with your general point that a promoted club should not enter a rash spending programme as this would use up too much cash. But spending £20m on new players would not use up £20m a year in profits , but only £5m a year for each of the 4 years of those players` contracts.

If we got promoted , spent £20m on new players, trebled our 2010/11 wage levels , and finished just above the 3 relegation places , then our profits would be about as follows:-

Income £77m ,less £68m(wages £48m , other costs £15m , player cost write-offs £5m) =profit £9m.

Nowhere in that are promotion bonuses paid to clubs for previous transfers or promotion on uses for players.... Bellamy has £1m alone.

That`s because those costs are accounted for in the year of promotion , not the first year in the new division.

200 shirts a day sold in South Korea and growing

Ki Sung-Yeung m'Lord Ki sung-Yeung