|
Post by RoryTheRanger on Mar 2, 2015 9:37:45 GMT
Year ago (as of last week) www.qpr.co.uk/news/article/qpr-accounts-may-2014-shareholders-loans-2306179.aspxAll those moaning about the financial side of things can shush for a while, losses of only £9.8m for the season and £60m of shareholders debt written off. [Macmoish copy/pasting the whole statement] QPR Ofificail QPR REDUCE LOSSES PUBLISHED 12:30 2nd March 2015 by @qprfc Queens Park Rangers post a loss for the year ending May 2014 of £9.8m … QPR have filed its account for the year ending May 2014 Club posted a loss of £9.8m for the year Expenditure was reduced by £22m Shareholders write off £60m of shareholder loans QPR filed its accounts for the year ending May 2014 showing the club posted a loss for the year of £9.8m. Expenditure was reduced by £22m mainly driven by lower player costs and this trend will continue in future years as the club will continue to bring losses down. In addition the club’s shareholders reiterated their long term support for the club by strengthening the club’s balance sheet by writing off £60m of shareholder loans. The club’s shareholders and directors are of the opinion that the club is moving in the right direction and on track with its mid-term and long-term business plans. The impact of relegation and promotion inevitably has a material impact on the short-term financial results of clubs but the shareholders are comfortable that the medium-term outlook is positive with Premier League revenues growing and the club’s costs continuing to fall. www.qpr.co.uk/news/article/qpr-accounts-may-2014-shareholders-loans-2306179.aspx#UtGi54HIJiqWPJki.99
|
|
|
Post by harr on Mar 2, 2015 9:48:40 GMT
Seems like a much better situation than we feared 9.8 million . Also the 60 Million being paid off by the shareholders is a massive plus . Will take that.
|
|
|
Post by Bushman on Mar 2, 2015 10:17:14 GMT
They have more or less written off the 65m debt from 2012-13. Expect a small fine from the FL is on the cards.
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Mar 2, 2015 10:21:22 GMT
It's really great that they have written off that the shareholders have written off that debt, hoping that puts us in a safer position. Supporters care about their football club and care about debt levels. People aren't "moaning" for no reason - if a club racks up very large amounts of debt, it's not exactly a fair/sensible assumption that shareholders are just going to have that written off forever i.e. it doesn't make it a sustainable business model, just means that we fortunately have shareholders who for now are happy not to see a return on their investment at this time, which is contrary to the reason shareholders tend to invest in something. But yes, I'm very glad that the debt's been largely written off this season. In terms of the club's shareholders, I would imagine this puts a fairly significant pressure on the next few years proving more profitable. But i'll certainly take £9.8m official debt over £65.4m, that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by nadera78 on Mar 2, 2015 10:52:34 GMT
What's not clear from that statement is if the £60m written off is from the pre-existing debt of £179million or is from last season.
If it's the former then it represents an incredible turnaround from losing over £60m 2012/13 in the PL to losing only £9.8m 2013/14 in the Championship. If it's the latter then it means we lost £69.8m last year but the shareholders wrote off almost all of it in order to get under the FFP rules. We'll only know which of this it is when the full accounts are published.
I realise I'll be accused of negativity, etc now.
|
|
|
Post by harr on Mar 2, 2015 11:08:23 GMT
I guess the 15 million from Remy and Mutch that wasn't reinvested into players will go towards any FFP fine . Would rather we stayed up though that worry about outcomes. Let's get a shock win against either Arsenal or Spurs , we are due a win against a big team. So far we just have one point off Man City don't we.
|
|
|
Post by Bushman on Mar 2, 2015 11:19:38 GMT
My guess is that the debt will still be sitting around the 180m mark.
|
|
|
Post by blatantfowl on Mar 2, 2015 11:48:43 GMT
These accounts are for year ending May 2014 so will only include our championship campaign costs.
A write off of debts is very welcome. The clarity of whether this left us with an overall debt of £130m or £190m as of May 2014 should come soon.
Wonder if our premiership campaign so far has been cheaper or more expensive than the previous year
|
|
|
Post by Ashdown_Ranger on Mar 2, 2015 12:24:48 GMT
Have to say that the board has been true to its word about swallowing the debts. There has been a lot of hostility and mistrust aimed at them from many quarters. Let's hope that this (pretty big) gesture reassures fans about the club's future. A good day.
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Mar 2, 2015 13:56:52 GMT
It's really great that they have written off that the shareholders have written off that debt, hoping that puts us in a safer position. Supporters care about their football club and care about debt levels. People aren't "moaning" for no reason - if a club racks up very large amounts of debt, it's not exactly a fair/sensible assumption that shareholders are just going to have that written off forever i.e. it doesn't make it a sustainable business model, just means that we fortunately have shareholders who for now are happy not to see a return on their investment at this time, which is contrary to the reason shareholders tend to invest in something. But yes, I'm very glad that the debt's been largely written off this season. In terms of the club's shareholders, I would imagine this puts a fairly significant pressure on the next few years proving more profitable. But i'll certainly take £9.8m official debt over £65.4m, that's for sure. Very well put.
|
|
qprha4
Gerry Francis
Lower Loft, to R-Block, to S Block, to X Block… Loyal Supporter
Posts: 53
|
Post by qprha4 on Mar 2, 2015 14:13:27 GMT
Its definitely positive that the shareholders have written off the debt.
I wonder how the FA will view this as I'm not 100% sure if this will prevent the FFP fine, its still a £69.8m loss (Otherwise Man City could have done the same thing).
|
|
|
Post by sharky on Mar 2, 2015 14:45:55 GMT
Good news. It will be good to know exactly what the Club's financial position is going forward too.
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Mar 2, 2015 15:09:24 GMT
The £60M written off has made the loss for that year £9M instead of £69M. The one hundred and seventy million pounds of prior debt remains.
|
|
kilburnhoop
Dave Sexton
Every Ranger is a danger
Posts: 1,631
|
Post by kilburnhoop on Mar 2, 2015 15:34:55 GMT
£60M. that is SIXTY MILLION POUNDS. I find it amazing people talk about this amount of money as if it is nothing!!!.
|
|
|
Post by sharky on Mar 2, 2015 15:35:10 GMT
From the BBC www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/31658677 QPR cut losses by 85% to £9.8m despite 2013 relegationPremier League club Queens Park Rangers have cut their losses by 85% to £9.8m for the year ending May 2014 despite spending 2013-2014 in the Championship. Rangers lost £65.4m in the year to May 2013 when they were relegated. The club say £60m of shareholder loans have been written off. Spending was also reduced by £22m, mainly because of lower player costs. The Football League is expected to state QPR's Financial Fair Play (FFP) position within the next week. QPR's seasons under Tony Fernandes 2011-12 17th in the Premier League Managers: Neil Warnock, Mark Hughes 2012-13 20th in the Premier League (relegated) Managers: Mark Hughes, Harry Redknapp 2013-14 4th in the Championship (promoted through play offs) Manager: Harry Redknapp If the figures announced today are ratified, it would mean a small fine, rather than the huge one that had been anticipated if losses were comparable to 12 months ago. However, QPR's FFP accounts had to be filed by 1 December and the Football League has confirmed they are still the subject of discussion: "The treatment of certain items in those accounts, and how the League's FFP rules should be applied to them, remains a matter of ongoing discussion between QPR and The Football League." QPR chairman Tony Fernandes has presided over huge investment in the transfer market since becoming the club's majority shareholder in August 2011. But with their Premier League place in jeopardy once more this season, with the club in 17th place in the table, level on 22 points with third-from-bottom Burnley, Fernandes outlined a new approach following the resignation of Harry Redknapp as manager last month. "Our recruitment policy at QPR is changing," he said. "This is a new strategy for us. "We want to develop a philosophy of buying young, hungry players who can go on to forge decent careers with us."
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Mar 2, 2015 16:24:19 GMT
£60M. that is SIXTY MILLION POUNDS. I find it amazing people talk about this amount of money as if it is nothing!!!. Quite. The extent of mismanagement and colossal losses year on year is incredible.
|
|
kilburnhoop
Dave Sexton
Every Ranger is a danger
Posts: 1,631
|
Post by kilburnhoop on Mar 2, 2015 16:58:14 GMT
£60M. that is SIXTY MILLION POUNDS. I find it amazing people talk about this amount of money as if it is nothing!!!. Quite. The extent of mismanagement and colossal losses year on year is incredible. We are not alone, cardiff announed 176million losses this week. Im sure fayed wrote of 100million debt at fulham before selling. Wigan must have huge losses, Blackburn, Bolton and Boro have crippling debts. This is typical of what small clubs need to spend to get into the prem and hopefully stay there. Where will it end?
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Mar 2, 2015 17:20:35 GMT
Quite. The extent of mismanagement and colossal losses year on year is incredible. We are not alone, cardiff announed 176million losses this week. Im sure fayed wrote of 100million debt at fulham before selling. Wigan must have huge losses, Blackburn, Bolton and Boro have crippling debts. This is typical of what small clubs need to spend to get into the prem and hopefully stay there. Where will it end? Hopefully it ends with the QPR owners running the club within means, and having a good youth system and good coaching from which players come through. Our club is the size it is, if our owners wanted a club with the revenue of a champions league club then they should have bought one. It is their choice to use the club as a vehicle to promote their other businesses as long as the debts they create are theirs and not saddled on the club. If we are to take Tony at his word then hopefully operate the club within its means. Still a long way to go though but, and again I use the word 'hopefully' this is a start. I hope Burnley stay up this season for all the right reasons, a team which is nothing more than average but is well organised by a good young British coach, surely this is the way it should be done.
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Mar 2, 2015 17:31:06 GMT
I have always stated that I thought the previous years' loss would have included provisions that would allow us to show better trading figures for the period just reported.
Maybe, we owe Rebecca Capelhorn a big thank you.
It may be pertinent to remember that these are audited accounts, so I would have thought that The Football League would not have to much room for query.
I wonder if the press will apologise for misleading other club's supporters that we would be liable to a massive fine?
|
|
|
Post by blatantfowl on Mar 2, 2015 17:57:31 GMT
I have always stated that I thought the previous years' loss would have included provisions that would allow us to show better trading figures for the period just reported. I don't understand. What sort of provisions do you mean?
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Mar 2, 2015 18:28:37 GMT
I have always stated that I thought the previous years' loss would have included provisions that would allow us to show better trading figures for the period just reported. I don't understand. What sort of provisions do you mean? Well, it is normal business practice that you allow for bad debts that have not yet been incurred. If you then receive payments for these in the following year, that would be all profit. Also I suspect that the purchase of Samba would have been fully included in the accounts for year end May 2013 & that the income for his outgoing transfer would have been in y/e May 2014. I don't know how it works with professional footballers, but I would think that when we sign a player we have to show depreciation on our "asset" over a set number of years. However, if they leave the club you would put the full write down as a loss in that years accounts. Therefore any player leaving in Summer 2013 would have been fully accopunted for & they may have been able to increase the depreciation as they would then be Championship players. Also, any bonuses that we paid for winning promotion may have been set aside for the accounts ending May 2015. Other costs/income may also be treated in a similar fashion. These, and many others, are practices that all companies carry out every year. It is what accountants are paid for! I give credit to the club if they did deliberately take losses in the prior year knowing that FFP could not be ignored for last season.
|
|
|
Post by blatantfowl on Mar 2, 2015 19:46:36 GMT
Interesting perspective terry but not one persuades me that the losses incurred in previous years were anything other than the way they were explained at the time. We were told then it was down to playing expenditure being too high - transfers fees, agent fees and massive salaries.
|
|
kilburnhoop
Dave Sexton
Every Ranger is a danger
Posts: 1,631
|
Post by kilburnhoop on Mar 2, 2015 19:55:29 GMT
We are not alone, cardiff announed 176million losses this week. Im sure fayed wrote of 100million debt at fulham before selling. Wigan must have huge losses, Blackburn, Bolton and Boro have crippling debts. This is typical of what small clubs need to spend to get into the prem and hopefully stay there. Where will it end? Hopefully it ends with the QPR owners running the club within means, and having a good youth system and good coaching from which players come through. Our club is the size it is, if our owners wanted a club with the revenue of a champions league club then they should have bought one. It is their choice to use the club as a vehicle to promote their other businesses as long as the debts they create are theirs and not saddled on the club. If we are to take Tony at his word then hopefully operate the club within its means. Still a long way to go though but, and again I use the word 'hopefully' this is a start. I hope Burnley stay up this season for all the right reasons, a team which is nothing more than average but is well organised by a good young British coach, surely this is the way it should be done. Not at our exspense you forgot to add.
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Mar 2, 2015 20:16:08 GMT
I suspect some of the previous years losses may have been timing issues i.e. buying Samba and selling Samba...that alone would have added £12m debt to the previous year and improved income by £12m in this season, so one deal net zero creates a £24m difference between financial years.
|
|
|
Post by corndog on Mar 2, 2015 21:43:59 GMT
Overspending the FFP limits by £1.8m shouldn't cause a large fine if relegated. Also nice to see the shareholders putting their money where their mouth is, I wouldn't expect a huge fine, but one is still in the cards. Still it is now understandable why TF isn't losing his mind about relegation, although staying up would certainly help financially. From my understand Leicester also breached the FFP rules as well, so it will be interesting to see where their figures end up.
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Mar 2, 2015 22:17:55 GMT
Hopefully it ends with the QPR owners running the club within means, and having a good youth system and good coaching from which players come through. Our club is the size it is, if our owners wanted a club with the revenue of a champions league club then they should have bought one. It is their choice to use the club as a vehicle to promote their other businesses as long as the debts they create are theirs and not saddled on the club. If we are to take Tony at his word then hopefully operate the club within its means. Still a long way to go though but, and again I use the word 'hopefully' this is a start. I hope Burnley stay up this season for all the right reasons, a team which is nothing more than average but is well organised by a good young British coach, surely this is the way it should be done. Not at our exspense you forgot to add. Did I need to to add that?
|
|
|
Post by primular on Mar 3, 2015 1:03:31 GMT
However, QPR's FFP accounts had to be filed by 1 December and the Football League has confirmed they are still the subject of discussion: "The treatment of certain items in those accounts, and how the League's FFP rules should be applied to them, remains a matter of ongoing discussion between QPR and The Football League."
So the FL introduce a penalty provision that is so unclear in its wording that after three months discussions on how it applies remain ongoing. Hopeless. This is a penalty that could amount to tens of millions of pounds. How can anyone carry on their business against that sort of uncertainty?
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Mar 3, 2015 6:57:37 GMT
60 million is still less than it cost to buy Ronaldo or Gareth Barry. It isa lot of money but having read various articles about it, perhaps we are indeed at long last starting to cut our cloth and live accordingly with it. Fingers crossed.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 3, 2015 8:07:47 GMT
Financial Fair Play News A couple charts www.financialfairplay.co.uk/latest-news/qpr-figures-not-all-they-seem QPR figures not all they seem Posted by Ed Thompson on Monday, March 2, 2015 QPR issued a press release on 2 March to announce that the club had improved on losses of over £65m in 2012/13 and had made losses of just £9.8m in 2013/14. Not only that, but the owners had paid off loans of £60m. On the face of it, a terrific improvement and stories about the club being hit by a £30-£40m FFP fine were clearly wider of the mark. However, things are not quite as they may initially seem The improvement was both stunning an unexpected. And as we know, when something seems too good to be true, it often is. The club’s announcement was lacking in detail – rather than publish full accounts, the club gave fans only partial information. However, the press release did tell us that ‘Expenses’ has been reduced by £22m. In 2012/13, Expenses were £125.8 – so we can expect Expenses to be somewhere around £103.8m for 2013/14 (although we don’t know the breakdown): When we overlay the Income figures (and a projection for the reduced income in 2013/14) we can see that something clearly doesn't stack up: Rather than reporting a loss of £9.8m, QPR should have reported a loss of around £67m. Rather than reducing, the club losses should actually have increased! Readers may be puzzled as to why the figures are so far out – well over £50m. The only way QPR could have reported a loss of £9.8m is if their income was £50m-£60m higher than can reasonably be explained. Well, remember that £60m of loans mentioned in the Press Release that the owners generously cancelled? It seems highly likely that QPR have accounted for that £60m loan cancellation as ‘Income’. To say this is highly irregular would be an understatement – injections of cash simply should not go through the Profit & Loss Account (the funds are not the result of trading and should not count towards the club’s annual profit or loss). Fortunately Football League rules prevents owners from artificially inflating transactions to help their club pass the FFP Break Even Test. This kind of inflated ‘mates-rate’ deal is termed a Related Party Transaction’ (RPT) and the Football League will assess any RPT transaction and apply a ‘fair value’ for the purposes of the FFP test. By brazenly classifying the £60m loan pay-off as ‘Income’, the club have clearly irritated the Football League’. The FL statement explains: "The Football League notes the statement made earlier today by Queens Park Rangers regarding its annual accounts for the year ending May 31, 2014. "The treatment of certain items in those accounts, and how the League's FFP rules should be applied to them, remains a matter of ongoing discussion between QPR and the Football League. Interestingly, QPR’s owners could suffer a double-whammy if the club cannot win their seemingly thin legal argument. The owners have written off £60m in loans but could also find themselves saddled with a FFP fine of somewhere around £50m. They will have to pay that fine if they are relegated to ensure the Football League will allow them into the place in the Championship. It will be interesting to see if this contentious transaction is labelled as a ‘Related Party Transaction’ in the accounts. It is possible that the obliging accountants may have decided not to use this term in the accounts. If so, this could make things more difficult for the Football League– however it seems such an ‘open and shut’ case that it may well not ultimately matter. It is possible of course that the missing £50m-60m isn’t related to the loan repayment – however the figures are so close it seems likely to be connected. In any case, there has clearly been a highly contentious owner-related injection of income which has irked the Football League and pushed at the boundaries of football club accounting. Ultimately, you have to wonder about the wisdom of the club’s approach. For all the owner’s openness on social media, many fans will have been misled by the club announcement and surely deserve to be treated better
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 3, 2015 8:11:37 GMT
City AM City A.M. Tuesday 3 March 2015 Business with personality Sport League chiefs query QPR financial recovery Share: by Frank Dalleres 3 March 2015 12:41am QUEENS Park Rangers could still face a hefty fine and demotion to the Conference for breaking the Football League’s financial fair play rules despite declaring a huge drop in losses last season. QPR said they lost just £9.8m in 2013-14, an improvement of £55.6m on the previous campaign even though they spent it in the Championship and missed out on lucrative Premier League broadcast payments. The west London club said they reduced expenditure by £22m but did not reveal any further details, other than that shareholders including chairman Tony Fernandes had written off £60m worth of loans. If approved by the Football League, the financial results would see Rangers avoid an anticipated £40m sanction for breaking FFP rules and a row that risked seeing them banished to non-league football. But the league, which represents clubs in the second, third and fourth tiers, said it was still in talks with QPR’s accountants over a number of potentially disputed items. “The Football League notes the statement made earlier today by Queens Park Rangers regarding its annual accounts for the year ending May 31 2014,” it said. “The club has previously filed accounts with the Football League in accordance with the requirements of the league’s FFP rules. The treatment of certain items in those accounts, and how the league’s FFP rules should be applied to them, remains a matter of ongoing discussion between QPR and the Football League. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment further at this time.” Clubs who exceed the size of losses permitted under FFP but gain promotion to the Premier League, as QPR did last term, face large fines determined by the extent of their infringement. Football League chairman Shaun Harvey warned in September that clubs who refused to pay their fines could be barred from re-entering the competition, effectively relegating them to the Conference. Fernandes responded at the time by vowing to fight any fine in court if necessary. HOW IT WORKS Football League Financial Fair Play ■ Championship clubs were permitted to lose a maximum of £8m during 2013-14 without breaking Football League financial fair play rules ■ Those who exceeded that amount face punishment depending on whether they stayed in the division or gained promotion League ■ Teams who stayed in the Championship are subject to transfer bans, while those who went up, like QPR, face a fair play tax of £6.7m for the first £10m lost, plus 100 per cent of any further losse www.cityam.com/210617/league-chiefs-query-qpr-financial-recovery
|
|