₦airaland Forum

ChristineC:
look at Liverpool, I don't see anything they've won for a decade, major or minor.
clubs propped up by sugar daddies can only float as long as the man is interested, the day he gets bored is the day you realize it's all been a farce.
there's almost no British club that'd survive servicing the debt the Glazers burdened on Manchester United, they've not only done that, but generated decent amount of money for player recruitment and maintenance of one of the biggest salaries payers in Europe. yes they've not recruited wisely but have shown that with better experienced personality in the recruitment process, they can go for the biggest talents out there and not be hindered by finds. you think all that source of income will go away with a bat of the lid? the only thing that has held the club back is recruiting poorly, not the lack of a properly managed institution.
the relationship between the brand and the success on the pitch vis a vis income generation is wildly elaborated, I'm not saying it is totally absent; but check how much has been taken by the Glazers since 2005 and check how much has been reinvested in the squad.

just gree.

Failure no get brother even in business

odizeey:
just gree.

Failure no get brother even in business

point the successful clubs in England over 10 years.
point the ones over 5 years.

ChristineC:
according to a new football finance study. a club that can't fill their stadium capacity is the most valuable EPL team if you think Man City is earning more money than Man United then joke is you. remove the sugar daddy let's count the change left.

i’m to believe ChristineC that sells shoes in Idumota instead of BBC Sport.

You can tell that to ur fellow scummies.

kokaneprodigy:
i’m to believe ChristineC that sells shoes in Idumota instead of BBC Sport.

You can tell that to ur fellow scummies.

that's because people like you don't think for yourselves, and when you do your mind tell you your thoughts are rubbish before they even leave your lips.

ChristineC:
that's because people like you don't think for yourselves, and when you do your mind tell you your thoughts are rubbish before they even leave your lips.

So you are asking me to believe “ChristineC sports” instead of BBC sports just to prove to u I think for myself. Hell No!! I don’t want to think for myself today.

Thanks.

Spurs lost to Bournemouth with Everton as their last match and Everton deh fight for Europa qualification. That match will be very interesting!

nitrogen:
Matter of time. Right now, Man City does not, but with the way things are going, give it one or two years, they will overtake us.

You're wrong sir.

Chelsea was also like this when Abrahamovic came in, the way the Qatar oil rich owners came for City. Yet over 10 years down the line, they are still not as valuable as man utd. You people don't know that Man utd has grown to become the English pride and it will take an extremely poor management to drown it

If only she read the report, while United actually made more revenue than City ( 590M to 500M), City had less wages to pay compared with Man-U, City made a profit of 39M on player sales while United was at a loss on that, City is debt free while United is not.

So if company A and company B both make 100M each in sales revenue. But “A” has liabilities including salaries to maintain as much as 95M while company B has just 60M. Is “A” getting more value for money spent?

kokaneprodigy:
This one is for the “is it your money” crew, las las your club will go the way of Leeds United. It’s a gradual process.

Watch this space.

Did you read the article before running here to troll like a sex starved house wife?

Hope you know that this report was based on the work of some lecturer with little accolades or notoriety in Sports finance and it was based on a model developed by one of the guys in charge of the company that owns Football manager game franchise.

Come back to troll when a more renowned entity like Deloitte who is in charge of the "Deloitte money league" and Forbes release their report.

Below is the current ranking by Forbes

olabode89:
Did you read the article before running here to troll like a sex starved house wife?

Hope you know that this report was based on the work of some lecturer with little accolades or notoriety in Sports finance and it was based on a model developed by one of the guys in charge of the company that owns Football manager game franchise.

Come back to troll when a more renowned entity like Deloitte who is in charge of the "Deloitte money legue" and Forbes release their report.

Below is the current ranking by Forbes

There’s a difference between richest and valuable.

olabode89:
Did you read the article before running here to troll like a sex starved house wife?

Hope you know that this report was based on the work of some lecturer with little accolades or notoriety in Sports finance and it was based on a model developed by one of the guys in charge of the company that owns Football manager game franchise.

Come back to troll when a more renowned entity like Deloitte who is in charge of the "Deloitte money legue" and Forbes release their report.

Below is the current ranking by Forbes

when you talk about rich you are valuing assets + money in the bank.
Valuable is actually looking at ur investment decisions against ur profits.
Reason the report talked about revenue vs profit.

You don’t expect City to beat United’s wealth over night.

Reason I said it’s a gradual process. It’s bad investment decisions overtime that makes u start selling those valuable assets and eventually become poor like Leeds United.

U dig?

tenmariner:
Spurs lost to Bournemouth with Everton as their last match and Everton deh fight for Europa qualification. That match will be very interesting!

Everton fighting for which Europa?
Man U is currently on 6th position with 65points and Everton with 53points and just one match left so how are they fighting for Europa ?

kokaneprodigy:
There’s a difference between richest and valuable.

In this scenario they are basically the same thing.

There is no where else apart from this sub par report, where City is valued more than United.

As as June 30 2018, the cut off period used in the report United had a higher net asset value, more revenue and more profit. You should note that City has zero debt and zero associated finance costs.

humblesteve:
Everton fighting for which Europa?
Man U is currently on 6th position with 65points and Everton with 53points and just one match left so how are they fighting for Europa ?

The 7th placed EPL team also qualifies for Europa...

Example; Burnley this season, they finished 7th last season and crashed out during d playoffs vs olympiacos I think...

ChristineC:
look at Liverpool, I don't see anything they've won for a decade, major or minor.
clubs propped up by sugar daddies can only float as long as the man is interested, the day he gets bored is the day you realize it's all been a farce.
there's almost no British club that'd survive servicing the debt the Glazers burdened on Manchester United, they've not only done that, but generated decent amount of money for player recruitment and maintenance as one of the biggest salary payers in Europe. yes they've not recruited wisely but have shown that with better experienced personality in the recruitment process, they can go for the biggest talents out there and not be hindered by funds. you think all that source of income will go away with a bat of the lid? the only thing that has held the club back is recruiting poorly, not the lack of a properly managed institution.
the relationship between the brand and the success on the pitch vis a vis income generation is wildly elaborated, I'm not saying it is totally absent; but check how much has been taken by the Glazers since 2005 and check how much has been reinvested in the squad.

What makes a brand so popular? Who accepts a brand? People!

The fact is supporters of Man Utd abound in South East Asia, South East, Middle East, Africa and the likes. What you however need to understand is without success, you don't get a top brand and many followers.

I mean, as the level of support declines due to poor results, the less top companies want to associate with your brand, and sale of jersies etc declines. AOL, Deezer, DHL etc will disappear.

Its business, nobody does emotional and historical stuffs.

olabode89:
In this scenario they are basically the same thing.

There is no where else apart from this sub par report, where City is valued more than United.

As as December 31 2018, the cut off period used in the report United had a higher net asset value, more revenue and more profit. You should note that City has zero debt and zero associated finance costs.

dude na finance 101 I give u so. You can take it or leave it. Reason Forbe’s categorically said RICHEST while the BBC report says VALUABLE. These things are used to track the progress or decline of coys. Coys don’t just close down in one day series of bad results make them close down. Take Diamond Bank for example, u can take Leeds United too. I never said City is richer than United today.

If u are to invest today will u invest with a coy posting losses?

Manchester United as of today is not as valuable as Man City simple.

kokaneprodigy:
when you talk about rich you are valuing assets + money in the bank.
Valuable is actually looking at ur investment decisions against ur profits.
Reason the report talked about revenue vs profit.

You don’t expect City to beat United’s wealth over night.

Reason I said it’s a gradual process. It’s bad investment decisions overtime that makes u start selling those valuable assets and eventually become poor like Leeds United.

U dig?

Fact is Man Utd is still one of the top two most valuable clubs in the world, but then, it's only a matter of time before we are out of the top 3.

kokaneprodigy:
when you talk about rich you are valuing assets + money in the bank.
Valuable is actually looking at ur investment decisions against ur profits.
Reason the report talked about revenue vs profit.

You don’t expect City to beat United’s wealth over night.

Reason I said it’s a gradual process. It’s bad investment decisions overtime that makes u start selling those valuable assets and eventually become poor like Leeds United.

U dig?

This is the reason why I said you should look deep into this wishy washy report. Below are the revenue, profit before taxation and profit after taxation for both teams

City
Revenue - 500M
Profit before taxation - 10M
Profit/(loss) after taxation - 10 M (note that City didn't pay corporate tax because they have tax credits as a result of huge losses accrued over the huge expenses the club incurred over the years)

United

Revenue - 590M
Profit before taxation - 26M
Profit/(Loss) after taxation - (37)M
Reason for the loss -
The US federal corporate income tax rate reduced from 35% to 21% following the substantive enactment of US tax reform on 22 December 2017. This necessitated a re-measurement of the existing US deferred tax position in the period to 31 December 2017. As a result the tax expense for the year ended 30 June 2018 includes a non-cash tax accounting write off of £48.8 million. Accordingly, this has resulted in a loss for the year ended 30 June 2018 and basic and diluted loss per share.

kokaneprodigy:
dude na finance 101 I give u so. You can take it or leave it. Reason Forbe’s categorically said RICHEST while the BBC report says VALUABLE. These things are used to track the progress or decline of coys. Coys don’t just close down in one day series of bad results make them close down. Take Diamond Bank for example, u can take Leeds United too. I never said City is richer than United today.

If u are to invest today will u invest with a coy posting losses?

Manchester United as of today is not as valuable as Man City simple.

Lol!

Check my last post for the reason why United posted losses in the last financial year.

Finance 101... lmao! No need to dey make noise..

Also there is a need to review the performance of a company over a period of time. Investment decisions are not made based on the report of one year. There is a reason why in financial statements/reports results for at least 5 years are shown to give users of financial statements ample information.

kokaneprodigy:
dude na finance 101 I give u so. You can take it or leave it. Reason Forbe’s categorically said RICHEST while the BBC report says VALUABLE. These things are used to track the progress or decline of coys. Coys don’t just close down in one day series of bad results make them close down. Take Diamond Bank for example, u can take Leeds United too. I never said City is richer than United today.

If u are to invest today will u invest with a coy posting losses?

Manchester United as of today is not as valuable as Man City simple.

Finance 101. Calm down!

Most valuable and richest are almost the same in finance. Some institutions say being rich is by revenue, but the fact is your market capitalisation (if you are a listed company) or fair/net asset valuation tells us how rich your company or entity is.

Only reason your report is saying something different from Forbes' is the valuation methodologies adopted.

I would go for Forbes' rather than a report from one riff raff entity or person. We all know that Forbes has been doing this sh1t for a very long time.

nitrogen:
Finance 101. Calm down!

Most valuable and richest are almost the same in finance. Some institutions say being rich is by revenue, but the fact is your market capitalisation (if you are a listed company) or fair/net asset valuation tells us how rich your company or entity is.

Only reason your report is saying something different from Forbes' is the valuation methodologies adopted.

I would go for Forbes' rather than a report from one riff raff entity or person. We all know that Forbes has been doing this sh1t for a very long time.

Finance 101... concluding based on one year result.

You go fear CFA certified financial/investment analyst... lmao

olabode89:
Lol!

Check my last post for the reason why United posted losses in the last financial year.

Finance 101... lmao! No need to dey make noise..

Also there is a need to review the performance of a company over a period of time. Investment decisions are not made based on the report of one year. There is a reason why in financial statements/reports results for at least 5 years are shown to give users of financial statements ample information.

Did you deliberately skip the parts I wrote “Overtime “ ? Or where I said it’s a gradual process?

tenmariner:
Spurs lost to Bournemouth with Everton as their last match and Everton deh fight for Europa qualification. That match will be very interesting!

Their goal difference might just be their saving grace

emitope:
A spot that someone like Maddison should be taking? Or one of those youth team boys....
Omo. Utd no serious jare

but talk true who will you keep
matic or mata

thorrvik55:
The 7th placed EPL team also qualifies for Europa...

Example; Burnley this season, they finished 7th last season and crashed out during d playoffs vs olympiacos I think...

It was because the winners/losing finalists of the two domestic cups in England for that season qualified for the Champions league (an European competition) via their league position. Therefore, the slot is passed down based on the league table.

olabode89:
Finance 101... concluding based on one year result.

You go fear CFA certified financial/investment analyst... lmao

Sh1t happens!

olabode89:
This is the reason why I said you should look deep into this wishy washy report. Below are the revenue, profit before taxation and profit after taxation for both teams

City
Revenue - 500M
Profit before taxation - 10M
Profit/(loss) after taxation - 10 M (note that City didn't pay corporate tax because they have tax credits as a result of huge losses accrued over the huge expenses the club incurred over the years)

United

Revenue - 590M
Profit before taxation - 26M
Profit/(Loss) after taxation - (37)M
Reason for the loss -
The US federal corporate income tax rate reduced from 35% to 21% following the substantive enactment of US tax reform on 22 December 2017. This necessitated a re-measurement of the existing US deferred tax position in the period to 31 December 2017. As a result the tax expense for the year ended 30 June 2018 includes a non-cash tax accounting write off of £48.8 million. Accordingly, this has resulted in a loss for the year ended 30 June 2018 and basic and diluted loss per share.

All these megedefegede doesn’t change the fact that u posted loss.

nitrogen:
Finance 101. Calm down!

Most valuable and richest are almost the same in finance. Some institutions say being rich is by revenue, but the fact is your market capitalisation (if you are a listed company) or fair/net asset valuation tells us how rich your company or entity is.

Only reason your report is saying something different from Forbes' is the valuation methodologies adopted.

I would go for Forbes' rather than a report from one riff raff entity or person. We all know that Forbes has been doing this sh1t for a very long time.

I strongly disagree.

If e no be panadol e no fit be like panadol.

kokaneprodigy:
I strongly disagree.

If e no be panadol e no fit be like panadol.

That's fine. Enjoy yourself buddy!

kokaneprodigy:
Did you deliberately skip the parts I wrote “Overtime “ ? Or where I said it’s a gradual process?

Are you switching your position on "City is more valuable than United"?

You mentioned that United is on a decline but the club is posting increasing/record revenues year after year and I explained the reason for the loss recorded in the last financial year which the wishy washy report that you are parading decided to ignore in their evaluation.

Taking into consideration that a material part of City's revenue is through some shady related company investments/commercial deals make your claim laughable.

Based on sound financial analysis from the financial report of both teams there is no way that City is valuable or richer than United.

kokaneprodigy:
All these megedefegede doesn’t change the fact that u posted loss.

Mr. Financial Analyst... I thought you were debating based on your Finance 101 expertise, how come valuable information relating to financial figures are all of a sudden irrelevant??

olabode89:
Are you switching your position on "City is more valuable than United"?

You mentioned that United is on a decline but the club is posting increasing/record revenues year after year and I explained the reason for the loss recorded in the last financial year which the wishy washy report that you are parading decided to ignore in their evaluation.

Taking into consideration that a material part of City's revenue is through some shady related company investments/commercial deals make your claim laughable.

Based on sound financial analysis from the financial report of both teams there is no way that City is valuable or richer than United.

Until u come up with ur report and it gets published by BBC only then will I take ur megedefegede (elamps will not kill me ) seriously.

City is more valuable than United let it sink.

Ayagayagayagayooo