The full 2016/17 Newcastle United Accounts have now been made public.

Last Friday saw the club present their headline figures from these 2016/17 accounts, ahead of them being made public.

The club clearly wanted to paint as bleak a picture as possible, with many/most Newcastle fans believing it to be an attempt by Mike Ashley, to push an agenda to try and show why this summer’s transfer budget should be far lower than both supporters and Rafa Benitez would be expecting.

They made much of the ‘fact’ that Newcastle United had ‘lost’ £90m in their Championship season.

Sure enough, pretty much all of the media slavishly followed the club’s line and repeated that figure, with many then using that £90m ‘loss’ in claiming that this then reasonably means why transfer budget expectations should be reined back.

However, when you looked into the various basic figures that the club provided last Friday, the picture didn’t look half as bleak as was being presented.

They did show an accountancy loss of £90m but in terms of actual cash, Mike Ashley had only had to put in an extra £15m to help get through this Championship season, plus the bank balance was showing less than it had done at the start of the season.

So in terms of actual money in and out, it appeared to be £25m had been the real hit on the club that season in terms of cash.

Now with the full 2016/17 Newcastle United Accounts able to be seen online at Companies House, football finance expert Kieran Maguire has done a great analysis of all the figures.

Kevin Maguire lectures in football finance at Liverpool University and also has his own Price Of Football website.

After poring over the various numbers in the NUFC accounts he has declared:

“Have crunched more numbers…

“Newcastle United EBITDA loss, used by analysts and excludes non-cash and one off items, is £19.8m, much less than quoted in press release.

“EBITDA profits £116m in previous 4 yrs, so don’t expect MA to be seen selling the Big Issue just yet.”

So in terms of the real hit on the club, the £19.8m figure Kieran Maguire has come up with, is very similar to the £25m cash figure that supported the club through the season in the second tier.

Getting Technical but easy to understand:

We don’t have to suddenly all become accountants, it is quite simple what Kevin Maguire is getting at.

EBITDA stands for earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, the definition of it being:

‘EBITDA is essentially net income with interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization added back to it. EBITDA can be used to analyze and compare profitability among companies and industries as it eliminates the effects of financing and accounting decisions.’

So basically, the EBITDA figure is the best guide to show how well a football club (or any other business) has done financially.

As Maguire points out, the club may have had a negative £19.8m figure for 2016/17 but in the previous four seasons, Newcastle United showed a total of £116m in EBITDA profits.

Anybody who thought that NUFC was in dire financial straits should think again, yes a season in the Championship has been a setback, but no reason why that should mean there isn’t significant strengthening of the squad and backing to Rafa Benitez this summer.

Previously NUFC from Kieran Maguire – The Mag 23 November 2017:

Mike Ashley is hopefully in the final stages of his time owning Newcastle United.

A disastrous decade of low/no ambition has seen two relegations and a number of near misses.

Newcastle reaching safety only on the very final day of the 2014/15 season when winning at home to West Ham, whilst the 2012/13 campaign saw Newcastle finally safe when beating QPR in their last away match of that season.

A football finance expert has now declared that it is ‘amazing’  that there weren’t more relegations in the Mike Ashley era, considering the lack of investment in the squad.

Kevin Maguire lectures in football finance at Liverpool University and also has his own Price Of Football website.

Maguire has revealed that between 2008 and 2015 there was an average net (players bought less players sold) spend of only £700,000 per season.

This happening at a time when the Premier League TV cash was rising dramatically.

It always felt/feels like Mike Ashley is living from season to season and these figures (see below) back up that perception.

Yet again he has gambled this season, refusing Rafa Benitez a penny to spend in January 2016, then a net spend of only £11.5m this summer (Brighton and Huddersfield both had net spends of over £40m), despite the club reporting that Rafa had earned Newcastle United a £40m profit on transfers in summer 2016.

mike ashley

Kieran Maguire;

“Between 2008 and 2015 Mike Ashley spent a net £700k  (on average) a season on players.

“It’s amazing that Newcastle United survived as long as they did in the Premier League.”



  • Geordiegiants

    All we had to do was ask Fleckas he knows best 🤔

  • Tweed Mag

    This brief analysis seems to put everything in perspective and reinforces what we know for definite – believe nothing coming from the owner or his pet poodles. The £90m loss reported by his PR ‘experts’ on behalf of the self proclaimed ‘pantomime villain’ will only serve to make them all look even more ridiculous. You couldn’t make it up if you tried.

  • Monkseaton Magpies

    The real loss before player trading is actually £54m. The £90m is before player sales. However it is hard to see how you can invest more in players when the accounts show a £12m overdraft. If this bloke reads the accounts the loss is clearly £54m but this will include future provisions of round £15m for players wages who are surplus to requirements and are going to be off loaded. On the bright side we are owed £60.7m for players sold and only owe out £24.0m for players bought so there will be a positive impact of £36.7m in the short term which will help the cash flow.
    Another good season this year and we should be in a strong position to buy players.

    • TheFatController

      Thanks mrs Ashley.

      • Monkseaton Magpies

        Please see my comment at top of page breaking down the figures.
        However I do believe there is approx. £15m worth of provisions which relate to future accounting periods. The good point in the accounts is that we will receive £60.7m for players which have been sold and pay out only £24m so the cash flow should improve.

        • TheFatController

          It’d improve even more with commercial deals and European football.

          Enjoying the status we had before he took over in other words…

          • Monkseaton Magpies

            The commercial deals really need to be round the forty million mark this season but will probably be round £30m which is in line or better than most clubs out the top six.

    • TheNutJob

      so you know more than a guy who lectures in football finance
      😂😂😂

      • TheFatController

        Of course, her son owns the club. Inside track….

      • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

        You have a bit of a nerve suggesting you take note of the experts now? Last week, the un-washed on here were saying the figures were cooked.

        • jack

          Not cooked , distorted , there’s a difference ,

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            There is a difference but perhaps that is too strong..

            The figures are presented with prudence, I’ve not read through the accounts yet which is why I’ve not commented in full but it will be interesting of any more information is provided on the provisions for wages – I suspect there will not be any as it’s not strictly required.

          • jack

            So it’s just a matter of watching this space

          • JonMag

            Ffs

          • Come&TakeIt1836

            There is a definition of the term ‘onerous’… value significantly less than the value of the benefit received. Since they went to the trouble to define this specific word in reports, I realized its use in the first wave of reporting a few days ago now to be a common word being used in a more ‘clinical’/objective fashion and not the subjective word choice I first took it as.

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            Were you suggesting this cost was specifically the cost of moving Krul, De Jong etc on?

            The popular (from reasonable folk) is that this is not just those players that have been shifted post balance sheet date but includes the like of Colback etc.

          • Come&TakeIt1836

            It could be. I have no idea. It could be player incentives that were due regardless of relegation.

            Remember the scene from Its A Wonderful Life where Jimmy Stewart and Donna Reed’s characters have just used their honeymoon money to keep the bank open? They close the day, lock the front doors, have only ‘momma dollar and papa dollar’ left, and are dancing around the bank.

            I have wondered if the club’s executive offices were like that a bit at the end of 2014-15. I have nothing to back this up but I can see the club being excited they’ve survived the financial restructuring years and throw a little party. MA proudly promises to spend £50M in each of the next three transfer windows… and starts to follow through on that promise through the next two windows. They’ve come through the hard times and survived. Spending should make things better… relegation isn’t a threat anymore… and they get reckless… new player contracts aren’t protected, potentially ‘onerous’ incentive clauses are included… and then the big ‘oops’ happens… Carr is the team builder (out of balance squad) and McClaren is the manager (inept leadership). The outcome is the seemingly impossible.

            My comment is more about the fact that the club were the ones who agreed to the contracts. To come back and call them onerous as a part of a news release seemed a bit disingenuous in that light. If the term is being applied by auditors as a technical/professional term and is being quoted, then I understand its use a bit better. Still a bit disingenuous but it is technically a technical term being repeated and not a completely subjective word choice.

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            Fair point.

        • JonMag

          the figures are cooked, you know of any billionaires that don`t fiddle, wise up a ££hole

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            The billionaires don’t fiddle, it’s the guys on their way to a billion you have to watch.

            Why are you so abusive? This is a forum of opinion and in some cases, information provided by someone who knows a heck of a lot more than yourself on a subject.

      • Monkseaton Magpies

        It appears so as I have the set of accounts in front of me so see my comment above the true loss is indeed £54m which explains it in simple terms. I do not think the bloke understands Accounts.

    • Milo79

      Another frugal season and we may very well go down again. Kenedy and Dubravaka made the difference, and we seem to be in no rush to secure the services of either one.

      • Monkseaton Magpies

        Yes definitely need those two players a class full back, a central midfield player and two strikers. Would stick with Perez as will come good. So that is six new players needed but good ones not squad players.

  • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

    It’s a strange way to look at the figures if they don’t include the writing down of player assets but include player sales.

  • TheFatController

    What is clear is that the club now exists to be run through tv money, and we are getting left behind by the big 6 commercially.

    No wonder the big 6 want a greater share of he overseas tv money (and will no doubt get it) – they can then compete better against euro rivals and ensure clubs like ourselves never get close to them on revenues ever again.

    So Ashley’s avoidance of spending to get into Europe because there’s no real money it will prove short-sighted, and Spurs have shown foresight by investing in the new stadium and players…

    And he wants £400m for a club that is going to be left behind as an also-ran by the top 6? He really doesn’t get football and it’s future at all.

  • ghostrider

    There’s only two things anyone needs to be concerned about with finances.

    1.That we continue to be able to function as a football club.

    2.Transfer funds are made available, as and when NEEDED” not simply “WANTED”….

    Anything else is not worth worrying over.

    • TheFatController

      You’re wrong. Transfer funds are not what is wanted or needed, they are, and I quote, ‘every single penny’ available.

      You’re changing the club’s narrative there, and thus are wrong or have inside knowledge ?

      • ghostrider

        All us as fans need to worry about is having a stable club and also having needed transfer funds available in order for us to watch a football team and be a part of it all.
        We can worry about how we play football or how good or bad a player is and argue all day.
        Worrying about finances other than what’s aid is a pointless exercise for a fan and is just added extra speculation as to what’s right and wrong about the club.

        Not worth worrying over.

        • jack

          Debatable wether your a fan or not , or a member of Ashley’s pr machine

          • Jezza

            He’s not a Newcastle fan. He’s a troll who posts under multiple ID’s. ghostbuster and Monkseaton Magpies are the same person. Just block him.

          • TheFatController

            They are both the same person. Ashley’s Mum. Mrs Ashley to you and me.’

          • ghostrider

            Let’s clear one thing up. What you think of me or what I am as regards being a fan or not, is irrelevant to me.
            What is relevant is the fact that I am a fan…..for me……for me……not for anyone else.
            Do you get my drift?

          • jack

            Yeah your a fan , a fan of Ashley

          • ghostrider

            I’m a fan of Newcastle and I have nothing against Ashley. In fact I’m sort of happy that he’s ridden through the dark times and the hatred to at least allow us to function as a club at the right end.
            I’m grateful that he took this club on from Hall and Shepherd, saving it from a fate that could have been worse than Sunderland’s is right now.

            You want to call me a fan of Ashley, then do so. I won’t argue it.

          • jack

            How you can have nothing against Ashley is bewildering. And at least the Hall tenure showed ambition ,and weren’t as much in debt as you portray them , you compare their tenure to 11 years Ashley tenure , there’s just no comparison in the success that was achieved by Hall , my first match was in 1957 ,I’ve followed Newcastle through some bad times but never as bad as the Ashley regime , and include Westwood and mckeag in that too , you just continue to be Ashley’s lap dog , spouting your ridiculous annoying posts to the real fans of Newcastle

          • ghostrider

            Hall did show ambition. He took a massive risk on success by getting ahead of the game in terms of getting in there before the sugar daddies.
            He nearly made it but couldn’t sustain the further push needed after that.

            The club was in serious debt. Don’t kid yourself that it wasn’t.
            Ashley bought the club and the massive debt with it.
            Hall was clever with his money and so was Shepherd.
            They literally gambled the club to the bank.

            If Ashley hadn’t taken over, Shepherd would have killed the club as a force in the higher leagues……Not by being a miser but by being a Newcastle fan and letting his heart rule his head.

            Ashley deserves applause not hatred.
            Too many people jump on the hate bandwagon because they’re brainwashed into thinking Ashley should be spending fortunes because he’s a multi billionaire and that somehow this club is a bank within itself.

            It’s not.

          • jack

            The club wasn’t in serious debt at all , nothing that wasn’t manageable and not the figure the Ashley camp quoted , and what you on about sugar daddies , and risk , your continued backing of the Ashley regime is bewildering and nothing Ashley has done deserves such loyalty as you give him..And even though we didn’t win anything under the Hall’s there’s no comparison to the purgatory that Ashley has given us .He’s took most sensible Newcastle supporters to the depths of despair (I don’t include you in sensible Newcastle supporter )Runners up , third , fourth and fifth , cup finals , Europe numerous occasions ,compare that to Ashley ,two relegations ,two near misses , fifth once (and he didn’t invest ),the rest of the time in premiere just surviving ,no cup runs do you want me to go on ,what planet do you come from man

          • ghostrider

            Ok I see you’re one of those that dines on the past.
            You dined on what Hall did in the past under Keegan when it was all brand new roses and tinted glasses.
            They were good times, I admit that. I’d love to see them again……but not at the expense of the club’s well being.

            That’s the key.

            Those days were grasped because they could be.
            Ashley came in at a time when he was up against the start of an influx of sugar daddy owners with blank cheques at the ready.
            He knew he couldn’t match them but he also knew he had to put the club on a financially stable footing after seeing the mess Hall and co had left the club in, in an attempt to appease the fans and themselves by living a dream of silverware.

            They weren’t bad people for doing it…just dreamers as rich fans wanting to give fans like us that dream.
            The problem was when the dream faded and there was no more money to be had other than their own personal wealth of which neither were going to risk…so Hall sold his shares to Ashley and ran.
            Shepherd was more of an ardent dreaming fan. A die hard Newcastle fan who had no choice but to follow suit opr risk his own family wealth by becoming part of the debt left of which he wasn’t in Ashley’s league to take on as part of.

            You take on what suits you with your hatred and I’ll take on what I believe.

          • jack

            You know , you really talk some rubbish .Ashley has put as far back to the dark ages football wise , no ambition whatsoever only to stay In division each year , just surviving is not ambition to me. If your happy with just surviving then you’ve no.ambition and deserve a useless owner like Ashley .I’d like more for my club than what he offers unlike you who would suffer with fish heads and bowl of rice per day .One of Maggie’s children who won’t argue for better .It doesn’t matter what proof people offer , even specialist football finance experts you’d argue against them. I know one thing , people like you with zero ambition are no good for Newcastle

          • ghostrider

            We all want more for and from our clubs. Every fan in every league in the world wants more.
            Some fans believe they’re entitled to more than others based on size of the city and/or club/fanbase.
            However you can’t hate a person and then expect that person to make your dreams come true from his own pocket but you can expect your club to at least run efficiently and ensuring a squad is in place to compete.

            Are we competing?
            Do we have a squad in place to compete with more to follow?

            If not then does that also mean nearly every club in the premier league barring maybe 6 are also not conforming?
            Or is ambition just throwing money about whether you manage to do anything or not?

            And as far as I’m concerned with my ambition. My ambition has nothing to do with Newcastle United.
            I’m a Newcastle United supporter and fan who will always be one whether they are top of the premier league or bottom of the non-league.

            If you mean, what would I like to see my club do. I’d love to see us win the league title and champions league and FA cup plus league cup and charity shield, every season and then some.

            Equally i’d also love to see my football club as a football club and not a once was Newcastle

          • jack

            You have no ambition full stop , if you continue to support a corrupt regime like Ashley’s , your bereft of ambition .

          • ghostrider

            I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.

          • jack

            Well on that score I think it’s pretty unanimous amongst the majority of posters that they all think similar to me as far as your postings on here go .So if anyone doesn’t know what they’re talking about your in a minority of one .I’ve never known anyone talk as much rubbish about football as you

          • ghostrider

            Good, no problem. I’m fine with all that. Thanks for letting me know.

          • jack

            The dark times are Ashley , not Hall . At least they had ambition and we had our most successful time under their regime , compare the two tenures ,

          • Kneebotherm8

            As a true Newcastle United fan there is,obviously,no comparison……these last 11 years have been pure purgatory……….the Hall years were a never to be forgotten period which I doubt will ever be repeated…..I could forget the Shepherd years at the helm,but he did have the club at heart…..unlike the present incumbent…

          • jack

            Yeah give me Halls and shepherd anytime instead of this Ashley regime , at least we tried and done well in premiere and in cup competitions ,one day when we are sold Ashley will be found out just like Robert Maxwell was

          • ghostrider

            How many trophies did Hall get us under his tenure?
            How many did Ashley get us under his?

          • jack

            You mean two championship trophies , you sad idiot , he took us down twice , if brains were taxed you’d never get a rebate ,we shouldn’t have even been in the championship to start with , and it lack of investment what put us there and the hired yes men of your beloved regime

          • ghostrider

            Why were we in the championship?
            Ashley?
            Take a look at the teams we had when we went into the championship and tell me if those teams were underfunded.
            The fact that we went into the championship and immediately came back out as champions of it, tells you a lot more good about Ashley than you care to believe.
            Putting blinkers on will skate you along on a tidal wave of mass opinion….of course it will….but it doesn’t tell you a whole story.

            Football is about the joys of a sniff of something successful, whatever that ius. It’s not just reliant on one specific brand of success.

        • TheFatController

          I beg to differ – given the manager’s number one factor in deciding to stay at the club, that being that they are as ambitious as he and the fans are.

          Thus having a bit of transfer money ready to buy some players to watch mid table mediocrity might suit you but some of us want ambition, and transparency.

          You’re entitled to want nothing too exciting, but allow the rest of us to have some passion for the club.

          • ghostrider

            How ambitious do you think Rafa would be if it was his own money he was using?
            I’ll answer for you. As ambitious as Ashley is.
            Anyone can be ambitious with someone else’s money.

            And as far as having passion for the club…we all have it but that doesn’t mean we all have to follow one route of debate/argument about how it’s run from top to bottom.

            So don’t use me as some kind of issue as regards your passion being up or down. You either are passionate or you aren’t…..for you, not for me or anyone else.

        • Milo79

          Well we were looking decidedly unstable before the loan arrivals of Kenedy and Dubravka; and it will cost us in the region of £20m to bring back the former and £4m for the latter. In other words, we need to invest £24m simply to stand still in this league. That’s not an outlandish sum for two influential players in today’s market. Without them, we looked like relegation fodder. Will Ashley sanction a £24m spend for no ‘new’ faces? I very much doubt it, and that’s before we address the striker issue.

          • ghostrider

            I believe we will invest more than that amount.
            Rafa’s been handed funds he needed but it gets washed under the bridge because he bought badly with the money.
            It’s his fault he emptied the pot and had little left for a striker. It’s his fault for keeping a striker in the doldrums who is in the process of massively helping Fulham have a crack at the premier league again.

            He struck lucky with his loans by percentage.
            He’s been lauded for getting us to 10th with those loans.
            Imagine if those loans had been off the boil, or not hitting the ground running.
            We would likely have been relegated or if not, a kick in the aris away from it….but Rafa wouldn’t have been blamed….Ashley would. WHY?

            Because Ashley would have forced the loans onto Rafa just like Ashley was blamed for Slimani but Rafa lauded for Kenedy and Dubravka.

            Sorry but it works all ways, not just one way.

  • Monkseaton Magpies

    The reality is this and it is clearly stated in the Accounts. Turnover is £85.7m and operating costs before player trading are £140.3m which leaves a true loss of £54.6m. Then deduct the player amortisation for the year the the use of players £35.7m and you get the loss of £90.3m which has been in all the papers.
    Then you add back the profit on players sales of £42.3m and you end up with a loss after player trading of £48m. So £20m loss is way of the mark as depreciation is only £3m the largest non cash item in operating costs. Is the bloke from Liverpool University related to George from the times.

    • jack

      He’s an independent football financial expert unlike you , and not related to George . Unlike you who are related to Ashley

      • Monkseaton Magpies

        Well he should learn to read accounts correctly. Even with his odd theories we went from having £2m in the bank to being £12m overdrawn and Ashley putting another £15m in. Where is the extra money to buy players and he calls himself an expert.

        • jack

          Obviously your a financial expert are you ?.

          • Jezza

            No he’s just a sad sexually frustrated troll who likes to wind up Newcastle supporters. Just block him.

          • Monkseaton Magpies

            Get some urgent help before it is to late.

          • jack

            I should really block him but I find his comments a bit ridiculous at times and I like a good laugh

          • Monkseaton Magpies

            That’s been my job for over thirty five years and coupled with the fact I go to all the games every one I should know something about Newcastle.

      • Jezza

        He’s not related to Ashley but he does work for him, in a S****s D****t shop.

  • Lord

    I note the books were signed off by Lee Charnley on 5th March (Page 2 of the accounts), ready to file for end of March, in time for the deadline.

    And yet, they’ve not been posted until now. That smells and lends credence to the fact these have been held back for the start of the transfer window.

    • Monkseaton Magpies

      Good point but they normally have to be approved at an Annual General Meeting before they are sent to Companies House.

      • Alex

        An AGM of the Board and shareholders – that’ll be in a tiny broom cupboard, then.

        • TheNutJob

          a one man band

        • Leazes.

          Charnley…’all those in favour of retaining Dubravka raise your hand’….. Charnley raises hand……’one!’

          Charnley……All those against’….Charnley raises other hand……’one!’

          Charnley….’Darn a split vote’

          Charnley….’I’ll use my casting vote’…… raises leg falls over.

          Door opens to cupboard….cleaner….’do you want your shoes polished?’

  • Mike

    So will cashley sell the club at a discount now!!

  • relaxed

    This is just a circus and the ringmaster (Ashley) has directed all of his clowns to go into overdrive to to muddy the waters and deflect all they can away from the facts of the accounts.
    The top and bottom of it is who do you trust and believe, an independant finance expert who lectures on football finance who has studied the accounts or Ashleys clowns who are now under orders and in a frenzied mode to to try and make things look totally different to what they are.
    The way and the manor they are posting now makes them look so so stupid

  • jack

    Are you reading this , ghostwtiter , monkseaton , fleckman , and all the other trolls, and the writer is a financial expert , and independent unlike you lot of lay preachers

    • Leazes.

      They’re all one person so its lay ‘preacher’, singular.

      • jack

        Probably right , they are not Newcastle supporters

        • Leazes.

          Just had a look by logging out….. that ghostbuster one is the younger of two brothers…. so its two….. ‘preachers’ is fine.

          • Kneebotherm8

            That’s what I thought……two brothers innit?……..

    • Jezza

      There’s only two of them. All those trolls who constantly back Ashley are actuallly just two brothers from Manchester posting under around 30 different ID’s.

      • jack

        Your right there

      • Do these moronic apologist just keep rejoining or something Jezza?
        Although they are laughable why are they so determined to keep being irritants? Hey Monkey ghostface you got gnat DNA or something?
        Mystery why they bother.

        • Jezza

          They have got around 30 different ID’s between them. When too many people have blocked them they will either revive an ID that has been dormant for a while or just register a new one. They have been trolling Newcastle forums for years and they have been responsible for at least two other Newcastle forums being closed down in the past. Why do they bother? I can only assume they are addicted to the trolling. They feed off it. It gives them a buzz and boosts their self esteem. I’m sure it’s not just NUFC forums they troll. They have obviously got sufficient time to troll internet forums full time because there is nothing else happening in their sad empty lives. The best thing to do is block them. Don’t give them the attention and reaction they so desperately crave.

          • Kneebotherm8

            Get a fckn job……that’s what I say to them……too much spare time on their hands…

          • Jezza

            Oh they’ve got jobs. At least one of them works in a S****s D****t shop. The problem is they’ve got absolutely nothing to do in their spare time.

          • Kneebotherm8

            Aye,I forgot that……..he’s one of Mikes managers(is it a 💩Direct shop or is he down at Shirebrook?)…….getting paid mega productivity bonuses………..whilst the zero hour,hire and fire employees do all the running about……

          • Jezza

            He reckons he’s manager of a shop. Probably just does some mundane admin job behind the scenes as he lacks the social skills to work on the shop floor dealing with the public.

          • Wezza147

            Either way they are a couple of saddos who need to get themselves lives. Says a lot about their personalities (or lack thereof) if all they can do to amuse themselves is troll on these forums and to make themselves feel worthy. Truth is they are not. They’re also blocked.

    • Monkseaton Magpies

      Jezza does not like a proper discussion and is seriously ill as he thinks anyone with a different opinion lives in Manchester and has a season ticket for Old Trafford and works for Spoerts Direct. He clearly needs help.

  • Hankandjerk

    Regardless of how you want to account for the numbers, it is really bad running of the club and team. Why the wage bill is so high is beyond me? Or maybe it is because ashley has such a bad reputation we have to pay more in wages just to attract championship players?

  • JonMag

    Looks like the Fat [email protected]@k distorts the accounts & not only that i`d guess he`s the one that stopped his slave Penfold from getting a bonus.
    [email protected]@king Tony Soprano without the guns.

    • Rich Lawson

      He sits down in the NUFC canteen having ordered onion rings for the table and the screen goes black.

  • Come&TakeIt1836

    It is somewhat amazing how worked up everyone seems to be getting over year old reports. They do not explain current transfer budgets, contract negotiations with Rafa, etc. They explain the transfer spend of last summer and winter and the motivation and valuation used (indirectly) in putting the club up for sale. How much was the net transfer spend? How much cash did St James Holding put in net of what was repaid to MA? It explains some things.

    The club will now have new reports tracking and almost complete with this year’s results that include ~£100M more in revenues as well as projections of accounts into the coming year. The club’s current decisions are being made from those.

    Perspective.

    • JonMag

      the clubs decisions are made by Ashley, if there was £200m he still wouldn`t spend it

      • Come&TakeIt1836

        We shall see. Rafa seems to be encouraged/satisfied enough to reportedly rebuff an interest from another club so for now I will be, too.

        I think the net spend will be around £50M. I think the gross spend could end up being around £95M this summer.

        • JonMag

          no club`s approached him yet so that`s a load of schitt and see what happens this summer, it`ll be the same as last year

          • Come&TakeIt1836

            My concern is not the amount of money being made available but we shall see. My concern is the club’s decision/approval process and if the club will dither through opportunities again.

            I think the club’s leadership was stung again and again by ‘football experts’ in the early years of ownership and became overly cautious to massive degrees. Caution is fine but now that they have found a source they can trust (Rafa) a solid majority of the time, decisions must come faster (be timely) starting this summer.

          • TheNutJob

            if you can`t comprehend whats happened in the last 11 years then you never will.

          • Billmag

            Exactly the only time he has spent money was trying to save us from relegation instead of addressing the situation at the beginning of the season.

          • FatParosite

            Wilfully thick or just another Bishop bot putting out the word to influence those who might complain when we start the season woefully ill-equipped again?

      • Leazes.

        Thats a troll.

  • Weyhhadaway

    The club has successfully used corporate tax laws to manipulate the numbers, as all corporations do. If you look at any large corporation they pay minuscule amounts of tax. GE is one of the biggest in the USA and get a refund every year yet still manage to pay dividends to its shareholders.

    So we did a great job of hashing up the numbers, muddying the waters to leave ourselves as much in the bank as possible. So get the check book out Mike and give Rafa what he needs to make this club even more profitable. Not forgetting the delivery of the product, football, to your customers.

    • JonMag

      i was with you all the way until you mentioned Mike & cheque book.
      not going to happen, ever

      • Weyhhadaway

        Faith is blind. LOL as a bat in our case.

    • Andy Mac

      Ah yes forgot for a minute this is a football club first and foremost. Football clubs need to compete thats why we have leagues.

    • FatParosite

      Give your head a shake….

      • Leazes.

        I blocked that one…. that’ll be one of the bro’s

        • FatParosite

          Thanks….. BLOCKED now

      • Weyhhadaway

        This is a business in Ashley’s eyes and that is what all businesses do. shuffle money around to avoid taxes and make things look bad. While in reality things are OK. and dividends (that’s profit if you are a makem) get paid.

  • So fatso has issued lies via his usual utterly corrupt and immoral media serfs..ho hum and Geordies just soldier on knowing they have to tune out the moronic greed vampire of tack, if they are going to enjoy the heroics of the decent mags in the dressing room and terraces.
    This is where our ‘culture’ is now, blatant lying theft and exploitation, Astley, is ‘normal’
    It’s worse because a side effect of this hideous pantomime is the undeniable fact that prayer doesn’t work!
    Otherwise a fatberg would have clogged up the heartless insects chest pump years ago.

    • Andy Mac

      No need to sit on the fence Brent ?😋

    • Weyhhadaway

      Thoughts and Prayer doesn’t stop American kids getting massacred in schools either mate. But I am drifting off message.

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      No, he didnt

  • MichaelMaximusMoose

    Fat Mick fiddling the books, never in the World
    😂😂😂

  • Andy Mac

    I’m trying to think of any business, in any industry sector that thrives on a lack of investment ?
    Enough, as the Maybot says, is enough. Got to get the fat phkr out

    • Leazes.

      I’m trying to think of another football club which gives away free advertising and its future development land subsidising its owner for no reward in return.

      • Kneebotherm8

        Don’t wrack your brains………we’re the only ones….

        • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

          Utterly stupid comment from Leazes’. Keeping the development land would have hamstrung the club for no real benefit. It was not given away, it was sold at significant profit to the club at a time it needed money to get promoted.

      • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

        Utterly stupid comment, the development land would have hamstrung the club for no real benefit. It was not given away, it was sold at significant profit to the club at a time it needed money to get promoted.

  • Leazes.

    Chronic mismanagement whichever way you look at it… footballing failure, financial incompetence, giving away development land, poor merchandising, poor customer relations, a puppet chairman, an absentee owner, and a downsized club and squad after 11 years.

    I only hope the next owner is able to extract what is left of the club from the parent company MASH who seem to have the clubs kitty at the moment.

    • Weyhhadaway

      Just read Rafas interview yesterday and note his comments about professionalism. We have none. We got Rafa by pure luck. Now his professional approach is embarrassing management to the point where they would prefer him to leave. The conundrum is that he adds about 100M to the clubs value. LOL.

      • Andy Mac

        As opposed to Pardwho who added nothing to the value of the club – just the way Fatman likes it !

  • TheNutJob

    Jabba oot, fatty must go

  • Kneebotherm8

    Another nail in the Mike Ashley PR bandwagon…….not that we needed it………its been dead and buried for many a long year in the eyes of true toon fans……..that’s the real ones……not the two or three trolls that infest this site….

    • Monkseaton Magpies

      You not saying I am a real fan in the top fifteen supporters of the club. You cannot mean me.

  • Yes, nobody beleives Ashely’s PR machine. He did suffer a loss in the Championship but had a lot gained before that to compensate. As I said previously, that 90m figure is more like 40-50 tops and then you have all the money Newcastle gained from previous years. Others fail to remember that we got promoted last time with Hughton on salt and water. No players were brought in and we sold our best,s o we actually made a profit in the Championship that term for sure and every year onwards until we got relegated.
    Ashley is asking for 400m because he knows you can make 50m+ per year by just keeping us in the Premier League.

    • FatParosite

      Oh yes… Why would he sell the cash machine when he makes more than a quarter of it’s worth every year?

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      No we didn’t, we made an £18m loss in 2010.

      The £90m is the trading figure but not the bottom line. Football clubs report a figure before player trading as well as the net profit before tax, it’s the latter figure that really counts.

  • Clarko

    This article is highlighting old/dated/incorrect information and has ignored/cherry picked information from the new accounts and the Price of Football website. Important notes:

    – Newcastle have a net spend of £65.0m from 2008-17 averaging £6.5m a season on players

    – The accounts state that the club had a net spend of ~£46.0m for the 2017/18 season suggesting that Benitez was in fact ‘backed’ financially

    – In terms of physical cash Newcastle had a net spend of £11.3m for the 2016/17 Championship season as the fees for Sissoko for example have not been paid

    – Newcastle are still due to receive £60.7m in unpaid transfers, £22.0m of that coming by the end of next month

    • glassjawsh-got-banned

      “highlighting old/dated/incorrect information and has ignored/cherry picked information” so following the Clarko method then?

      • Clarko

        No, I just provided the information that the author decided to ignore.

        • glassjawsh-got-banned

          Another Clarko rule is “The surefire way to convince everyone on the Internet that you’ve won an argument is to declare victory”. There’s no coming back from that.

          • Clarko

            This isn’t an argument, you didn’t challenge anything I stated (as usual), where did I ‘declare victory’ in the argument that never happened? Quote me.

          • HarryHype59

            Clarko reminds me of the Black Knight in the Monty Python Holy Grail movie. Despite having all his limbs cuts off in a fight with King Arthur, the reality denying Black Knight insists victory can be his and his injuries are just flesh wounds.

            Clarko does a similar thing when his feeble pro Ashley arguments are deconstructed and shown to be utter nonsense.

          • Clarko

            ‘Clarko does a similar thing when his feeble pro Ashley arguments are deconstructed and shown to be utter nonsense.’

            Yet you didn’t provide an argument that deconstructs my ‘pro Ashley argument’.

            😂

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      The cash position moved a fair bit more as £15m cash was introduced but you are tlright, this should be improved as the creditors are low and debtors high.

      • Clarko

        And how is that relevant to any one of my (-) points?

        • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

          You said this: ”
          – In terms of physical cash Newcastle had a net spend of £11.3m for the 2016/17 Championship season”

          You need to add the £15m to that.

          • Clarko

            No, I’m specifically talking about transfer net spend, we spent £55,472,000 cash on signings, and recouped £44,356,000 cash in sales. Everyone talks about the £30.0m profit we made in the Championship transfer window from selling Sissoko, Wijnaldum and so on, in terms of physical cash, we didn’t, we actually spent £11.3m.

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            I’m not fighting your pint but how have you worked that out. I don’t think its possible from the figs?

          • glassjawsh-got-banned

            it’s impressive you went to the trouble of arguing with yourself o.O
            – if Jezza hadn’t blocked you both his head might explode

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            Jezza’s head would explode at anything in the real world. Perhaps the private detectives he hired got it wrong! ;-)

          • glassjawsh-got-banned

            He’s a bag of nuts sometimes, for sure. So it scares me how often he’s right!

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            He’s hardly ever right. That’s why he got moody with me, I challenged him and he could never back up his claims. We had a charity bet where he lost and refused to pay up. Dispicable lying toad imho.

          • Come&TakeIt1836

            You can have knowledge or not and you can be justified in your knowledge or not. That creates a matrix of having either justified knowledge (what we all generally want), justification but no knowledge (think of a stopped clock that is correct twice a day – you are coincidentally correct), no justification but accurate knowledge (no analysis but a correct belief), and no justification or knowledge (random information).

            Jezza seems to never combine knowledge and justification in the same comment.

          • Clarko

            Chronicle:
            ‘According to the accounts, Newcastle had a net cash spend of £11,347,000 on players during the 2016/17 campaign; they forked out £55,472,000 on signings, and recouped £44,356,000 from sales in terms of physical cash which came into the club that year.’

            Accounts:
            ‘Whilst significant transfer fees were earned in the year in respect of the players who left, the cash profile of these and other, existing, deals resulted in an overall net cash outlay on player trading for the year £11.4m’

            I was unable to find the numbers quoted in the Chronicle in the accounts, maybe you can find them.

  • Leazes.

    Sort of Cyclical finances isn’t it….

    Underinvestment….. relegation…..promotion….. repeat

  • Weyhhadaway

    Net spend of 700K per year says it all.

    It also suggests nothing will change.

    • Clarko

      It’s not 700k per yer, it’s £6.5m per yer.

  • Leazes.

    Something big I’m missing here…. what is it?

    That’s it….

    This is the report UP TO 30th June 2017 that has just been published, I had it in mind it the season just gone, but it hasn’t touched last season at all…. this is weird.

    When do we get last seasons Accounts 1st July 2017 to 30th June 2018?

    Where is the tv money and the parachute payments we’ve received since then?

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      April next year

  • Come&TakeIt1836

    Based on the reports numbers and the trends they create, the known tv revenues, and the expected player amortization for 2017-18 as noted in the report, the operating profit for this most recent year could be ~£8M (depends on exact Payroll amount), and the Profit After Tax could be ~£25M (depends on exact Profit on Player Sales amount). I’m estmating Payroll to be flat since there was a bonus payout this year that ended up bigger than the prior year and potentially salaries were higher. I’m not adding anything in for ‘onerous’ contracts. I’m estimating player sales at a more normal £15M (£42M in 2016-17).

    Cash balances should be relatively healthy with tv money coming in. Per the released report, £22M of deferred receivables should have been collected for past player sales so depending on the timing of those payments, some or all of that amount could be coming into the cash till, too.

    • FatParosite

      I wouldn’t hold your breath on that. Ashley prefers the slow drip as it allows him to squirrel it away to MASH. Either way the release of these accounts are part of the pantomime and duly timed to limit expectation. Aren’t they Bishop…?? I said aren’t they…??

      • Come&TakeIt1836

        One could argue their timing also might help negotiate the purchase of new players as selling clubs won’t think we are filled with cash.

        Or maybe they were waiting for some HMRC findings that would be relevant to the year being reported but the delay was becoming too long.

        Or maybe none of these types of positive or negative conspiracy scenarios are true and they were just released late because they seem to be slow in many of their managerial actions (releasing failing scouts and managers, making transfer decisions, etc).

      • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

        Where do the accounts state that?

      • Kneebotherm8

        Part of the pantomime?……..you’re not suggesting this whole episode is a pantomime?…..you’ll be telling me next Mike is the pantomime villain……😂😂😂😂…….

  • Come&TakeIt1836

    The article quotes the ‘expert’ as saying EBITDA as being a loss £19.8M. This is simply wrong… EBITDA is a loss of £54.6M (revenues less wages and operational expenses… £85.7M less £122.2M less £28.1M). The prior four year trend is ~£116M but relatively unimportant since it is spent history. The reason the club will be able to invest is because what has happened in the year since the reports occurred.

    • grumpyoldmag

      As a qualified accountant you will no doubt be able to tell us why you are not excluding amortisation from your “expert” calculations of EBITDA. Take out the 35 m amortisation you get to the 19 figure.

      • Come&TakeIt1836

        If you review my math, you will see that amortization is nowhere to be found. It is excluded from the total to begin with so it does not need to be added back in. You don’t get to add amortization back into the £54.6M subtotal if it wasn’t included in the first place. This from the top of the P&L working downwards.

        Said from the bottom of the P&L upwards, you do not get to add back in the amortization and depreciation from the £90.4M Operating Profit twice which the only way you get to £19M. You are suggesting £90.4M with an amortization credit (there is no depreciation) of £35.8M creating a subtotal of £54.6M for EBITDA and then a second amortization credit of £35.8M which gets one to £18.8M?

        That is not how it works.

        • grumpyoldmag

          Ok I’d lazily assumed that approximated to the difference. Here the exact quote from Maguire so that you can explain how you know more than a bloke who does this full time.

          Profits are income less costs, and here the club has been disingenuous by promoting in the press release a £91 million loss figure. However, this is before considering gains on player sales of over £42 million and includes the non-recurring costs from promotion bonuses and the contract write ups.

          If you strip out the one-off costs and income and exclude amortisation claiming it is a non-cash expense, we get to something called EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest Tax Depreciation and Amortisation). This is the profit most focussed on by analysts, at it is a sustainable cash equivalent of profit.

          This gives a figure of £19.8 million, still sizeable but far less than the sum being touted by the club to the media when the results were announced.

          • Come&TakeIt1836

            Exactly…Earnings Before Interest Taxes Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA). The title defines the formula and what is and is not included.

            The bottom line “earnings” were actually a loss of £40.7M. Now remove the positive impact of interest (£1.9M), positive impact if tax (£5.5M), depreciation (£0), amortization (£35.8) and also adjust for the positive impact for player sales (£42.3). You are left with the operational results for the year or EBITDA.

            -40.7 – 1.9 – 5.5 + 0 + 35.8 – 42.3 = -54.6.

            Now the quote says something about one time events. If they are going to start cherry picking onerous payroll expenses and promotion bonuses to exclude, that is their prerogative but then it is no longer technically EBITDA. Those items aren’t in the name/formula. And no one gets to add back in the amortization value twice.

            Your comment seems to be communicating an inherent presumption that I don’t do this full time. I just happened to be the guy apparently who checked the math. EBITDA is no accounting secret. Look it up on line.

          • Come&TakeIt1836

            I’ve gone out to the ‘expert’s’ website and found his math. And what I’ve suggested is exactly what he has done. He has arbitrarily decided not to include some of the wages, bonuses, etc in his calculation and so is only holding £80.3M of labor expense against the club instead of the £112 that occurred. This is not how the classic use of formula works.

            We have loanees out every year. We have players receiving bonuses and incentives every year. The amount expensed this year may be a one off but having these expenses in some amount is not. It is a subjective decision on his part to omit those items and does not follow the very name of the formula.

            From his comments, I think he is really trying to measure the risk against Financial Fair Play rules which is a viable concern/purpose and these items would apparently not be considered. He is just labeling the outcome EBITDA

      • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

        The question is why do this? What this is is for older viewers, a source and application of funds calculation. However, it’s a very dangerous thing to base any analysis on. It starts to assume the assets are far more valuable than they are, in fact, run a similar excercise over Sunderland’s figures and they appear to be a great investment.

        I get to a similar figure but a little more justifiably. The loss after player trading was £40m, the provision of £20m was a one off so add that back and you get a £20m loss which is a fairer comparison.

  • Matthew Flynn

    I assume you all read the Chronicle article as well. So, follow the money. Why does Charnley take so little home (comparatively)? If he is part of the collusion then we should figure out how he is being compensated for him continuing the (Mike Ashley) ‘non ambition’ approach.

    By football standards £75k a year for a GM is very low. Maybe he should be shopping around his CV.

  • Hankandjerk

    I think we can safely say Ashley has no intention of selling th3 club. There is no way you can justify a $400m valuation based on these accounts.

    What is there in terms of Assets, merchandising? Future revenue is tied to TV deals, gate receipts and shirt sponsorship.

    The squad is worth $100m but how do you realise any value from selling your best players?

    We are well and truly stuck with it. Unless Ashley gets a visit from 3 ghosts on Xmas eve – suck it up people.

    • ghostrider

      The club is worth more than 400 million in my opinion.
      One big club with a massive fan base as the only club in the city.
      Financially stable. Sold as ready to go and with no added debt other than normal annual expenditure of staff and maintenance throughout.

      When clubs can spend nearly 200 million on one player, I think anyone should see that Ashley is not asking anything overboard.

      • Hankandjerk

        You are not buying so who cares about your opinion?

        • ghostrider

          Who cares about anyone’s opinion if that’s the case?
          This site is for opinions and whether you care about it or not, any opinion will be seen by many and agreed by some in the majority of cases, so it’s all relevant.

          • Hankandjerk

            Exactly – no one cares for your opinion ghost buster.

          • ghostrider

            Then feel free not to care and feel free to think nobody cares. If it makes you feel better then everything’s fine.

          • Desree

            Jezza cares about your opinion Ghostbuster

          • ghostrider

            Who’s Jezza?

      • Hankandjerk

        200m for who in our squad? You can’t just strip the club of playing assets and say that is a fair deal you got your 400m back?

        The revenue and profit of the club is only guaranteed for 12 months.

        So if I was buying the cl7b based on revenue generated, then i can only forecast 12 months ahead.

        And the fact that to guarantee the revenue I then have to acquire better players who cost 200m then how is the club worth that figure?

        Your logic is flawed. These aren’t unicorns mate, these are businesses that require massive amounts of capital to realise minimal profits.

        • ghostrider

          Where do you get 200 million from?
          Are you telling me that this club…Newcastle United football club standing loud and proud in the city of Newcastle as one club in the city is only worth Neymar in its entirety?

          Do you realise how much Ashley paid for this club 11 years ago and also how much debt he cleared?

          Do you realise how much football has changed in 11 years in terms of footballers and cost of?

          Let me put this plainly.
          If ashley asks for 10 billion for this club and he gets no takers, then it’s not worth 10 billion.
          If he asks for 1 million and gets 1000 bidders then we can assume it’s worth more until the bidding stops.

          If he asks for 300 million and gets bidders, then we can assume it’s worth a bit more….until nobody wants to touch it.

          At 400 million it remains to be seen whether it gets sold or anyone at least tries to bid on it for near.

          No matter what happens in terms of being sold, it will be worth what any buyer pays for it and until then the selling price is set at 400 million.

          If anyone thinks it’s worth less then bid what you think and see if he sells. If he won’t then you can assume that your bid is not what the club is worth to Ashley. It doesn’t matter what it’s worth to you if you haven’t spent the readies.

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      If you ran the numbers for 2017/18, we will show a profit of around £75m . If we survive the season next, a profit of about £65m.

      That more than justifies a £400m price tag.

      Put £400 in a bank account today, you will not get £65 interest in a year.

      • Hankandjerk

        Great. So Rafa can spend 60m and we are still 5m up

        • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

          In very simple terms, yes. However, the way player purchases are accounted for is a little more complex .

          The club can possibly cope with a net spend + wages of £50m .

          • Hankandjerk

            Which comes back to the point that Ashley sets it up to suit him. NUFC is no different to a PE backed business that is basically a dividend play for the owners.

            If Ashley could strip the club of all its assets and sell them off he would.

            It is like watching Gordon Gecko in wall street. Except Gordo had some class and was at least charismatic!

          • Desree

            too right mate

          • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

            He’s not taken a dividend since he’s owned the club.

  • Desree

    The facts are this. Rafa had to sell his best players and has not been supported in signing players of a similar level.

    Of that surely there is no argument? 12m is the most Rafa has been sanctioned with for a single player where as he lost 13m, 25m and 30m players.

    • ghostrider

      Sell his best players ….like who exactly?
      Who did he sell that wasn’t busting a gut to get out of Newcastle?

      • Desree

        Sissoko, Townsend, Janmaat and Wijnaldum. Rafa also inherited a massive wage bill. May I remind you that Rafa came into a situation that was down to the owners mis management – not his.

        And even if these players were busting a gut to get out, he still had to sell them and was not given comparable funds to replace – yet somehow you and Fleckman still try and find a way to make your point valid.

        No wonder people on this site get so annoyed with you, you just act like a prize plumon every thread.

        • Peter C

          Add M Potter to that list

    • Dont stop bobbi fleckman

      Not really, in this reported season he lost some players that were never hanging about in the EFL.

      He was supported in buying good players who could do a good job in the EFL and move up to the EPL. He continued with a wage bill (even without the £20m provision) that dwarfed all other clubs, that in fact was more than all the promoted clubs combined.

      The outcome was that we were promoted and not only that, we comfortably survived the following season buing the highest placed team of the promoted sides.