Celtic PLC 23/24 Results £77m cash fucking minted

Correct the wording in the statement is sly that I will agree with highlighting the outgoing when ignoring the value of incoming in same period would expose the fact we are in a significant trading profit in same periods in terms of the figures they seem accurate. They are a summary when in receipt of the full report it will be better to breakdown

 

£26.854million from selling players in the year. Seems high for who left, was it Abada, Starfelt, Turnbull, Ideguchi, Ajeti and maybe Haksabanovic.

£14m Abada, £6m Starfelt, £3m Haksabanovic, £2m Turnbull £1m Ajeti, £1m Ideguchi. Must have been something like that.

 

Certain transfers be it incoming or goings out happening before or after year end being 1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Correct

Reported fees where

£10m abada
£5m starfelt
£2m turnbull
£1m Ideguchi
£500k ajeti
£2.5m Hacksaw
£200k hazard

Dunno where rest could have came from

 

Who in particular they are all listed

 

Could the difference be installments of previous deals? Ajer or Frimpong deal perhaps paid in installments?

Sent from my M2012K11AG using Tapatalk

 

Don't think so that money would be a liability I think.

If the fees were about this...

£14m Abada
£6m Starfelt
£3m Haksabanovic
£2m Turnbull
£1m Ajeti,
£1m Ideguchi

Would be around £27million

Then it fits in with the profit made on them also of was it around £6.6million as they maybe cost like

£5m Ajeti
£4.5m Abada,
£4m Starfelt
£3m Turnbull
£2.5m Haksabanovic
£500k Ideguchi - I think he was free but would still have been agents fees and signing bonus and whatever

 

Wait till next years with the new champions league money ooft. Loaded. Hopefully we spend on another couple engals type signings.

 

JB on twitter does make a good point failure to qualify for the UCL would without player trading ultimately result in a loss in a season which we can absorb for many years

 

Since these account as well we've probably made about £10million compared to what we spent on transfers. Says we've spent £31million but we probably got about £40million for O'Riley, Oh, Johnston, Iwata, Kobayashi and Siegrist.

I think we get a lot of that CL money this week, maybe did get it or are getting it tomorrow or something. As we sit currently theres probably about £90million in the bank.

Possibly even over £100million, the pre-season tour, 2 new strips and making about £10million on selling players probably covered the expenses of the last 2 months so the £77million likely never changed much until about 2 weeks ago and then the CL packages being sold is probably about £10million and then the £20million or whatever UEFA will have just paid us or will round about now.

There must be around £90-105million in the bank at the moment.

 

There always will be more money at this time of the season. Season tickets sold, European tickets sold but not yet paid the seasons salaries or the costs of hosting a game.

So we may have it but it's basically already been spent.

I think we get the CL money at the end of the season in early June.

 

No they give you most the now, the guarenteed money I think like the £13.5million for being in it plus the whatever they call it now "pilar" that is to do with your market pool and coefficient. It'll only be the rest of the TV money that gets paid over the season and the other "pilar" of the performance related money to come.

I know I just meant as we speak the now we probably have about £100million in the bank, i'd guess actually over £100million which will be for the first time ever and probably one of only a handful of clubs ever to be in that position.

 

Was thinking last night, what other club in the whole or world football has this much money in the bank? Has ever had this much?

Pretty much all the major clubs are in some form of debt, be that crippling (Barcelona couple years ago), manageable (most clubs) or to some oilgarch/Saudi billionair(see psg or city).
But even clubs like Ajax, benfica, Copenhagen, I don't imagine any of them are running at such a surplus as we are.

Would be interesting to see, is Peter Lawwell playing a board game here and waiting to be able to officially call us the richest club in the world, just for some * and giggles?


Sent from my M2012K11AG using Tapatalk

 

Is there much likelihood in us investing a large chunk of that cash into revamping the stadium? Main stand reconstruction for example?

 

@Peej has got it right I suspect here it’s the same with outgoings. In the cash flow statement at the bottom it also shows we spent £31m+ on signing players and contract extension but again that likely counts add ons due from other deals, income will be the same in that £26m+ figure there will be payments due from previous add ons. Haksabanovic won’t show in these accounts just released as according to Lawell’s statement he is listed as a sale post accounting period.

@Blochairnbhoy was right earlier when talking about the accounting periods I don’t see anything drastic going on in the figures. Sly to mention having spent about £100m but not mention that in the same period the club has brought in approximately £130.75m with another £19m of add ons, some of which as discussed above from Christie, Ajer and Edouard deals that have likely been realised. In the annual report to 30th of June 2023, it showed we were due considerably more in add ons from sales than we owed others, circa £16m (due up to £23m and owed up to £7m).

I recently done an exercise looking at deals since Ange came in, we have bought (not including loans) 40 players and sold/ released 32. Of the 40 bought 17 have already moved on. So we are averaging 10 players in and 8 out per season.

Of the remaining 23 brought in, 7 just came in the door in the summer there so giving them a value of what we paid, with only adjusting Bernardo up slightly and Idah down by a similar amount, (as I think we underpaid for one and overpaid the other), we have 23 players that should be worth at least £112m and that is being very modest with valuations.

On Amortisation this is shown in the P&L and cashflow statement impacting on profit. It is an accounting practice that depreciates non tangible assets. So if we buy a player like Engels for £11m on a four year deal it will be amortised at £2.75m per year for the four years of his deal. Why this is important is when talking about profit on disposal of intangible assets you take what’s left on the players original contract multiply that by the price per year and take that off before coming up with the gains figure. It is why despite selling Jota, Giakoumakis and Juranovic that figure last year was only £14.4m, as we still had most of his transfer fee to take off the £25m and the 30% we were due Benfica. So where we got about £25m for him paid Benfica about £7m, so down to £18m but he was only 1 year into his deal so it would have still had to take off what was due on his transfer balance. Just to confuse things further this doesn’t mean we actually spent the money then we would have likely paid Benfica in 3 instalments and that is the figure reflected in the cash flow statement under purchase of intangible assets. It’s the same for proceeds from sales of intangible assets the £26m figure.

Overall as the X post by JBLuvs said the club had a year where we added £4.9m cash from £18m surplus from operating activites. We paid a £0.5m dividend, spent £7.2m on capital projects and had a net spend on all transfer income and outgoing of £4.7m. The remaining balance was spent on leasing activities (£0.7m).

What I would say though is the club have strengthened the balance sheet by about £13m. Our liabilities have dropped by over £15m and we have only dropped assets by about £2m. We are still due more in than out (£1.6m) with this mainly being realised beyond the 24/25 financial year. This will have changed already depending on terms of our transfer activity but at the year end that’s where we were.

Our current ratio was also sound having just under 1.5 times the current assets to liabilities and the acid test ratio isn’t much below it, which shows we have sound liquidity in the business. We also have more than double the total assets than total liabilities of the business.

Next years revenue figure will likely be higher again from increased number of home games (if we do well in cups and Get play off in CL), our payments from CL will likely be up given increased money in new CL format and costs shouldn’t be too much higher than last years. Also the US Tour will likely have brought in more than Japan tour. I wouldn’t be surprised if operating revenue broke £130m next year and we beat the 2023 total income number by going over £150m. Profit still won’t be up at £40m gross and £33m net, but more in line with this year.

What it is worth noting is the profit figure being down considerably isn’t anything to be concerned about as the £13.3m net profit is more in line with where we should expect to be in a CL season. It will likely be higher this year given Matt O’Riley sale will push up profit on disposal of intangible assets and although we have spent more we still likely made a surplus of around £5-8m before add ons with the potential that could be higher if some of them are realised.

The biggest risk we face is failing to qualify for the CL League next year as that would significantly change our revenue and turn that £18m surplus from operating activities likely to a negative. However we tend to do heavily incentive based player and manager contracts based on CL qualification or not so operating costs would likely fall too.

 

No. The Huns do creative accountancy. Our numbers are ACTUAL accountancy.

The money shows up when/if it's actually in the account, or spent... Being able to do it so that it's balanced and maximised is a strength of good accountants and management. It's one of the clubs best features, and it's all from the foundations that Wee Fergus put in place, and it's why we're a juggernaut in Scottish Football

 

All this money in the bank and we are still sticking full interviews and content behind a paywall on Celtic TV.

That's a bit tinpot in my opinion. Get full content posted on YouTube for * sake.

 

The wealthy don’t stay wealthy by changing what makes them wealthy.

 

Apparently this side of things that attracts the likes of Lindsell Train and their owner interested. They see Celtic as having a massive global fan base that is untapped potential to grow revenues.

 

Would posting things for free on YouTube not increase the global fanbase more that putting it behind a paywall?

The doc about last season that was just released is a perfect example. I'm sure a lot of football fans around the world would enjoy watching that who aren't exactly Celtic fans.