Club valuations

padr81

Account closed by user request
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,456
Supports
Man City
I'm a city fan and I don't believe it. Your debt as much as I wish it wasn't is easily sustainable.
 

manc exile

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
790
I'm a city fan and I don't believe it. Your debt as much as I wish it wasn't is easily sustainable.

I think the valuation is what a buyer would pay carrying the debt, hence its the value minus the debt
 

Mciahel Goodman

Worst Werewolf Player of All Times
Staff
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
29,100
Forbes places City's value at just over a billion pounds. It values us at just over two billion pounds. I'd go with Forbes.
 

padr81

Account closed by user request
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,456
Supports
Man City
I think the valuation is what a buyer would pay carrying the debt, hence its the value minus the debt
Maybe but I don't think we'd sell for more than you. We don't even own our own stadium. I'd say we are certainly a valuable club now but above united I don't think so. The fact we're even close us huge progress though.
 

Manchester Dan

Full Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Messages
2,397
Supports
Man City
I disagree with those valuations, but City are definitely a viable business now. I don't think it would be silly to suggest we're probably the second most "valuable" club in the country, you could certainly make a case for it.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
10,052
Supports
Trad Bricks
How's Liverpool valued so low and barely above Newcastle
 

Mciahel Goodman

Worst Werewolf Player of All Times
Staff
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
29,100
I disagree with those valuations, but City are definitely a viable business now. I don't think it would be silly to suggest we're probably the second most "valuable" club in the country, you could certainly make a case for it.
In terms of squad value alone, you could definitely make a case for City being the most valuable. In terms of how much each club is worth (which takes into account brand value, support, and a host of other things), I'd say City are probably behind Chelsea and maybe Arsenal.
 

manc exile

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
790
it could be that the city valuation is for the holding company and also include New York City and Melbourne city
 

Damien

Self-Aware RedCafe Database (and Admin)
Staff
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
85,336

Formula:


This was from 2015:
 

Damien

Self-Aware RedCafe Database (and Admin)
Staff
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
85,336
Actually it appears he ended up using a different formula due to not liking the results:

 

Damien

Self-Aware RedCafe Database (and Admin)
Staff
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
85,336
I'm a city fan and I don't believe it. Your debt as much as I wish it wasn't is easily sustainable.
I think your academy stadium et al is taken into account which'd add a lot to the value.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
10,052
Supports
Trad Bricks

Skills

Snitch
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
30,152
There's not a club in the country that's worth half of our value. Chelsea and Arsenal would be the closest.
 

Manchester Dan

Full Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Messages
2,397
Supports
Man City
Nobody in their right mind believes that City are a profitable business without the huge subsidizes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/5262616.stm
Thanks for that completely useless article. Hopefully your own portfolio is as far away from stocks as possible. Any chance I can get you to run through the highlights in City's latest set of finances that you think suggests you could snap them up for £1 (you can even cherry pick).
 

donkeyfish

Full Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
7,869
Location
Plumbus - Uncompromising and Innovative
How public are all the financial statements from the clubs? We are after all a publicly traded company, so I know there has to be a significant amount of info made public. Is there rulings in the PL about disclosing accounts? Or is there a lot of guesswork in these estimates?
 

leontas

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
701
Isn't most of City's revenue derived from subsidiaries of the Sheikh family like Etihad Airways? Hardly a viable business model...
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
10,052
Supports
Trad Bricks
How public are all the financial statements from the clubs? We are after all a publicly traded company, so I know there has to be a significant amount of info made public. Is there rulings in the PL about disclosing accounts? Or is there a lot of guesswork in these estimates?
I don't think there's any guesswork as the numbers are available

http://ir.manutd.com/financial-information/annual-reports/2016.aspx

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00035668
 

Alfie Robson

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
42
Location
California
I don't think that's just Franchise City: Manchester Branch. I'm pretty sure it's for Franchise City: All branches. In fact, the whole group, which a quick check on wiki tells me, consists of:
Manchester City F.C. (100%)
New York City FC (80%)
Melbourne City FC (100%)
Yokohama F. Marinos (20%)
Club Atlético Torque (100%)
City Football Academy
City Football Marketing
City Football Services
City Football Japan
City Football Singapore
City Football China

Of that lot, Franchise City: Manchester Branch are officially valued at a box of Picked Onion Monster Munch and a 24 pack of Beef & Tomato Pot Noodles.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
24,079
I don't think that's just Franchise City: Manchester Branch. I'm pretty sure it's for Franchise City: All branches. In fact, the whole group, which a quick check on wiki tells me, consists of:
Manchester City F.C. (100%)
New York City FC (80%)
Melbourne City FC (100%)
Yokohama F. Marinos (20%)
Club Atlético Torque (100%)
City Football Academy
City Football Marketing
City Football Services
City Football Japan
City Football Singapore
City Football China

Of that lot, Franchise City: Manchester Branch are officially valued at a box of Picked Onion Monster Munch and a 24 pack of Beef & Tomato Pot Noodles.
Even if it is like that they won't come close. As someone else mentioned they don't even own their own stadium. Not to mention selling the stadium name rights around 5-6 years ago for a 400m deal for a 10m per year or something. If we're to do that we could easily double that wiping out all debt there is.

However there's no problem whatsoever to service that debt given our economic power and the current market.
 

padr81

Account closed by user request
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,456
Supports
Man City
City is worth about £1(1 pound).

If you bought City it would cost you millions every year just to pay the wage bills.
Except for the fact City, United and Chelsea all spend roughly the same on wages. City 225m, United 220m, Chelsea £218m.
 

padr81

Account closed by user request
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,456
Supports
Man City
Isn't most of City's revenue derived from subsidiaries of the Sheikh family like Etihad Airways? Hardly a viable business model...
Also a myth. Citys deals include Nike, Nissan, EA Sports, SAP, Wix, QNet, Betsafe. LG, Heineken etc... while the majority of our money comes from Etihad and the Shiekh's business acquaintances so does everyones. People do business with who they know and City have been bringing in lots of big non Sheikh related partners.
 
Last edited:

M18CTID

Full Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
2,500
Location
Gorton
Supports
Manchester City
Except for the fact City, United and Chelsea all spend roughly the same on wages. City 225m, United 220m, Chelsea £218m.
You need to cut him a break here. I think he has a really good point in that City don't have any way of servicing that wage bill and all our income is false.

I mean, it's not like we don't get £130m-£140m a year from the PL TV deal is it? Add to that the fact that we earned more in prize/TV money than any other club in Europe from last season's Champions League run - around £70m IIRC. Then there's the £50-odd million a year from match day/corporate ticket income. Not to mention the £12 million a year kit deal from Nike - a deal that is due to run out soon and will be up for tender with rumours that a far more lucrative deal will be signed with Under Armour. That's well over £250 million a year without me even trying and is before a single penny of commercial revenue is taken into account, much of which these days doesn't come from companies located in or near our owner's homeland as you pointed out.

So yes, it's easy to see where he's coming from. City are clearly an insolvent business worth no more than a quid because obviously Mr gregster knows of some secret clause where, if the sheikh sells the club, we'll be the only club in the whole of the football league that will lose all our TV income, all our prize money, all our sponsorship revenue, all our match day revenue, and all the money from our kit deal. We'll go from generating circa £400 million a year to generating the sum total of zero pounds and zero pence per annum pretty much overnight.

Yep, what he said makes perfect sense to me.
 

Akshay

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
10,811
Location
A base camp for the last, final assault
Also a myth. Citys deals include Nike, Nissan, EA Sports, SAP, Wix, QNet, Betsafe. LG, Heineken etc... while the majority of our money comes from Etihad and the Shiekh's business acquaintances so does everyones. People do business with who they know and City have been bringing in lots of big non Sheikh related partners.
C'mon, there's a pretty big distinction between City's Sheikh related business deals and what clubs without a sugar daddy do. City have loads of money and as a fan you're not going to care where it comes from, but let's not pretend its anything other than what it is.

I also don't see what the point is in evaluating club value on the basis of revenue and profit when their sources of revenue are dependent on their owners. Anyway, the whole exercise seems a pointless financial dick measuring contest.
 

thegregster

Harbinger of new information
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
10,627
Location
24 hours behind the transfer muppets
You need to cut him a break here. I think he has a really good point in that City don't have any way of servicing that wage bill and all our income is false.

I mean, it's not like we don't get £130m-£140m a year from the PL TV deal is it? Add to that the fact that we earned more in prize/TV money than any other club in Europe from last season's Champions League run - around £70m IIRC. Then there's the £50-odd million a year from match day/corporate ticket income. Not to mention the £12 million a year kit deal from Nike - a deal that is due to run out soon and will be up for tender with rumours that a far more lucrative deal will be signed with Under Armour. That's well over £250 million a year without me even trying and is before a single penny of commercial revenue is taken into account, much of which these days doesn't come from companies located in or near our owner's homeland as you pointed out.

So yes, it's easy to see where he's coming from. City are clearly an insolvent business worth no more than a quid because obviously Mr gregster knows of some secret clause where, if the sheikh sells the club, we'll be the only club in the whole of the football league that will lose all our TV income, all our prize money, all our sponsorship revenue, all our match day revenue, and all the money from our kit deal. We'll go from generating circa £400 million a year to generating the sum total of zero pounds and zero pence per annum pretty much overnight.

Yep, what he said makes perfect sense to me.



Everybody with half a brain knows if the City owner pulled out tomorrow City would go under.

Nobody believes the figs on sponsorship City are putting out.

City are one big joke.

The idea that City could better better sponsorship deals than Liverpool or Arsenal is farcical.
 
Last edited:

M18CTID

Full Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
2,500
Location
Gorton
Supports
Manchester City
Everybody with half a brain knows if the City owner pulled out tomorrow City would go under.

Nobody believes the figs on sponsorship City are putting out.

City are one big joke.

The idea that City could better better sponsorship deals than Liverpool or Arsenal is farcical.
Not as farcical as the idea that you think City are only worth £1. That post of yours claiming such a thing has to be the most laughable in the history of this forum. It even trumps some of the utter gash namco comes out with.

In any case, even if all City's commercial revenue was indeed fake (which it isn't unless you think the likes of Nissan are a figment of one's imagination as opposed to one of the world's largest car manufacturers ffs), I've clearly pointed out to you that we're getting upwards of £250 million per year from other sources. So no, City aren't going under if our owner "pulls out" and to even think such a thing is utter delusion and wishful thinking.
 
Last edited:

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
17,106
Of course City would struggle if the oil men disappeared. If they left then the deals with legitimate companies would dwindle due to City losing the one thing that made them stand out.
 

M18CTID

Full Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
2,500
Location
Gorton
Supports
Manchester City
Of course City would struggle if the oil men disappeared. If they left then the deals with legitimate companies would dwindle due to City losing the one thing that made them stand out.
That's debatable insofar as it would depend on who bought the club. City's profile is a lot higher than it used to be and a sale could end up being a smooth transition.

Either way, saying we'd struggle is a lot different than saying we'd go under and that the club is only worth a pound. Of course, if the sheikh ended up selling to a totally unscrupulous owner who asset-stripped the club (thinking a Pompey-style scenario here), then yeah we could go under but that's a hypothetical scenario that could be applied to any club in the world so it's a moot point really. As it happens, with all the business contacts our owner has he'd surely vet any potential buyer and I doubt he'd make the mistake of offloading it to a total crook.
 

thegregster

Harbinger of new information
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
10,627
Location
24 hours behind the transfer muppets
That's debatable insofar as it would depend on who bought the club. City's profile is a lot higher than it used to be and a sale could end up being a smooth transition.

Either way, saying we'd struggle is a lot different than saying we'd go under and that the club is only worth a pound. Of course, if the sheikh ended up selling to a totally unscrupulous owner who asset-stripped the club (thinking a Pompey-style scenario here), then yeah we could go under but that's a hypothetical scenario that could be applied to any club in the world so it's a moot point really. As it happens, with all the business contacts our owner has he'd surely vet any potential buyer and I doubt he'd make the mistake of offloading it to a total crook.
New owners would have to keep pumping in the money.