Cruel comparisons and boardroom leaks

I am told that the recent publication of Celtic’s financials did not go down at all well with the Sevco High Command.

Of course, the Blue Room chaps were aware that the Parkhead club had enjoyed a good year.

However, they did not expect that it had been THAT good.

Regardless of the result on Saturday at the stadium that John Brown played for, the financial muscle of the Champions means that it is no contest over the length of a season.

To think that Sevco can finance a challenge to Celtic would be akin to putting Mr Bean up against Olivier Ntcham in an arm wrestling match.

I’m told that Celtic intend to continue to expand their commercial department.

Moreover, their plans for the hotel complex will produce revenue on the Parkhead site 365.

The Sevco High Command know that their own financials will inevitably be compared to Celtic’s and that will not make for good reading.

It goes without saying that the stenographers will do their obedient best to serve up the high-Level spin that it isn’t all that bad at Ibrox.

As ever, the main objective of the reportage is to convince The People that everything is tickety-boo at “ra rainjurrzz”.

For the avoidance of doubt, it isn’t.

Rugger Guy has promised me that he would crunch the Celtic numbers for me and this is what he sent an hour ago:

 

“Phil, although the results were published on Wednesday, I am writing to summarise my main takeaway points on the financial results, even although the headlines have been extensively reported.

Turnover has increased by almost £40m to £90.6m, primarily assisted by Champions League income. Operating expenses has increased by £19m to £76.3m. Clearly, substantial further investment has been made across the board in all football-related activities and is further reinforced by investment in players of £14m.

What stands out very clearly, is that operating profits, which is a measure of the day to day activities, has improved by almost £20m to £14.3m. This is a very healthy improvement and when you look at the cash flow from operating activities, the real underlying state of the business, this is £16m.

At the year-end, Celtic plc had net cash of almost £18m, a very healthy position indeed.

Once again, the auditor’s report was not qualified, did not draw attention to any matters by way of emphasis. The full statutory accounts will be issued in due course, but I can say with some degree of confidence that it is highly unlikely that any troublesome issues will appear on publication.”

As ever, I’m very grateful to my egg chasing buddy.

So it looks as if Celtic currently have much cash in the bank that Charles of Normandy had at RIFC after the IPO.

Not too shabby.

I understand that Mr David Cunningham King wants the circle as tight as possible apropos the preparation of year-end accounts for the Holding Company Vehicle.

Apparently, he is concerned about leaks!

Of course, Mr King is fortunate in that any of his entirely ethical corporate machinations will be free from any journalistic scrutiny by the Fitba Fourth Estate.

As ever, your humble correspondent will keep his Skibbereen eye on Sevconia.


Discover more from Phil Mac Giolla Bháin

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

13 thoughts on “Cruel comparisons and boardroom leaks”

  1. The amusing thing is that for all the clever, clever brass-necked corruption within Rangers, SFA, SPFL. SPL, SFL, SMSM and amongst their many friends in high places, the RIFC/TRFC business is still shite – incompetence, arrogance and mistaken superiority hang around thier necks like millstones.

    It would have been deeply depressing if RIFC/TRFC has gotten away with this whole saga scot-free – but they haven’t – they are much more likely to go out of business before they ever get close to winning one-in-a-row. When the administraors call again, all their friends will need to explain that they “meant to do that” and devise a cunning Plan C – which can only be more amusing than Plan B. Karma is taking the longview on this one.

    Reply
  2. A number crunching friend of mine who read your earlier article regarding the requirement for external finance this month, advised me of the following. £4million by the time duration from now (Sept 5) until Feb 18 when further cash injection required 4m divided by 6 months (Sept to Feb incl) and you get the value required p/m as : 666,666,666 recurring.

    Could September 2017 be significant?

    Reply
  3. On a footballing front, I have seen Sellick and Sevco at Firhill this season, the latter twice. If there is less than a 3 goal gap on Saturday, Pedro will have exceeded my expectations.

    Reply
  4. “Pure dead brilliant”…my ICAS training could not have served me better in this analysis from your “Rugger Guy” analyst….looking forward to the SMSM “spin” on this one….

    Reply

Leave a Reply

error: Content is protected !!