[Albion] Premier League 16-26/4/21

[Uh_huh_him]

The figure is skewed by the fact that it included a extra month ( 13 instead of the normal 12 months)
So a extra £10 mill of wages, and a months worth of depreciation and amortisation costs.

I assume they have done that to also include the revenue from the end of season games. Is that not the case?
It seems odd to deliberately take in just the costs and report on a 13 month year.
We took the opposite approach and excluded the revenue and wages from the end of season games.

I think both sets of figures are skewed in that regard.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

The figure is skewed by the fact that it included a extra month ( 13 instead of the normal 12 months)
So a extra £10 mill of wages, and a months worth of depreciation and amortisation costs.

Yes that extra month is enough to account for a rise in wages vs turnover from 77% to 93%. You’ll have also had a 13th month of income not just the outgoings to include.

The main reason for your rise and ours from 71% to 78% will be the loss in income due to Covid and thus a downturn in annual turnover.

 

[Stat Brother]

You really aren't very smart, are you [MENTION=25756]Se20[/MENTION]?



You will be very pleased to see that Palace's wages-to-revenue figure for last season was 93% (compared to Albion's figure of 78%).

Is the other 7% being spent on the new stand, or just the fence to hold the money?

 

[Weststander]

I assume they have done that to also include the revenue from the end of season games. Is that not the case?
It seems odd to deliberately take in just the costs and report on a 13 month year.
We took the opposite approach and excluded the revenue and wages from the end of season games.

I think both sets of figures are skewed in that regard.

This.

In zzzz accounting, it’s known as the matching concept.

The additional month added both revenue (the final element from BT and Sky after Operation Restart, could be released to their 13 months statement of income), and an additional month’s wage costs.

CP would not in company law and accounting standards be able to arbitrarily choose which elements to recognise.

 

[AZ Gull]

The figure is skewed by the fact that it included a extra month ( 13 instead of the normal 12 months)
So a extra £10 mill of wages, and a months worth of depreciation and amortisation costs.

In zzzz accounting, it’s known as the matching concept.

The additional month added both revenue (the final element from BT and Sky after Operation Restart, could be released to their 13 months statement of income), and an additional month’s wage costs.

CP would not in company law and accounting standards be able to arbitrarily choose which elements to recognise.

As I said:

You really aren't very smart, are you [MENTION=25756]Se20[/MENTION]?

 

[jcdenton08]

I love me a good accounting debate. No idea what's going on.

 

[timbha]

I love me a good accounting debate. No idea what's going on.

Matching principle is the accounting principle that requires that the expenses incurred during a period be recorded in the same period in which the related revenues are earned. This principle recognizes that businesses must incur expenses to earn revenues.

The principle is at the core of the accrual basis of accounting and adjusting entries. It is a part of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The matching principle is based on the cause and effect relationship. If there’s no cause and effect relationship, then the accountant will charge the cost to the expense immediately.

 

[BNthree]

I love me a good accounting debate. No idea what's going on.

The executive summary is we're making the Palace fan look stupid (which arguably isn't that hard).

 

[jcdenton08]

Matching principle is the accounting principle that requires that the expenses incurred during a period be recorded in the same period in which the related revenues are earned. This principle recognizes that businesses must incur expenses to earn revenues.

The principle is at the core of the accrual basis of accounting and adjusting entries. It is a part of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The matching principle is based on the cause and effect relationship. If there’s no cause and effect relationship, then the accountant will charge the cost to the expense immediately.

So the opposite of Mark to Market?

 

[timbha]

So the opposite of Mark to Market?

Not quite. This one relates to valuing assets and liabilities fairly - something Palace will find very difficult to do with their relic squad

 

[jcdenton08]

Not quite. This one relates to valuing assets and liabilities fairly - something Palace will find very difficult to do with their relic squad

But I have a relative understanding of Mark to Market so basically I'm clever?

 

[bhanutz]

If a Palace fan states a complete lie as the truth more than 3 times.... It becomes fact! We all know that... I.e. Zaha doesn't dive. That is one of many

 

[Weststander]

Not quite. This one relates to valuing assets and liabilities fairly - something Palace will find very difficult to do with their relic squad

The shiny new main stand must have a value.

£2.78.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Don't blush too much as your 77% is from the 18/19 season, where as our 78% is from the 19/20 season. Where are your latest set of accounts? Or are they late again (The Palace Way).

View attachment 136191

Ah so our 78% is for a Covid revenue season, and palace's 77% was before Covid.

Great comparison ! Lol.