Bradford City are a "strong" business according to financial expert

Bradford City are a

Bradford City are a "strong" business according to financial expert

First published in Sport
Last updated

CITY have been rated as a "strong" company by a leading financial analyst.

The Plimsoll group have carried out a study of the UK's 167 largest football clubs – and the Bantams have been ranked as the 14th most profitable.

The report claims that City, one of only 19 clubs not to make a loss last season, continue to buck the national trend. The 'strong' rating is the highest available and reflects their financial performance over the last 12 months.

A spokesman for Plimsoll said: "What is more impressive is that you have achieved this in a difficult market place where 124 of your competitors are in financial danger and a record number are making a loss."

City are among 25 clubs whose performance is described as strong. The report also states that 58 clubs are now carrying more debt than a year ago.

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:31am Tue 8 Jul 14

tyker2 says...

a repeated story issued for what purpose? take over perhaps!
a repeated story issued for what purpose? take over perhaps! tyker2
  • Score: -23

8:56am Tue 8 Jul 14

whisky1 says...

I had not seen it. Quality performance behind the scenes and on the playing side. Proud to be a City fan
I had not seen it. Quality performance behind the scenes and on the playing side. Proud to be a City fan whisky1
  • Score: 17

9:24am Tue 8 Jul 14

Plastic Bantam says...

THis just shows the sad state of affairs that football is in... With all the money in the premiership and chanpionship there is no way we should be ranked 14th... great for us.. But when will the madness end, the bubble has to burst at some point surely!!
THis just shows the sad state of affairs that football is in... With all the money in the premiership and chanpionship there is no way we should be ranked 14th... great for us.. But when will the madness end, the bubble has to burst at some point surely!! Plastic Bantam
  • Score: 12

9:36am Tue 8 Jul 14

whisky1 says...

Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price.
Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price. whisky1
  • Score: 11

10:42am Tue 8 Jul 14

Michael Clayton says...

whisky1 wrote:
Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price.
Nationally, what is clear is that none of what is happening is helping to nurture our home-grown talent; either in the Premier League or at international level.

It is much better to support a stable club that is not cash rich but is inching in the right direction.
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price.[/p][/quote]Nationally, what is clear is that none of what is happening is helping to nurture our home-grown talent; either in the Premier League or at international level. It is much better to support a stable club that is not cash rich but is inching in the right direction. Michael Clayton
  • Score: 6

11:31am Tue 8 Jul 14

lawsonio123 says...

Plastic Bantam wrote:
THis just shows the sad state of affairs that football is in... With all the money in the premiership and chanpionship there is no way we should be ranked 14th... great for us.. But when will the madness end, the bubble has to burst at some point surely!!
Yes the madness will come to a end and some so called big clubs will suffer badly But let us be thankful that City will not be among them when the House of Cards Falls Our Directors are prudent gentlemen
[quote][p][bold]Plastic Bantam[/bold] wrote: THis just shows the sad state of affairs that football is in... With all the money in the premiership and chanpionship there is no way we should be ranked 14th... great for us.. But when will the madness end, the bubble has to burst at some point surely!![/p][/quote]Yes the madness will come to a end and some so called big clubs will suffer badly But let us be thankful that City will not be among them when the House of Cards Falls Our Directors are prudent gentlemen lawsonio123
  • Score: 10

11:32am Tue 8 Jul 14

tyker2 says...

Michael Clayton wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price.
Nationally, what is clear is that none of what is happening is helping to nurture our home-grown talent; either in the Premier League or at international level.

It is much better to support a stable club that is not cash rich but is inching in the right direction.
agree about support. The structure for cash to be spread better between all the leagues is now required.
[quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price.[/p][/quote]Nationally, what is clear is that none of what is happening is helping to nurture our home-grown talent; either in the Premier League or at international level. It is much better to support a stable club that is not cash rich but is inching in the right direction.[/p][/quote]agree about support. The structure for cash to be spread better between all the leagues is now required. tyker2
  • Score: 5

11:55am Tue 8 Jul 14

mrmuzzy says...

Not suprised.
as we don't spend anything!
Not suprised. as we don't spend anything! mrmuzzy
  • Score: -17

12:00pm Tue 8 Jul 14

whisky1 says...

Mr Muzzy...I think they have learned the lesson of 2 Administrations don't you?
Mr Muzzy...I think they have learned the lesson of 2 Administrations don't you? whisky1
  • Score: 17

12:39pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Michael Clayton says...

tyker2 wrote:
Michael Clayton wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price.
Nationally, what is clear is that none of what is happening is helping to nurture our home-grown talent; either in the Premier League or at international level.

It is much better to support a stable club that is not cash rich but is inching in the right direction.
agree about support. The structure for cash to be spread better between all the leagues is now required.
It would obviously be more equitable but how would the money be used? How far down the pyramid would any extra cash go? Who would benefit??

Unless the money cascades down to the grass-roots, you will see the spread of disease that has infected the top-end of the game. In other words, higher wages for Football League players and little else; certainly not an improved national team.
[quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: Its pathetic most Clubs are either vanity projects for the rich or run on the never never. City should be a model for clubs of the same size. The fans have near enough a direct stake in the playing budget( ie season ticket sales pay for it )and they can watch footy at a modest/reasonable price.[/p][/quote]Nationally, what is clear is that none of what is happening is helping to nurture our home-grown talent; either in the Premier League or at international level. It is much better to support a stable club that is not cash rich but is inching in the right direction.[/p][/quote]agree about support. The structure for cash to be spread better between all the leagues is now required.[/p][/quote]It would obviously be more equitable but how would the money be used? How far down the pyramid would any extra cash go? Who would benefit?? Unless the money cascades down to the grass-roots, you will see the spread of disease that has infected the top-end of the game. In other words, higher wages for Football League players and little else; certainly not an improved national team. Michael Clayton
  • Score: 1

1:06pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Thee Voice of Reason says...

They just do the opposite of Leeds United and Bradford Bulls. Follow that rule and you'll be fine.
They just do the opposite of Leeds United and Bradford Bulls. Follow that rule and you'll be fine. Thee Voice of Reason
  • Score: 6

1:33pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Plastic Bantam says...

whisky1 wrote:
Mr Muzzy...I think they have learned the lesson of 2 Administrations don't you?
Can't spend what you don't have... unless you're a badly run football club that is!
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: Mr Muzzy...I think they have learned the lesson of 2 Administrations don't you?[/p][/quote]Can't spend what you don't have... unless you're a badly run football club that is! Plastic Bantam
  • Score: 3

1:33pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Plastic Bantam says...

Plastic Bantam wrote:
whisky1 wrote: Mr Muzzy...I think they have learned the lesson of 2 Administrations don't you?
Can't spend what you don't have... unless you're a badly run football club that is!
Apologies, quoted the wrong comment
[quote][p][bold]Plastic Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: Mr Muzzy...I think they have learned the lesson of 2 Administrations don't you?[/p][/quote]Can't spend what you don't have... unless you're a badly run football club that is![/p][/quote]Apologies, quoted the wrong comment Plastic Bantam
  • Score: 0

2:35pm Tue 8 Jul 14

bwwb says...

A similar survey in March 2002 stated that City were one of the most financially stable clubs in the League. Within 12 months they wee in administration.
All these surveys look at is published information and have no more knowledge of "off balance sheet" loans than anyone else.
I hope City are a bit more financially secure than in 2002 but the way they keep crying the poor tale I'm not totally convinced.
The Rhodes family were just as culpable of the 2002 meltdown as anyone else so presumably Mr Lawn is the one keeping the brakes on
A similar survey in March 2002 stated that City were one of the most financially stable clubs in the League. Within 12 months they wee in administration. All these surveys look at is published information and have no more knowledge of "off balance sheet" loans than anyone else. I hope City are a bit more financially secure than in 2002 but the way they keep crying the poor tale I'm not totally convinced. The Rhodes family were just as culpable of the 2002 meltdown as anyone else so presumably Mr Lawn is the one keeping the brakes on bwwb
  • Score: -5

2:59pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Michael Clayton says...

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
They just do the opposite of Leeds United and Bradford Bulls. Follow that rule and you'll be fine.
Both clubs would have done better had they been liquidated and subsequently reformed.

In hanging on to past glories, they have probably delayed their respective recoveries.
[quote][p][bold]Thee Voice of Reason[/bold] wrote: They just do the opposite of Leeds United and Bradford Bulls. Follow that rule and you'll be fine.[/p][/quote]Both clubs would have done better had they been liquidated and subsequently reformed. In hanging on to past glories, they have probably delayed their respective recoveries. Michael Clayton
  • Score: 0

3:02pm Tue 8 Jul 14

whisky1 says...

When have they "cried the poor tale"?. They have said consistently that the club has to live within its means that's rather different. Not quite sure why you suggest the club has undisclosed liabilities. JR confirmed MLs loan has been repaid which was the last significant liability. As for 2002 JR has said that Richmond was given pretty much free reign and we have paid for it since. Fortunately JR did not bail out and we still have a footy club as a consequence
When have they "cried the poor tale"?. They have said consistently that the club has to live within its means that's rather different. Not quite sure why you suggest the club has undisclosed liabilities. JR confirmed MLs loan has been repaid which was the last significant liability. As for 2002 JR has said that Richmond was given pretty much free reign and we have paid for it since. Fortunately JR did not bail out and we still have a footy club as a consequence whisky1
  • Score: 4

3:17pm Tue 8 Jul 14

bwwb says...

whisky1 wrote:
When have they "cried the poor tale"?. They have said consistently that the club has to live within its means that's rather different. Not quite sure why you suggest the club has undisclosed liabilities. JR confirmed MLs loan has been repaid which was the last significant liability. As for 2002 JR has said that Richmond was given pretty much free reign and we have paid for it since. Fortunately JR did not bail out and we still have a footy club as a consequence
I'm sorry
As far as I can recall the biggest liability is the remaining period of the lease on Valley Parade c£7m
The very fact you ignore this shows your lack of understanding of undisclosed liabilities
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: When have they "cried the poor tale"?. They have said consistently that the club has to live within its means that's rather different. Not quite sure why you suggest the club has undisclosed liabilities. JR confirmed MLs loan has been repaid which was the last significant liability. As for 2002 JR has said that Richmond was given pretty much free reign and we have paid for it since. Fortunately JR did not bail out and we still have a footy club as a consequence[/p][/quote]I'm sorry As far as I can recall the biggest liability is the remaining period of the lease on Valley Parade c£7m The very fact you ignore this shows your lack of understanding of undisclosed liabilities bwwb
  • Score: -4

3:21pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Michael Clayton says...

whisky1 wrote:
When have they "cried the poor tale"?. They have said consistently that the club has to live within its means that's rather different. Not quite sure why you suggest the club has undisclosed liabilities. JR confirmed MLs loan has been repaid which was the last significant liability. As for 2002 JR has said that Richmond was given pretty much free reign and we have paid for it since. Fortunately JR did not bail out and we still have a footy club as a consequence
You cannot please some people. They would rather be promised the earth than accept the reality of tight financial constraints.
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: When have they "cried the poor tale"?. They have said consistently that the club has to live within its means that's rather different. Not quite sure why you suggest the club has undisclosed liabilities. JR confirmed MLs loan has been repaid which was the last significant liability. As for 2002 JR has said that Richmond was given pretty much free reign and we have paid for it since. Fortunately JR did not bail out and we still have a footy club as a consequence[/p][/quote]You cannot please some people. They would rather be promised the earth than accept the reality of tight financial constraints. Michael Clayton
  • Score: -1

3:27pm Tue 8 Jul 14

whisky1 says...

Wrong pal...the Rent does not fall due in the total sum for the entire term of the lease at any one time. It is paid periodically. To suggest that should be seen as debt now is misleading. Very few clubs now own the freehold to their grounds unencumbered.
Wrong pal...the Rent does not fall due in the total sum for the entire term of the lease at any one time. It is paid periodically. To suggest that should be seen as debt now is misleading. Very few clubs now own the freehold to their grounds unencumbered. whisky1
  • Score: 7

3:45pm Tue 8 Jul 14

bwwb says...

Not admitting to being your pal
But I would ask you look at IAS 17 before suggesting the lease is not a liability
I would also remind you that the reason the club went bust in 2002 was the onerous unrecorded liabilities owed due to player contracts
These have to be paid whether or not the player performs and are a liability now just as they were in 2002 (but probably not as much in quantum terms)
Not admitting to being your pal But I would ask you look at IAS 17 before suggesting the lease is not a liability I would also remind you that the reason the club went bust in 2002 was the onerous unrecorded liabilities owed due to player contracts These have to be paid whether or not the player performs and are a liability now just as they were in 2002 (but probably not as much in quantum terms) bwwb
  • Score: -2

3:53pm Tue 8 Jul 14

whisky1 says...

There is nothing to suggest that the club is paying players more than it can afford. I do not have the clubs accounts in front of me but I would be astounded if Salaries were not recorded in the Accounts. The suggestion that the club could be in the state it was in 2002 is frankly laughable. Last time I checked on planet earth rent on commercial premises was paid quarterly. The reality is that it is paid out of income moving forward and suggest that the clubs finances are compromised by notional sum due for the full lease is ridiculous. Good Accounts course is it?
There is nothing to suggest that the club is paying players more than it can afford. I do not have the clubs accounts in front of me but I would be astounded if Salaries were not recorded in the Accounts. The suggestion that the club could be in the state it was in 2002 is frankly laughable. Last time I checked on planet earth rent on commercial premises was paid quarterly. The reality is that it is paid out of income moving forward and suggest that the clubs finances are compromised by notional sum due for the full lease is ridiculous. Good Accounts course is it? whisky1
  • Score: 5

5:01pm Tue 8 Jul 14

tyker2 says...

bwwb wrote:
Not admitting to being your pal
But I would ask you look at IAS 17 before suggesting the lease is not a liability
I would also remind you that the reason the club went bust in 2002 was the onerous unrecorded liabilities owed due to player contracts
These have to be paid whether or not the player performs and are a liability now just as they were in 2002 (but probably not as much in quantum terms)
most stupid statement yet
[quote][p][bold]bwwb[/bold] wrote: Not admitting to being your pal But I would ask you look at IAS 17 before suggesting the lease is not a liability I would also remind you that the reason the club went bust in 2002 was the onerous unrecorded liabilities owed due to player contracts These have to be paid whether or not the player performs and are a liability now just as they were in 2002 (but probably not as much in quantum terms)[/p][/quote]most stupid statement yet tyker2
  • Score: 3

6:16pm Tue 8 Jul 14

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

As league 1&2 clubs can only spend 60% of turnover on wages for playing staff I'd say you were scaremongering and/or have no knowledge of that fact
As league 1&2 clubs can only spend 60% of turnover on wages for playing staff I'd say you were scaremongering and/or have no knowledge of that fact Prisoner Cell Block A
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree