Financial Times summary of Red Football accounts (with link)

Originally Posted by jem

have to be the three unwisest monkeys I've clapped eyes on.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

Not exactly no. Think of it more along the lines that the mere fact of increased revenues has been used to renegotiate the original interest repayment deal. The fact Red Football shows high losses was expected, and next year's figures could prove far more telling (is there a limit on how many times a debt can be refinanced?, or to the benefit of further refinancing if there isn't tim887 do you know, please?) Some argue (Gill) that the present interest figure of £60m is not significantly greater than that of tax and dividends under the plc and that this increase is worth it (to be rid of the likes of Coolmore) in the quest for stability. Others claim that that is nonsense, and that the club never had any debt (visible or otherwise - dividends being said to have been technically voluntary) before the Glazers took over. Future revenue streams look likely to be good, with prospects for the success of the team very good. Whether the debt itself will be paid off at all is open to question - just a tad! This seems to be the situation. What have I left out?

out of interest how much did we pay regarding tax and dividends?

Originally Posted by DoubleJ

out of interest how much did we pay regarding tax and dividends?

there's a sticky at the top of the page if you don't mind having to start your own thread if you want to contradict published figures.