Real Madrid top the money league (2011-2012).

[Jack D Rips]

I dont really know what you mean by "we made more than we earned".

The EBITDA figure is the difference between income and operational costs. The graph shows that figure decreasing from 2009 to 2011. Possibly as a combined result of increased wages and reduced income.

PETER WHERE ARE YOU!!!!!!!

 

[Der Alte]

I understand those accounts.

This is the one I don't understand

That's just a graph how turnover and EBITDA have developed percentually since 2005/2006. It doesn't(if I'm not mistaken and I well might) mean we had a higher EBITDA than turnover in 2009.

 

[StevieM]

So it's saying we earned more that we turned over in previous years.

I think.

Which I don't understand.

 

[Rosco]

EBIT is not worth worrying about

 

[Der Alte]

So it's saying we earned more that we turned over in previous years.

I think.

Which I don't understand.

No, the original values in 2005/06 could be like £2 billion turnover and £5000 EBITDA and the graph just shows their percentual change. Or am I mistaken as well?

 

[hamstrung_pigeon]

So it's saying we earned more that we turned over in previous years.

I think.

Which I don't understand.

Der Alte has nailed this one I think. The graph isn't comparing the actual EBITDA and turnover figures, but illustrating the growth/decline of these figures relative to the 2005/2006 baseline for those figures (hence the 2005/2006 = 100 header). In other words, EBITDA grew faster in those two years relative to the baseline, than turnover did relative to the baseline. Which is possible, given that EBITDA includes exceptional income like player sales and EBITDA comparisons are against a lower base (i.e. same amount of increase affects EBITDA growth/decline rate more than turnover growth/decline rate).

The graph suffers from a poor and misleading heading, and an unlabeled y-axis.

For what it's worth, these are estimates of the income we got from player sales in those years:
-- 2007 - 2008 -- 30.5m
-- 2008 - 2009 -- 36.5m
-- 2009 - 2010 -- 44.75m

 

[Jack D Rips]

So it's saying we earned more that we turned over in previous years.

I think.

Which I don't understand.

What its saying is that EBITDA ( Income less operating costs) has decreased mainly because wages as a percentage of turnover has gone from 54% in 2009 to 62% in 2010 to 70% in 2011