19/20 Accounts (23 Viewers)

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Supporters could always help by filling the CBS Arena when there are no restrictions. Or is that just being plain crazy?

The owners weren’t that bothered and accepted losses. We could and that I’m sure will mean they can recover some of their deferred interest quicker

Nothing will change but you look at the club under Sisu now and you have to question how this is a sustainable way forward
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
Yeah but the difference is Brentford are under little pressure to sell as they have an owner propping them up. The model falls down if you can’t sell the player for an inflated price.

100% I don't think anyone is expecting us to make £95m in 5 years (if they do then more fool them). Although Brentford are still bottom half wage budget their turnover is also one of the lowest in the division. In any other business it'd be unsustainable.

For me it's more about finding, developing (and then selling) under valued talent. That's the model rather than necessarily how much you invest.
I'm content with the way we're doing it now, making £3.5m on McCallum in just 18 months & now could probably sell Hamer for 3 x his outlay after just 12 months etc.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
100% I don't think anyone is expecting us to make £95m in 5 years (if they do then more fool them). Although Brentford are still bottom half wage budget their turnover is also one of the lowest in the division. In any other business it'd be unsustainable.

For me it's more about finding, developing (and then selling) under valued talent. That's the model rather than necessarily how much you invest.
I'm content with the way we're doing it now, making £3.5m on McCallum in just 18 months & now could probably sell Hamer for 3 x his outlay after just 12 months etc.

Great what ambition
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
What do you expect?

Id Expect an organisation who runs the club to not rely on asset sales to minimise escalating losses and also not to have adopted a strategy of revenue deterioration by removing the club from its home

Sisu have had 14 years at the club. Good or bad in your view?
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
Id Expect an organisation who runs the club to not rely on asset sales to minimise escalating losses and also not to have adopted a strategy of revenue deterioration by removing the club from its home

Sisu have had 14 years at the club. Good or bad in your view?

In any other business yes, it would be crazy, but most football clubs run at significant losses.

You seem to think the St Andrews move was a deliberate ploy & purely down to them which, as you criticised another poster for, is conjecture.
They've since negotiated a better deal than we've ever had previously at the Ricoh so... Ends justify the means? We'll see.

The Sisu tenure has been majority bad, of course, I'm not sure many would argue otherwise.

They've definitely turned a corner more recently with Seppala being more hands on & also Boddy's appointment (despite well founded skepticism) has worked well. Robins now has significant control over the majority of the footballing side - these are all things they should have done sooner rather than the failed Ranson experiment. If they'd had a similar model but coupled it with the support afforded to Ranson & greatly inferior managers we likely would have been much more successful. That's all in the past though, we are where we are now & have to work under these constraints.

So what do you expect in the here & now?
 

skybluesam66

Well-Known Member
I am so glad Grendel is nowhere near any business i work for
£91m loss with a plot of land in Stoke and a team going backwards v £3m loss and no ground and a team going forwards
 

Barnsley

Well-Known Member
Equally I don’t think anyone is surprised by the numbers nor do I think many clubs in our league will have vastly different general pictures

We lost £300’000 according to our released accounts, with crowds our CEO said we would have broken even or shown a small profit. The year before we showed a similar loss to yourselves, it basically the difference between championship and league one income.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I am so glad Grendel is nowhere near any business i work for
£91m loss with a plot of land in Stoke and a team going backwards v £3m loss and no ground and a team going forwards

A plot of land that’s worth £22 million and an owner that’s worth what £8 billion?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
We lost £300’000 according to our released accounts, with crowds our CEO said we would have broken even or shown a small profit. The year before we showed a similar loss to yourselves, it basically the difference between championship and league one income.

Operating losses for Barnsley were £3 million
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
They’re owners are clueless when it comes to running a football though.

They are loaded with mega billions so it’s irrelevant
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
They spent 10 consecutive years in the Premier League tbf which is an achievement for a club no bigger than us.

Lol minor point we lost £3 million with owners that have zero investment potential and no ground but we are on the up
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Also as a sense of perspective the owners of Stoke city were paid through their business interests £88 million in dividends
 

Barnsley

Well-Known Member
Operating losses were £3 million

The accounts for the club have been filed for the year to 31 May 2020.

Overall the picture looks like a big improvement on the previous year, the main factor being the central distribution increasing from £2.4 to £8.1m. This is broadly the £6m that is often mentioned as the value of being in the Championship.

Overall turnover increased from £7.8m to £14.2m. Player wages increased modestly from £8.1m to £11.1m. This represents 78% of turnover. Net profit on player trading amounted to £2.8m and importantly this is net of player amortisation.

The operating loss after all expenses was £3.1m but this was partially offset by the profit on player sales to leave a small loss of just short of £0.3m. This is compared to a loss of £3.4m the previous year.


Reading that we lost £300’000
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
The accounts for the club have been filed for the year to 31 May 2020.

Overall the picture looks like a big improvement on the previous year, the main factor being the central distribution increasing from £2.4 to £8.1m. This is broadly the £6m that is often mentioned as the value of being in the Championship.

Overall turnover increased from £7.8m to £14.2m. Player wages increased modestly from £8.1m to £11.1m. This represents 78% of turnover. Net profit on player trading amounted to £2.8m and importantly this is net of player amortisation.

The operating loss after all expenses was £3.1m but this was partially offset by the profit on player sales to leave a small loss of just short of £0.3m. This is compared to a loss of £3.4m the previous year.


Reading that we lost £300’000

as I said the operating loss was £3 m - essentially the club relies on asset Disposal to survive - 33% increase in wages also isn’t modest
 

Barnsley

Well-Known Member
as I said the operating loss was £3 m - essentially the club relies on asset Disposal to survive - 33% increase in wages also isn’t modest

Shit just seen your user name, I didn’t realise I was arguing with an idiot. £11M wage bill in championship isn’t modest 🤣😂🤣😂 selling players to balance the books doesn’t count, you’re as silly as a bottle of chips you pal.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Shit just seen your user name, I didn’t realise I was arguing with an idiot. £11M wage bill in championship isn’t modest 🤣😂🤣😂 selling players to balance the books doesn’t count, you’re as silly as a bottle of chips you pal.

You just said wages “increased modestly”

Still as you’ve just said the multi billionaires Coates family no nothing about business and you’ve failed to understand operating profit

you’ve constantly praised owners who seemingly have similar ambition to
Ours and are one relegation away from severe issues - yes there’s no borrowing but that’s something I’m assuming that will not change regardless
 

Barnsley

Well-Known Member
You just said wages “increased modestly”

Still as you’ve just said the multi billionaires Coates family no nothing about business and you’ve failed to understand operating profit

you’ve constantly praised owners who seemingly have similar ambition to
Ours and are one relegation away from severe issues - yes there’s no borrowing but that’s something I’m assuming that will not change regardless

Silly Billy.
 

speedie87

Well-Known Member
Couple of standout points to me in the accounts

Not recognising the bonuses payable re 19/20 season in those accounts.
Having to borrow 3.2m this month
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
£800k more than whatever we were paying to rent the Ricoh

Yes that’s what I meant that would if the case mean £1.3 million
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Not pretty but as a few had said, thank fuck we got promoted. Will be interested to know what this years broadly look like. Decent upside on tv money but spent a chunk of it on transfers and salaries (and no crowds obviously having negative impact but they at least managed to keep membership monies to compensate a little - not sure how many non season ticket holders were coming to St Andrews, guessing not loads)

Return to Ricoh/CBS Arena was 100% necessary all round
 

Colin Steins Smile

Well-Known Member
As other posters have said ...... the 20-21 accounts will be interesting as the big difference in revenue for being part of Championship compared to L1 will be telling.
The question of how much did we increase expenditure to compete this past season?
Overall the finances of football clubs is bizarre with clubs losing vast sums. It will be interesting to see how our accounts compare with our championship rivals next year ...... but I share the concern that if we did get relegated back to L1 we could see a drop in revenue of circa £6m
 

CDK

Well-Known Member
In any other business yes, it would be crazy, but most football clubs run at significant losses.

You seem to think the St Andrews move was a deliberate ploy & purely down to them which, as you criticised another poster for, is conjecture.
They've since negotiated a better deal than we've ever had previously at the Ricoh so... Ends justify the means? We'll see.

The Sisu tenure has been majority bad, of course, I'm not sure many would argue otherwise.

They've definitely turned a corner more recently with Seppala being more hands on & also Boddy's appointment (despite well founded skepticism) has worked well. Robins now has significant control over the majority of the footballing side - these are all things they should have done sooner rather than the failed Ranson experiment. If they'd had a similar model but coupled it with the support afforded to Ranson & greatly inferior managers we likely would have been much more successful. That's all in the past though, we are where we are now & have to work under these constraints.

So what do you expect in the here & now?
Your last paragraph is spot on as the corner is turned but everybody will need a load of patience to move significantly forward as a club.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top