19/20 Accounts (4 Viewers)

Grendel said:

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

Click to expand...

The operating model is changing. Players are essentially stock. Clubs’ recruitment strategies are about delivering a mark-up on player transactions. So treating it as standard asset disposal is incorrect - that would lead to an ever-decreasing quality of asset, whereas the reality is anything but.

Grendel said:

They are loaded with mega billions so it’s irrelevant

Click to expand...

Depends how much of those mega billions are available and what happens when they lose interest and walk away?

As normal you are just spinning yarns and plucking out ideas that suit you and claiming them to be fact.

The whole football system is fucked and I wouldn't trade our situation for Stoke's anymore than I would trade Mark Robins for Kenny Jacket.

SBAndy said:

The operating model is changing. Players are essentially stock. Clubs’ recruitment strategies are about delivering a mark-up on player transactions. So treating it as standard asset disposal is incorrect - that would lead to an ever-decreasing quality of asset, whereas the reality is anything but.

Click to expand...

The blokes a lunatic. He just spouts any old shite that suits his agenda.

Barnsley said:

The blokes a lunatic. He just spouts any old shite that suits his agenda.

Click to expand...

We have had years of it. Can change horses mid stream. He thinks he is really good at debating but he really isn't. His ego is massive, looks down on most posters because he was some top dog at Jaguar. But if he is anything like his alter ego he would have been a horrible little man to work for.

speedie87 said:

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

Click to expand...

What is significant about the bonuses?
Would it be the method of delivery , to do with taxation issues or something completely separate?

We spent years being really unlucky - relegation from the prem before the really big money arrived, selling Highfield road then being unable to afford the ricoh, budgeting for ITV digital money just after relegation then having them go pop, the council forcing Sisu on us as they were the only show that didn’t want the ricoh, sisu changing their mind and taking us to Northampton allowing wasps in, wasps and the council conspiring to fuck over the football club as a way to get at sisu.

I’ll take us getting lucky with a promotion when we really needed one as the accounts resulted in a loss. We’ll have done much better this season than the majority of a league we finished 16th in, we’re back at the ricoh with nearly 10k season tickets sold. Let’s take the win for a change.

Any chance for a slanging match on the internet instead of enjoying a sunny bank holiday Monday though.

Grendel said:

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?

Click to expand...

I still find it hard to work out how you match your feelings here and those towards austerity and tax cuts which have been the backbone of Tory policy.

Barnsley said:

The blokes a lunatic. He just spouts any old shite that suits his agenda.

Click to expand...

Youve basically positioned your club on here as some kind of revolutionary businesss model

The fact is you have dodgy owners who don’t seem to care which of the portfolio of clubs they own to invest in and are essentially the same as ours without the initial disastrous failed loans.

You are a relegation from massive asset disposal and also your brand of football is poor and I expect a difficult season ahead

A lot in your forum agree with me and not you

Some interesting bits picked out:

- Operating lease charges were £1.1m which, I imagine, includes both the St Andrew’s charges and the Alan Higgs. Increase of about £700k year-on-year.
- There was apparently a net transfer spend of £2.5m in the year up to to 31 May 2020, which I find hard to believe.
- Also listed is a ‘sell-on fee’ income of £1.5m but I can’t fathom who moved during this period that it could relate to.
- SISU look to have injected £1.4m to keep things running. Not all of this would have been cost-covering for the final 2.5 months of the season.
- The club has taken an interest-free loan of £3.2m from the EFL this month. That loan can only be used to pay tax liabilities and support planned working capital requirements, and it seems this plan has/had to be supplied to the EFL.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:

I still find it hard to work out how you match your feelings here and those towards austerity and tax cuts which have been the backbone of Tory policy.

Click to expand...

Football is not exactly a political budget setting process is it

SBAndy said:

Some interesting bits picked out:

- Operating lease charges were £1.1m which, I imagine, includes both the St Andrew’s charges and the Alan Higgs. Increase of about £700k year-on-year.
- There was apparently a net transfer spend of £2.5m in the year up to to 31 May 2020, which I find hard to believe.
- Also listed is a ‘sell-on fee’ income of £1.5m but I can’t fathom who moved during this period that it could relate to.
- SISU look to have injected £1.4m to keep things running. Not all of this would have been cost-covering for the final 2.5 months of the season.
- The club has taken an interest-free loan of £3.2m from the EFL this month. That loan can only be used to pay tax liabilities and support planned working capital requirements, and it seems this plan has/had to be supplied to the EFL.

Click to expand...

I didn’t understand the loan from the EFL as why it’s needed

The sell on fee I assumed was Wilson

SBAndy said:

Some interesting bits picked out:

- Operating lease charges were £1.1m which, I imagine, includes both the St Andrew’s charges and the Alan Higgs. Increase of about £700k year-on-year.
- There was apparently a net transfer spend of £2.5m in the year up to to 31 May 2020, which I find hard to believe.
- Also listed is a ‘sell-on fee’ income of £1.5m but I can’t fathom who moved during this period that it could relate to.
- SISU look to have injected £1.4m to keep things running. Not all of this would have been cost-covering for the final 2.5 months of the season.
- The club has taken an interest-free loan of £3.2m from the EFL this month. That loan can only be used to pay tax liabilities and support planned working capital requirements, and it seems this plan has/had to be supplied to the EFL.

Click to expand...

Is the sell on fee possibly staged payment for Maddison or was that accounted for in the last accounts?

SBAndy said:

Some interesting bits picked out:

- Operating lease charges were £1.1m which, I imagine, includes both the St Andrew’s charges and the Alan Higgs. Increase of about £700k year-on-year.
- There was apparently a net transfer spend of £2.5m in the year up to to 31 May 2020, which I find hard to believe.
- Also listed is a ‘sell-on fee’ income of £1.5m but I can’t fathom who moved during this period that it could relate to.
- SISU look to have injected £1.4m to keep things running. Not all of this would have been cost-covering for the final 2.5 months of the season.
- The club has taken an interest-free loan of £3.2m from the EFL this month. That loan can only be used to pay tax liabilities and support planned working capital requirements, and it seems this plan has/had to be supplied to the EFL.

Click to expand...

It says The £2.5m transfer spending and £1.5m in sell-ons came in the period AFTER May ‘20 so won’t show up in these accounts.

skyblue93 said:

It says The £2.5m transfer spending and £1.5m in sell-ons came in the period AFTER May ‘20 so won’t show up in these accounts.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Seems I didn’t read the word “subsequent”.

So a net spent of £2.5m tallies approximately with what we had expected, no? The add-on is slightly lower than had been anticipated if it relates to Wilson.

Grendel said:

I didn’t understand the loan from the EFL as why it’s needed

The sell on fee I assumed was Wilson

Click to expand...

Why not take interest-free cash though?

SBAndy said:

Why not take interest-free cash though?

Click to expand...

I thought Boddy gave an interview at some point saying it’s nothing the club would benefit from so I’m surprised they have now done it

Grendel said:

Youve basically positioned your club on here as some kind of revolutionary businesss model

The fact is you have dodgy owners who don’t seem to care which of the portfolio of clubs they own to invest in and are essentially the same as ours without the initial disastrous failed loans.

You are a relegation from massive asset disposal and also your brand of football is poor and I expect a difficult season ahead

A lot in your forum agree with me and not you

Click to expand...

You’d fit in on that forum pal. Littered with imbeciles. We finished 5 in league last season us. So they’re not doing too bad. They’ve got more money than stokes owners, finished 9 places above, them spending millions less, yet it’s them that’s doing it right, you’re a silly billy 100%

Barnsley said:

You’d fit in on that forum pal. Littered with imbeciles. We finished 5 in league last season us. So they’re not doing too bad. They’ve got more money than stokes owners, finished 9 places above, them spending millions less, yet it’s them that’s doing it right, you’re a silly billy 100%

Click to expand...

So your forum is full of imbeciles when they a serious analysis of your accounts

Ok

Frostie said:

Can't be Wilson, that will be in this year's.

More likely is ongoing payments for someone like Maddison or even George Thomas/Cian Harries or similar.

Click to expand...

It isn’t in these accounts is it?

Frostie said:

Can't be Wilson, that will be in this year's.

More likely is ongoing payments for someone like Maddison or even George Thomas/Cian Harries or similar.

Click to expand...

The club acknowledge it but say it isn’t reflected in the accounts published

wingy said:

What is significant about the bonuses?
Would it be the method of delivery , to do with taxation issues or something completely separate?

Click to expand...

Normally you would account for them as a cost in those accounts as they relate to that season (financial period). Benefit of not including them is that reduces the loss by approx £700k, as pushes them into next set of accounts. The fact that season was late finishing gives them opportunity to do it tho as it states as at 31/5 the bonuses weren’t payable as technical didn’t know where promoted at that point

Grendel said:

I thought Boddy gave an interview at some point saying it’s nothing the club would benefit from so I’m surprised they have now done it

Click to expand...

The owner,then the club further down the line when interest is normally applied,or interest gets applied anyhow?

stupot07 said:

We should get whatever % of sell on, that Norwich get for their sell on. It will be something like 15% of 15%.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Is that so? Anderson did say he done a deal which would fund the club for years, well done to him on that.

Not going to go through every figure but this is my take on the 2020 financials.

- The pandemic kicked in from 23/03/2020 and yes did affect the club just like every other business in the UK. There were five home fixtures missed just at the time when we were top of the division but the net effect of the lost matches? Just as a very rough estimate in 2019 financials based on 23 league games (yes i know it doesnt cover cup games) the average match day money was in region of £110k per match in 2020 based on 18 league games the average match day income was approx £72k per match. You could say that the move to St Andrews was costing the club in lost turnover 38K per game or around £875k for the season.
the five games meant lost turnover of £360k (it may have got a bit higher because we were on the verge of promotion.

- on the other side of that is the amount of direct costs relating to turnover. Using the number games as above the direct costs at St Andrews were £72k in 2020 and £65k in 2019 at the Ricoh. The move meant those costs per match increased by £7k per match because of the move or £161k for the year. Also compare the match day income to direct costs and St Andrews it is break even, the previous year it was a gross profit of £45k per game. That is before any wages paid out.

The club didnt pay the direct costs for the five missed matches so saved £72k per game or £360k. Other than the possible increase in crowds as promotion beckoned the five missed games didnt create losses

In terms of operating the St Andrews move appears to have cost the club just over £1m even without the effect of the pandemic or the increased rent.

The lease costs increased by £611k year on year so a reasonable estimate of the St Andrews lease cost is between £800k and £850k.
So the additional cost to the club of being at St Andrews was probably at least £1.6m. Not difficult to get a better deal than that by returning it would seem to me. Both CCFC & Wasps needed that deal and anyone who thinks that Wasps are not making money in the deal is in cloud cuckoo land.

Broadcasting and other commercial income was very similar to the 2019 figures at 1.7m and 2.1m respectively

Wages costs increased by £1.2m. Partly because we signed more expensive players but also partly because the number of playing & management staff increased by 11 (1 admin job was lost). The club took advantage of the Furlough scheme for April & May (9 weeks) and recovered £333k against a normal weekly wage cost of £126k (2019 £102k)

The club was running at a quite substantial loss (given the CCFC set up) in any case. And if you look at the above then it is hard not to conclude that the decisions of the owners contributed largely to that. In my opinion i do not think the decision to move to St Andrews is as black and white as people make out. Nor was the return just because wasps are in dire financial straights. What was expected was losses because of the move to St Andrews the pandemic for that season was not the main contributing factor (and may be covered by an insurance claim in any case) but it did add to the losses.

Player transactions. The club summary highlights the player profits but if you read the SBS&L financials there are details of the actual cash flows. Player sales achieved £4.23m and in 2019 that was £4.4m. Not a massive difference. Player purchases in 2020 were £1.1m compared to £706k in 2019. In the scheme of things not a great difference either. Kind of gives a better indication of what MR has to work with in terms of buying players - he didnt get the biggest slice of the player sales either in 2019 or 2020 and 2021 i suspect will be no different.

Amortisation of players is the annual write down of existing player contracts to reflect usage of that contract. The club looks at those contracts and writes down those that have no value in addition to apportioning over the contract. We have had our fair share of players bought with high hopes that turned out to be duds but are still on the books. The cost went up to £888k basically doubling

The loans. The amount owed to the owners increased by a loan from SISU Master Fund by £1.635m . Total now £10m. Add to that the interest that is charged and hasnt been paid out which is a further £9.39m. It is possible to estimate the rates of interest on the three loans. ARVO charges 19.5% on £5.7m and 11.4% on £1.75m, SISU Master Fund seems to be in region of £14%. (Those rates include the cost of any witholding tax ). Effectively the owners put back in what they took out in 2019.

In the year CCFC got a new loan of £1.635m but at the end of the year had £1.1m in the bank. I assume that was there to help see the club through the pandemic.

The club now has net liabilities of £23m (ie has more liabilities than assets by £23m) That deficit includes 19m at that time owed to the owners so the club wasnt solvent in normal business terms even without owing the owners. The Auditors again place reliance for going concern on assurances from the owners which are not binding. Pretty certain we can expect losses in 2021.

Add to that the following when thinking about 2021. Bonuses for the 2019/20 season of £711k were accounted for in the 2021 year. There is now a £3.2m loan from the EFL repayable over next three years (non interest bearing unless we default). We have also paid out £2.6m on players and received £1.5m from sales. Due to increased owner loans then the interest charge will increase. The total liabilities were rising in 2020 i would guess they still are

Absolutely critical for the club to come back from St Andrews. Absolutely critical for the club to have access to normal attendances.

Oh and the new stadium is mentioned as on going .............. how do they raise the capital and pay for it

Not great reading at all. But thats my take on it

Grendel said:

So your forum is full of imbeciles when they a serious analysis of your accounts

Ok

Click to expand...

You’re idiotic, Barnsley lost £300k net and are doomed if we go down, Stoke lost £91M but it’s alright for them because their owners are worth, £8b despite that being a billion less than what our owners are worth. You’re an absolute nincompoop.

I’m just here for Grendel to be honest. Not only is he an expert on judging the ability of managers and players, he is also a forensic accountant! I love reading it

procdoc said:

I’m just here for Grendel to be honest. Not only is he an expert on judging the ability of managers and players, he is also a forensic accountant! I love reading it

Click to expand...

His abilities are really wasted in marketing.

procdoc said:

I’m just here for Grendel to be honest. Not only is he an expert on judging the ability of managers and players, he is also a forensic accountant! I love reading it

Click to expand...

Theirs more brain cells in a pork pie.

procdoc said:

I’m just here for Grendel to be honest. Not only is he an expert on judging the ability of managers and players, he is also a forensic accountant! I love reading it

Click to expand...

OSB is an accountant and I’m not but this isn’t great and the real problem to me is the loans are growing and the interest against them is huge. It’s starting to spiral and unlike other clubs these owners have zero emotional investment

Worrying

Barnsley said:

Theirs more brain cells in a pork pie.

Click to expand...

Quality use of the English language

Grendel said:

Quality use of the English language

Click to expand...

You can hardly talk...

Grendel said:

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

Click to expand...

Ccfcisparks said:

You can hardly talk...

Click to expand...

you are an accountant aren’t you? Why do you never comment on finances?