Another nice positive article in the CT (3 Viewers)

dongonzalos · May 22, 2016

Grendel said:
Why bother?

Sorry Grendel fair play, I have lost itvin this one,
What is the correct situation?

Nick · May 22, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Am I missing something or are

Maybe I am completely misunderstanding everything?
However I am under the impression we borrowed around 750 k due to the error over the break even point.
If we paid back 250k.
We still owe around 500k.
Pay back 250k
Owe 500k
Increase ticket prices for next season to rectify the mistake.
Budget the same this session as last season
Did we only get 750-800k for Maddison?
Does that make sense or have I lost the plot?

How do you know the money was put in because of the break point stuff? Wasn't the money put in before all that?

stupot07 · May 22, 2016

Anderson said the maddison money was to help with the operating costs over 2-3 seasons not just filling a gap last season.

This years accounts don't come out till march 2017, so don is doing the usual 2+2=5 with no facts at all, just complete supposition.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Super Graham Withey · May 22, 2016

stupot07 said:
Anderson said the maddison money was to help with the operating costs over 2-3 seasons not just filling a gap last season.

This years accounts don't come out till march 2017, so don is doing the usual 2+2=5 with no facts at all, just complete supposition.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Anderson did say this and results went into free fall.

tisza · May 22, 2016

accounts only give a guideline on what the playing budget might be.
Jim Brown's figure of 92% is an irrelevance as it includes everyone employed by the club.
Juggy can check the profit on player sales it's the accounts which does actually come in at around 9 million but obviously in not regular enough sizes to be planning wage budgets and contract values .(range is 72k upto 2.7m for Wilson).
a playing budget of around 2.5m out of a wage bill (inc directors fees) of 4.6m does show we are having to spend a lot of money on the reported 20 admin & management & 289 stewards.

Nick · May 22, 2016

Their comments never fail to amaze, you can usually just read them and then take the opposite to get what actually happens

It's no surprise usually nearly all of them are misinformed, and if you point out any facts they go mental.

stupot07 · May 22, 2016

tisza said:
accounts only give a guideline on what the playing budget might be.
Jim Brown's figure of 92% is an irrelevance as it includes everyone employed by the club.
Juggy can check the profit on player sales it's the accounts which does actually come in at around 9 million but obviously in not regular enough sizes to be planning wage budgets and contract values .(range is 72k upto 2.7m for Wilson).
a playing budget of around 2.5m out of a wage bill (inc directors fees) of 4.6m does show we are having to spend a lot of money on the reported 20 admin & management & 289 stewards.

But that playing budget wont include management, coaches, medical staff, it probably won't include those employed by the academy, etc, eith
Looking back 2014/25 accounts wages were actually £4.3m, there was another c£1m in employers NI and pension scheme contributions - are those included or excluded in the £2.5m juggy talks about?

OK, if you're saying that that £2.5m is all 105 players and management specified in the accounts, then less 20% for the employers NI and pension contributions, would make £2m for wages, that would be am average of £19k gross pay per player/coach (£366 PW).....

Its much more likely that the £2m/£2.5m is purely the c35 first team players (inc. The youngsters in the u21's) which even at £2.5m (before adding NI & Pension contributions) brings the average up to £71k pa (c£1.3k PW) which is pretty much what the average league one wage is.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...14-15-season-1-7million-rest-creep-along.html
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Nick · May 22, 2016

stupot07 said:
But that playing budget wont include management, coaches, medical staff, it probably won't include those employed by the academy, etc, eith
Looking back 2014/25 accounts wages were actually £4.3m, there was another c£1m in employers NI and pension scheme contributions - are those included or excluded in the £2.5m juggy talks about?

OK, if you're saying that that £2.5m is all 105 players and management specified in the accounts, then less 20% for the employers NI and pension contributions, would make £2m for wages, that would be am average of £19k gross pay per player/coach (£366 PW).....

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

That's the thing, people forget that clubs cost money to run away from the players and transfers.

Even sky blue sam needs paying!!

Warwickhunt · May 22, 2016

Nick said:
It's another case of the loudest not always being correct.

It doesn't say how much he thinks they have pocketed off player transfers.

The scary thing is, shit like that is taken as fact and will be repeated.

I would think anything liablous would have been moderated out of it

Nick · May 22, 2016

Warwickhunt said:
I would think anything liablous would have been moderated out of it

You would think any incorrect facts would have as well...

Warwickhunt · May 22, 2016

Nick said:
You would think any incorrect facts would have as well...

They are like politicians Nick they like to make you think that's what they said by inference and denial by the factual text that was written , not a bad thread this one

Warwickhunt · May 22, 2016

Nick said:
You would think any incorrect facts would have as well...

Would be nice to get OSB on this one

Nick · May 22, 2016

Warwickhunt said:
Would be nice to get OSB on this one

I think he's been through the accounts every year when they come out.

If sisu were making loads of money off the club, do we really think the telegraph wouldn't have hammered that headline

Grendel · May 22, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Sorry Grendel fair play, I have lost itvin this one,
What is the correct situation?

Fortunately Stupot has taken time to explain it

Warwickhunt · May 22, 2016

Nick said:
I think he's been through the accounts every year when they come out.

If sisu were making loads of money off the club, do we really think the telegraph wouldn't have hammered that headline

Totally agree Nick I think it's more about being able to explicity prove the facts, as reporters they probably know lots of stuff they would like to get out into a headline but are tied because of the burden of proof

Warwickhunt · May 22, 2016

Warwickhunt said:
Totally agree Nick I think it's more about being able to explicity prove the facts, as reporters they probably know lots of stuff they would like to get out into a headline but are tied because of the burden of proof

I would really love to know the truth behind the Les Read debacle though as he seems to leak little tit bit now and then

Deleted member 5849 · May 22, 2016

Warwickhunt said:
I would really love to know the truth behind the Les Read debacle though as he seems to leak little tit bit now and then

Somewhere, if anybody could be bothered, there's not just one book but a whole trilogy, and mini-series TV spin-off to be had from all the various strands surrounding the club in the 21st century.

Nick · May 22, 2016

Warwickhunt said:
Totally agree Nick I think it's more about being able to explicity prove the facts, as reporters they probably know lots of stuff they would like to get out into a headline but are tied because of the burden of proof

If they were taking money out or making money it would be in the accounts wouldn't it? Nothing about trying to prove things.

What point are they trying to get across with this article? Seems to me the next rumour on the street is sisu are making loads of money out of the club.

Clearly part of a pr battle.

Warwickhunt · May 22, 2016

Nick said:
If they were taking money out or making money it would be in the accounts wouldn't it? Nothing about trying to prove things.

What point are they trying to get across with this article? Seems to me the next rumour on the street is sisu are making loads of money out of the club.

Clearly part of a pr battle.

I agree CCFC accounts would be very stringent and any misdemeanour would be found, I think that a lot of people think that when we sell a player it appears immediately in the books and that is what gives them a perception of SISU making money out of the club. I for one would not be looking for a 3rd division club to try and make money out of it and I should imagine it is difficult trying to keep the books balanced with only have one source of income which in our case is ticket sales. Hence why I agree with this years pricing structure which is still very very competitive in our league

SkyBlue_Bear83 · May 22, 2016

Are some really back to the opinion that SISU are making a killing out of the club and making millions pounds of a year? I thought we had moved past that.

Nick · May 22, 2016

CCFC said:
Are some really back to the opinion that SISU are making a killing out of the club and making millions pounds of a year? I thought we had moved past that.

Yes but something has come out about the council being a bit naughty, so something needs to be done to sweep it away

We move past it every year when the accounts come out, I can't believe people think that if they were making a killing the Telegraph wouldn't have made 50 stories out of it and the council's PR wouldn't have gone to town about it.

dongonzalos · May 22, 2016

stupot07 said:
Anderson said the maddison money was to help with the operating costs over 2-3 seasons not just filling a gap last season.

This years accounts don't come out till march 2017, so don is doing the usual 2+2=5 with no facts at all, just complete supposition.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

If you read what I said at the start, I actually said I don't agree with article.

Deleted member 5849 said:
Somewhere, if anybody could be bothered, there's not just one book but a whole trilogy, and mini-series TV spin-off to be had from all the various strands surrounding the club in the 21st century.

To be fair it would make a cracking TV series the whole thing.

oldskyblue58 · May 22, 2016

Been looking at the figures again since SISU got here up until 31/05/2015 the last published accounts for SBS&L. CCFC Ltd & CCFC H Ltd didn't file for 2012 onwards and Otium took over in 2013.

Piecing things together from the SBS&L group accounts 2008 to 2015
Player transactions from the accounts and therefore included on its profit & loss
Sales £15.91m
Purchases £7.86m

Turnover (excls player sales) £72.51m
Wages (all players & staff) £68.16m ...........(At best 78% of turnover at worst 133% over the various years)
Operating losses (before amortisation of player contracts and interest payable) £56.95m

Not a lot of spare cash to be withdrawn. The accounts do not identify any related party as withdrawing funds although around 2011 to 2012 the investors loans dropped by £1m so that could have been an extraction of funds

There is one anomaly I have discovered when looking at this again. I cant explain it no doubt there is a good reason. In a number of years the Sale value of players does not equal the amount disclosed in the Cash Flow Statement. It doesn't seem like it is staging of payments. Just to be clear I am not pointing fingers or saying things are wrong. I can not explain why there should be a difference that say is not rectified the following year. Will recheck my figures

Captain Dart · May 22, 2016

dongonzalos said:
Am I missing something or are

Maybe I am completely misunderstanding everything?
However I am under the impression we borrowed around 750 k due to the error over the break even point.
If we paid back 250k.
We still owe around 500k.
Pay back 250k
Owe 500k
Increase ticket prices for next season to rectify the mistake.
Budget the same this session as last season
Did we only get 750-800k for Maddison?
Does that make sense or have I lost the plot?

Last accounts (12 months up until 31 May 2015) showed £1.9M loss, the club is not running at break even, it is leaking money and there is £6M to find to cover the Sixfields fiasco and the season that followed it.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-fc-accounts-show-10970959
The club suffered an operating loss of £1.9million in the latest accounts, down from £4.4m previously

MusicDating · May 22, 2016

Kieran Crowley ‏@KieranCrowley1 34m34 minutes ago
@JuggyChima @sharonw27071968 @CovTel_CCFC And that's the wrong way around. 60% go on wages at the club, 40% goes on everything else.

chiefdave · May 22, 2016

He's not having the best time trying to back up what he wrote in the article. Problem is there's still loads of people on the CT, Facebook and twitter saying he's spot on.

armybike · May 22, 2016

chiefdave said:
He's not having the best time trying to back up what he wrote in the article. Problem is there's still loads of people on the CT, Facebook and twitter saying he's spot on.

But what about Freedom of Speech.......... *whistles*

Maybe Juggy will get his own police escort everywhere he goes!

oldskyblue58 · May 23, 2016

oldskyblue58 said:
There is one anomaly I have discovered when looking at this again. I cant explain it no doubt there is a good reason. In a number of years the Sale value of players does not equal the amount disclosed in the Cash Flow Statement. It doesn't seem like it is staging of payments. Just to be clear I am not pointing fingers or saying things are wrong. I can not explain why there should be a difference that say is not rectified the following year. Will recheck my figures

So here is the anomaly
Cash flow statements indicate how actual cash has been utilised in the business - ie non cash accounting adjustments like depreciation are excluded

Player calculated sales total 15.9m. The profit on those sales as declared in the accounts 13.72m. The entries on the cash flow statements 2008 to 2015 total 12.76m actually received. Difference Calculated sales to cash flow total is 3.15m
(calculated sale price is original cost less accumulated amortisation plus the profit)
Player purchases 7.86m. The entries on the cash flow statements actually paid out 7.26m

Shouldn't the cost on the balance sheet of players bought equal the figure on the cash flow statement (some years it did) ?
Shouldn't, even allowing for staged payments and add ons cash received even out to pretty much the same figure as sales value?
2012 calculated value of Player sales 3.19m figure on cash flow statement 935K
Some years there was no difference

I cant explain it but sure there will be a reason. Perhaps I am looking at it wrongly. No I am not saying anything is wrong only that I do not understand the entries

Godiva · May 23, 2016

oldskyblue58 said:
There is one anomaly I have discovered when looking at this again. I cant explain it no doubt there is a good reason. In a number of years the Sale value of players does not equal the amount disclosed in the Cash Flow Statement. It doesn't seem like it is staging of payments. Just to be clear I am not pointing fingers or saying things are wrong. I can not explain why there should be a difference that say is not rectified the following year. Will recheck my figures

Amortization?

covcity4life · May 23, 2016

ccfc need to ban the CET. no more interviews,no more press conferences.

give it to the observer or keep it all on sky blues player

Skyblueweeman · May 23, 2016

Juggy is/was LeamingtonBootBoy, correct?

Otis · May 23, 2016

Skyblueweeman said:
Juggy is/was LeamingtonBootBoy, correct?

Believe so.

Skyblueweeman · May 23, 2016

Otis said:
Believe so.

Wonder why he doesn't post on this forum?

Skyblueweeman · May 23, 2016

Just seen this as well...he's watching. Hello LBB!

Juggy Chima ‏@JuggyChima 3h3 hours ago
Looks like the Sky Blue Talk forum admin and the owners are in agreement. Well, I'll decline to join that merry 'little' band

Otis · May 23, 2016

Skyblueweeman said:
Just seen this as well...he's watching. Hello LBB!

Juggy Chima ‏@JuggyChima 3h3 hours ago
Looks like the Sky Blue Talk forum admin and the owners are in agreement. Well, I'll decline to join that merry 'little' band

Since when has anyone been in agreement on here?

Another nice positive article in the CT (3 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Euro 2016 Prediction League Champion!!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency