speedie87
Well-Known Member
i reckon its a mistake and someone has published the wrong version!
I still think the detail although not overwhelming adds detail that we don’t normally get from ccfc so I think it’s interesting
That would be so funnyi reckon its a mistake and someone has published the wrong version!
Just out of curiosity,does anyone know when the bond needs to be paid back by the London rugby club?
Or how far there is left for repayment?
My thinking is the club must be getting near to be a sellable asset once inside the Championship.
I just think at least breaking even is an important thing to show amongst owners of certain professional sporting clubs in Coventry at the moment, with everything what's going on.
Got a feeling things are going to come to a conclusion within the next 12 months or so.
Always good when I click on the twitter link only to find I’m blocked by an account I’ve never interacted with and only just found out exists!Another one of those weird accounts.
Deleted, what was it?Good to see John knows what he’s talking about
The club may have turned a profit but don't we still owe Arvo Masterfund via SISU over 40 million and still getting charged interest on it?
part 2
- Cash at bank at the year end had decreased from £682k to £56k. Must have made things tight over the summer months but that would have been buffered by Chaplins sale in the summer of 2019
- Creditors overall decreased from £21.8m to £21.4m. These figures include what is owed to the owners
- Overall the balance sheet is £19.7m negative. Which means they do not have the assets to cover the liabilities – they are 19m short. This is not the deficit on the SBS&L accounts which is £48.5m however the original funding claimed to have been put in of £28m+ is not secured on Otium so is not a liability of Otium/CCFC
- Operating lease charges show a figure of £535k down from £574k in 2018. This includes the Ricoh rent but also the Higgs centre and any other leases paid by the group. There is no split
- Audit fees shown on Otium show fees down by 10k at 12k in total – perhaps why the change
- Employees in total have increased by 10 to 362 but is related to the part time stewards so unlikely in itself to increase the costs by much.
- Wages costs increased from £4.879m to £5.321m in total. Less was paid in to pensions (decrease £220k) but so wages & salaries actually (inc NI) went up by £665k.
- The interest charge increased by £220k because the ARVO etc loans cost more
- With all the accumulated losses over the years there is no tax to pay on the profit
- The capital element on the ARVO/SISU Master Fund loans has decreased by £254k which indicates a part repayment of £254k. No reason why an owner cannot take money out if they choose to
- The interest element increased from £7.169m to £7.701m. Given that the interest charge in the P&L was £2.1m that means not all of the charge was rolled up and carried forward. Do the calculation and the owners paid down £1.56m of accumulated interest. Again no reason why they should not if they choose to but it does mean less available to the manager
- What is unusual is the inclusion of the management profit & loss which is a detailed report not usually released and certainly not filed by other clubs at Companies House. Having checked today it seems that part of the financials reports has been taken down from the club website, it certainly hasnt been filed at Companies House. Highlights not dealt with above are as follows
- There is a break down of the turnover. Match receipts despite a decent season dropped by £150k to £2.54m. Broadcasting income jumped by £480k to £1.72m Other commercial income stayed static at £2m
- There were redundancy costs in both 2016 and 2019. In 2019 the cost was £112k
- There is the first evidence of any management charges being paid £42,792 in both years. Not unreasonable and certainly not large figures
- Generally the costs of utilities, repairs and maintenance are down
- There legal & professional fees of £72k in 2019 and £47k in 2018. This could be all legal fees but it could also be agents costs. On top of that there are consultants fees 32k in 2019 and 14k in 2018 – no further explanation in accounts
- Boardroom expenses are 48k up from 45k in 2018
- There is no cash flow statement in the Otium accounts. It is included in the SBS&L ones. What it shows is that over the year the group was cash low negative by 625k after paying out for players and equipment but also repaying part of the loans and interest. The closing position of cash still showed £56k in the bank
- SBS&L accounts has useful info but it is Otium that is the trading part of the group. Not all of the liabilities owed by the group are owed by Otium.
- Outstanding to SISU investment funds £28.5m – owed by group but not secured on Otium/CCFC
- Otium owes ARVO £7.482m for which ARVO has a charge over Otium assets
- Otium owes SISU Master Fund £1.167m no charge registered at Companies House
The worry is what happens if the player sales do not come through. This year (2019) looks good on the face of it and is to be welcomed but the club has to keep churning out gems that others want to buy just to keep going. I still remain concerned if we remain at St Andrews and get promoted (dont get me wrong i would love promotion) that we will struggle to compete and finance it. If it fails next season that could have serious financial implications, including having to sell star players off cheaply. Worrying and caring about your team is part of being a fan i guess
PUSB
part 2
- Cash at bank at the year end had decreased from £682k to £56k. Must have made things tight over the summer months but that would have been buffered by Chaplins sale in the summer of 2019
- Creditors overall decreased from £21.8m to £21.4m. These figures include what is owed to the owners
- Overall the balance sheet is £19.7m negative. Which means they do not have the assets to cover the liabilities – they are 19m short. This is not the deficit on the SBS&L accounts which is £48.5m however the original funding claimed to have been put in of £28m+ is not secured on Otium so is not a liability of Otium/CCFC
- Operating lease charges show a figure of £535k down from £574k in 2018. This includes the Ricoh rent but also the Higgs centre and any other leases paid by the group. There is no split
- Audit fees shown on Otium show fees down by 10k at 12k in total – perhaps why the change
- Employees in total have increased by 10 to 362 but is related to the part time stewards so unlikely in itself to increase the costs by much.
- Wages costs increased from £4.879m to £5.321m in total. Less was paid in to pensions (decrease £220k) but so wages & salaries actually (inc NI) went up by £665k.
- The interest charge increased by £220k because the ARVO etc loans cost more
- With all the accumulated losses over the years there is no tax to pay on the profit
- The capital element on the ARVO/SISU Master Fund loans has decreased by £254k which indicates a part repayment of £254k. No reason why an owner cannot take money out if they choose to
- The interest element increased from £7.169m to £7.701m. Given that the interest charge in the P&L was £2.1m that means not all of the charge was rolled up and carried forward. Do the calculation and the owners paid down £1.56m of accumulated interest. Again no reason why they should not if they choose to but it does mean less available to the manager
- What is unusual is the inclusion of the management profit & loss which is a detailed report not usually released and certainly not filed by other clubs at Companies House. Having checked today it seems that part of the financials reports has been taken down from the club website, it certainly hasnt been filed at Companies House. Highlights not dealt with above are as follows
- There is a break down of the turnover. Match receipts despite a decent season dropped by £150k to £2.54m. Broadcasting income jumped by £480k to £1.72m Other commercial income stayed static at £2m
- There were redundancy costs in both 2016 and 2019. In 2019 the cost was £112k
- There is the first evidence of any management charges being paid £42,792 in both years. Not unreasonable and certainly not large figures
- Generally the costs of utilities, repairs and maintenance are down
- There legal & professional fees of £72k in 2019 and £47k in 2018. This could be all legal fees but it could also be agents costs. On top of that there are consultants fees 32k in 2019 and 14k in 2018 – no further explanation in accounts
- Boardroom expenses are 48k up from 45k in 2018
- There is no cash flow statement in the Otium accounts. It is included in the SBS&L ones. What it shows is that over the year the group was cash low negative by 625k after paying out for players and equipment but also repaying part of the loans and interest. The closing position of cash still showed £56k in the bank
- SBS&L accounts has useful info but it is Otium that is the trading part of the group. Not all of the liabilities owed by the group are owed by Otium.
- Outstanding to SISU investment funds £28.5m – owed by group but not secured on Otium/CCFC
- Otium owes ARVO £7.482m for which ARVO has a charge over Otium assets
- Otium owes SISU Master Fund £1.167m no charge registered at Companies House
The worry is what happens if the player sales do not come through. This year (2019) looks good on the face of it and is to be welcomed but the club has to keep churning out gems that others want to buy just to keep going. I still remain concerned if we remain at St Andrews and get promoted (dont get me wrong i would love promotion) that we will struggle to compete and finance it. If it fails next season that could have serious financial implications, including having to sell star players off cheaply. Worrying and caring about your team is part of being a fan i guess
PUSB
Its a far better situation OSB from a few years back. There has been a sustained effort by all to turn things around responsiby while growing the team under MR's.
As for competing in the Championship, I think we would easily do so. Many of the existing squad are good enough. Receipts will increase and 2 0r 3 fold if we get back to the Ricoh.
I will still maintain SISU have an exit strategy once we reach the Championship where will will be worth more of a punt than a number on the back of a fag packet!
Utter rubbish
- There legal & professional fees of £72k in 2019 and £47k in 2018. This could be all legal fees but it could also be agents costs. On top of that there are consultants fees 32k in 2019 and 14k in 2018 – no further explanation in accounts
Would hope the consultant fees are these land agents etc who are finding all these sites. At the fees quoted you'd hope they're getting a decent number of days work from them!
Time will tell then Grendel to see if I'm right? Bookmark it and I will gloat later....
What you reckon they are for Nick and Shmmeee? :emoji_briefcase::emoji_busts_in_silhouette:
We will have the lowest wage bill by a mile so what you are basically saying is all other clubs have the wage structure wrong? We’d be half of the next lowest safe in that league even being optimistic
Income was either£8M or£11M last time,expenditure £22M.Utter rubbish
So are the accounts telling us that CCFC have ultimately paid £1.81m back to ARVO/SISU as a mix of capital and interest payments? I've calculated that amount from the two statements below, taken from OSBs reading of the accounts:
"The capital element on the ARVO/SISU Master Fund loans has decreased by £254k which indicates a part repayment of £254k. No reason why an owner cannot take money out if they choose to"
"Do the calculation and the owners paid down £1.56m of accumulated interest. Again no reason why they should not if they choose to but it does mean less available to the manager"
Its a far better situation OSB from a few years back. There has been a sustained effort by all to turn things around responsiby while growing the team under MR's.
As for competing in the Championship, I think we would easily do so. Many of the existing squad are good enough. Receipts will increase and 2 0r 3 fold if we get back to the Ricoh.
I will still maintain SISU have an exit strategy once we reach the Championship where will will be worth more of a punt than a number on the back of a fag packet!
Your assumption, and it is a reasonable one to make, is that out playing budget goes up. There is nothing to say sisu can’t provide MR with a league one squad on a league 1 budget and say if he works wonders and keeps us up he gets much more money the next year. A season in the championship without increasing expenditure could go some way to sorting things out.Yes in some ways it is much better
Its only better so long as we have multi million pound player sales in the year and the owners do not draw down the interest and/or loans owed which is now accruing at £2m pa. In each of the years since 2014/15 we have made operating losses, those operating losses have steadily increased every year since 2016/17. The model relies on the ability to sell players on, what happens if CCFC cant or cant get the right price or cant get enough combined sales to cover the bills. If operating losses are increasing so is the requirement for cash to pay the bills, which restricts the budget for player purchases
Whilst the financial control does look better i query the driver behind it. To me it was brought about by SISU no longer having access to major funds so the tap was turned off - that drove the "responsible" finances. There was no choice. Btw i am far from against better financial control. Thankfully it has worked because we have a manager achieving wonders. Next season it gets tougher still. But until we got some momentum from Cup and League success i should imagine its been touch and go, even now it isnt without its problems
My concern though was about promotion and staying at St Andrews together. I dont believe you will see crowds double or triple if that happens. Income from the EFL will increase yes, crowds will grow but not to the extent you suggest (could fall off if we start losing) but the costs will also grow particularly wages and largely unaffected by results. Incomes in the Championship in a report done for 2018 season were on a decline. In 2019 we got £6m in turnover, possibly less this season. Increase by a factor of 3 and thats income of £18m - average wage bill in the championship is probably that at least simply to survive, ours is 5.3m in 2019 Then there are the other overheads and direct costs to pay for not to mention the interest. That means £4m player sale simply to stand still and pay the bills
Championship 2018 Finances – Revenue - FINANCIAL FOOTBALL NEWS
The players, well some of our better ones are loans or coming to end of contract that other teams have taken an interest in. In which case we are relying on bringing in players who quickly adapt or progress to the higher level or paying out funds currently in short supply. It is one thing asking players from the academy or development squad to step up to L2 or L1 quite another asking them to compete against a large number of Ex Premier League players for a season. Loan players will play a part but the higher you go the more costly they become. Yes we have small core of players that could step up but what about the depth of squad needed
I do not share your optimism, that doesnt mean we should not go for it though - we have to strive to be the best we can be. You maybe right, and i am being over cautious guess we wait see
YepWhat you reckon they are for Nick and Shmmeee? :emoji_briefcase::emoji_busts_in_silhouette:
The SBSL cash flow shows a total interest paid figure of £1.477906 but have not done the sums to see how much is internal funding
Ah right, i was just interested to understand the figures quoted as it seems like a potentially large sum to have been taken out of the club's earnings if so? I don't know if previous years have shown a similar pattern or not but clearly the interest overall continues to pile up.
The prior year shows £nil
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?