Clouting Refuses To Be Drawn on Hoffman Talks (1 Viewer)

As it stands SISU have not lost a single penny. They have put a lot in but in such a way that the value is preserved in their balance sheets. They will only realise a loss if they sell for anything less than they have put in. So they are somewhat safe as long as the club can live within its means - if they have a cashflow deficit of 2-2.5mio a year, the club needs to have a profit on other activities (player trade) to live within its means. If they manage to sell Turner I guess the board will take what is needed to balance the cashflow deficit for the season and give the rest to AT.

The club is not for sale as it is unrealistic anyone will want to pay off the loans 100%. And as the club is actually quite close financially to become a viable business with a future I can't see SISU sell for less.

We wont have a club shortly. We have til the end of May 2012 and we will go under.

CCFC123 said:

We wont have a club shortly. We have til the end of May 2012 and we will go under.

Click to expand...

What makes you think that? Is that the final date on some ancient inca calendar?

Or are you refering to the statement from the board that the owners have agreed to a revised plan and made cash available to the end of the season? If so, maybe at that time the owners will evaluate the situation and act as needed.

This is what really gets up my arse, SISUs 30-40 million,
-debts to shareholders when sisu caame here were approx 30m which were wrote off so they could take the club forward.
-600k revamping Ryton which they have mortgaged.
-700k for westy 350k for gunnar 500k for Dann 450k for Fox 250k for Juke; total in for players (please tell me anymore we have paaaid for) 2.25m
-we received 2.2m for Fox (actual 1.9 minus % 2 walsall) 3.5m for Dann (3m) plus a reported 700k when he signs for arsenal. Total (again aanymore please sayy. Just over 5m
So they've doubled their player return not to mention compo for gunnar.
-apparently shirts and STs are higher thaan last season (AT won't get that as they took a loaan out against them)
-the rest of the "investment" is running costs.

SISu are full of shit. If they get aaa buyer who pays what they want (their "investment" back) or the majority of it, please send them my way as I'm looking to sell my van and I got "investment" (fuel and. maintainance) reciepts for the 2 years I've had it totalling about 14k plus the asset value the vans gta be worth about 16k. On sisu's theory that's the sale price.


FOR SALE; MERCEDES VITO 2.2CDI 52 reg 140k on clock MOT and TAX

£16.000 o.v.n.o

I hope these clueless arseholes leave ASAP.

boycott the club until sisu leave, it is the only way, I'm afraid.
Plenty of better things to do on a Saturday, might try my hand at lobbing bricks......could become an Olimpik sport.

Last night Clouting said SiSU will fund the club until it can live within it's means, which basically means untill the club breaks even! Which very naively the board have set a target of the end of this season! If the football league doesn't put that rule in place we will be struggerling for a very long time. The problem sisu has is it owns a football club were it's assists are the players and staff as well as the chance to purchase a 50% share in the ground as well as ryton and that's about it! Hoffmans value of the club is probably about right but sadly for him sisu want a return on there purchase. Hopefully the meeting produces a way forward for both parties! The club needs a change something new and maybe Hoffman is the man to do it.

Lord_Nampil said:

Last night Clouting said SiSU will fund the club until it can live within it's means, which basically means untill the club breaks even! Which very naively the board have set a target of the end of this season! If the football league doesn't put that rule in place we will be struggerling for a very long time. The problem sisu has is it owns a football club were it's assists are the players and staff as well as the chance to purchase a 50% share in the ground as well as ryton and that's about it! Hoffmans value of the club is probably about right but sadly for him sisu want a return on there purchase. Hopefully the meeting produces a way forward for both parties! The club needs a change something new and maybe Hoffman is the man to do it.

Click to expand...

I don't think it is naive to target break even for next season - we are a lot closer than you think. If we had sold Westie and Gunnar last Summer and replaced them with likes of Dunn and Bigimama/Thomas the club would probably broke even last year.

Even if the new financial fair play rules are not implemented next season, we will still have to live within our means. We simply cannot survive if the club keeps bleeding money.

Godiva said:

I don't think it is naive to target break even for next season - we are a lot closer than you think. If we had sold Westie and Gunnar last Summer and replaced them with likes of Dunn and Bigimama/Thomas the club would probably broke even last year.

Even if the new financial fair play rules are not implemented next season, we will still have to live within our means. We simply cannot survive if the club keeps bleeding money.

Click to expand...

I say naive because i can see alot of the clubs getting around it, IF they have benefactors.

I think the new rule is great and needs to come in, its not the players who should be penalized its the clubs! If they can't afford the wadges and agent fees then players demands will reduce.

But the one thing i think annoys me is the fact the money for king and Gunner has not been reinvested, Clouting said last night the money was still there so its not a question of have we got money to work with, cuz we have!

The problem maybe with Thorn, he wants a type of player who will fit in with his plans that player may cost a fee, a fee that we do not have unless we sell or receive money from sell on fees or tribunals. Instead of signing some one on a free who will do a job for a season.

I guess as fans the only thing we can do is get behind AT but i have a feeling that may not last long due to the injury list hitting 7 and already having a start of 2 defeats.

Lord_Nampil said:

But the one thing i think annoys me is the fact the money for king and Gunner has not been reinvested, Clouting said last night the money was still there so its not a question of have we got money to work with, cuz we have!

Click to expand...

I think that money is intended for use on loan players wages.

akira1984 said:

This is what really gets up my arse, SISUs 30-40 million,
-debts to shareholders when sisu caame here were approx 30m which were wrote off so they could take the club forward.
-600k revamping Ryton which they have mortgaged.
-700k for westy 350k for gunnar 500k for Dann 450k for Fox 250k for Juke; total in for players (please tell me anymore we have paaaid for) 2.25m
-we received 2.2m for Fox (actual 1.9 minus % 2 walsall) 3.5m for Dann (3m) plus a reported 700k when he signs for arsenal. Total (again aanymore please sayy. Just over 5m
So they've doubled their player return not to mention compo for gunnar.
.

Click to expand...

Your transfer fee figures, both in and out are wildly inaccurate. Off the top of my head: Fox and Danny was confirmed to be over a million for the pair. Juke was closer to a million. You haven't included Eastwood, Platt, Dunn, Hussey, Deegan, McIndoe, Clingan, Cranie, Keogh, McPake, Best, Borrowdale, Bell all of which some kind of fee was paid for. We also got closer to £1.5m for fox and it's a reported £450k sell on for Dann. Also we received cash for: Adebola, Gray, Borrowdale, Best.

I can't be bothered to do the sums again, but it's less than £1m profit over their stewardship.

Couple things....

Having also done the figures, based on the accounts, I have to agree with shmmee that the club are approx £1m to the good on player dealings during SISU's tenure (btw EAstwood bought before SISU came in so they cant be blamed for him). A lot of the signings though have been on free, and Juke was £930K approx.

The debts didnt all disappear when SISU came in - yes £35m were written off but another £25m + remained for SISU to take on and pay. I dont really understand the problem everyone one has with mortgaging short term the training ground - nearly all clubs secure loans (bank, investors or fairy godmother) on property they own - if they didnt raise the finance and offer security then most clubs would shut the doors, its the serviceability that is the problem

The wages savings made is not like putting money in the building society - the "savings" are reducing losses ie we were already paying out too much in the first place and could not afford it. Think other teams are going to lock themselves into financial deals that they cannot afford over the next few years and pay the price. It is likely that their squads will not be allowed to be built upon until they get finance right and some teams lose £15 or £20m a year! thats a hell of a saving to find! The potential new rules are something for our board to hide behind, a convenient excuse BUT it doesnt hide the truth that no club can continue to incur loss after loss and survive. We are no different and it wont be pretty but financial control ensures the club survives - in what division is a different story! The club however could have dealt with the fans on this much much better - PR what PR?

The financial control issue is a convenient smokescreen for the Directors / SISU to hide behind. Nothing has been agreed as to what the rules will be and I very much doubt the clubs will vote in something that will penalise the majority of themselves. If, and it is an if, something does come in it will not only be phased in over a few seasons and also clubs will find ways around it. Just look at Man City getting huge sponsorship of the stadium etc from a company definately not associated with their owners (NOT) - there are always ways around these things. Our Directors are using this as an excuse to justify their running of the club. It is obvious that they simply don't want to invest any more money and the owners are unwilling to invest any more money so the club has to become self sufficient - simply not possible in todays climate and the playing field will not be level next year or the year after. The owners have a millstone they don't know what to do with, don;t want to spend any more money on it but also are unwilling to write off large amounts of money and divesting themselves of it at a knockdown deal. As has been said before - they have no plan and really don't care what division we play in etc as long as the investment does not affect their bottom line. We get relegated then we simply cut even more - not palatable for us the supporters but do they care - of course not.

Godiva said:

What makes you think that? Is that the final date on some ancient inca calendar?

Or are you refering to the statement from the board that the owners have agreed to a revised plan and made cash available to the end of the season? If so, maybe at that time the owners will evaluate the situation and act as needed.

Click to expand...

The club will go under at the end of May next season when gate receipts have dried up. Not for a minute are we anywhere close to breaking even. Kings wages etc would still not bring us to the break even figure. SISU wont be investing anymore after the end of the season. SISU's plan will be break even by end of next season but that depends on a core gate etc each week...we wont be getting any healthy gates with the decline in the playing squad/results will will?! Gates down and performances down with a relegations struggle indicates they WONT break even!

The hardcore support who would come whatever division we are in or however we are performing is probably around 8-10k - which for a City and catchment area is pathetic but maybe a Div One team is all the city deserves or wants. We have always deluded ourselves that we are a "big" team but in reality are we? If we live within our means without a sugar daddy owner - ie within the revenue we can generate as a club then we are dependent upon those coming through the gate and they add up to a Div One club. Maybe its a hard and sorry fact but maybe we should get used to it as unless SISU suddenly have a change of heart thats where we are heading.

Wise words again Oldskyblue. We may be waiting for the transfer window to close as their is rumoured to be a large surplus of players that will be free agents at this point. As the city seem to want a top player for as little as possible players will be more flexible on wage demands with out a club, problem with that is if you look at the likes of Aliadiere that left Middlesborough still a free agent but has that much money from his premier league contracts that they can still choose wether or not to sign. As for Clouting, he did not give a straight answer to any one last night, the man is a SISU spokesman not a club spokesman. If he is doing the best he possibly can for the club, his words at the forum, then he needs to front up and tell us what is being done rather than the cloak and dagger stuff we get all the time. In reality SISU pay his wages so he dances to their tune. Hopefully funding for players can be found from somewhere to strengthen , even though its early days yet. The big thing to shock me is he said last night that we have a similar budget to Norwich did last season! PUSB

oldskyblue58 said:

Couple things....

(btw EAstwood bought before SISU came in so they cant be blamed for him).

Click to expand...

He can't have been? Eastwood was a Coleman signing wasn't he? And Coleman was brought in by SISU?

shmmeee said:

Your transfer fee figures, both in and out are wildly inaccurate. Off the top of my head: Fox and Danny was confirmed to be over a million for the pair. Juke was closer to a million. You haven't included Eastwood, Platt, Dunn, Hussey, Deegan, McIndoe, Clingan, Cranie, Keogh, McPake, Best, Borrowdale, Bell all of which some kind of fee was paid for. We also got closer to £1.5m for fox and it's a reported £450k sell on for Dann. Also we received cash for: Adebola, Gray, Borrowdale, Best.

I can't be bothered to do the sums again, but it's less than £1m profit over their stewardship.

Click to expand...

and we sold best to newcastle for pretty much the money we spent on most of them players, plus we got some back on borrowdale and sold gray, adebola and jay tabb.

so yes sisu have recouped a hell of a lot more in transfer fees than they have paid out since taking over.

kg82 said:

He can't have been? Eastwood was a Coleman signing wasn't he? And Coleman was brought in by SISU?

Click to expand...

Eastwood was deffo signed by coleman.

Snr Vic - did he really say we have the same budget as Norwich last year? In summer 2010 Norwich signed John Ruddy, Andrew Crofts, Simeon Jackson, David Fox and of course Elliott Ward. Sounds like more bullshit and lies from Clouting - or did he mean as a percentage of revenue where they had gates of over 27000 - more smoke and mirrors I think.

ashbyjan said:

Snr Vic - did he really say we have the same budget as Norwich last year? In summer 2010 Norwich signed John Ruddy, Andrew Crofts, Simeon Jackson, David Fox and of course Elliott Ward. Sounds like more bullshit and lies from Clouting - or did he mean as a percentage of revenue where they had gates of over 27000 - more smoke and mirrors I think.

Click to expand...

am sure clouting said last night norwich went up last season using a lower budget than we currently have.

surely must have meant wages as they signed a fair few last summer.

dont believe a word he says anyway mumbling thru those aggresive questions last night with his usual waffle.