SBS&L accounts 2016 (2 Viewers)

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Comments as follows

- Turnover up 700K to 5.4m
- match income up 517k other incomes up 163k
- reduced direct costs by out sourcing things like shop
- operating loss is 1.876m after player sales that becomes 602k profit before deducting interest costs of 2.4m the bottom line is a loss of 1.869m. improvement from 2015 but both years relied on player sales of 2.5m
- commitment to academy apparently 600k
- interest up from 1.37m to 2.47m in part because of withholding tax (£800k - withholding tax runs at 20% so this must relate to £4m in gross interest)
- mentions Wembley then hints Cat 2 Academy might not be sustainable in L2. Academy was said to be fundamental to CCFC. If in doubt surely that impacts on financial future. No agreement or site at date of reports
- accounts going concern relies on a non contractually binding letter from the owners not to call loans in and to source extra funds (worth of such letters have questioned in a recent court case)
- apparently the club will need further funding in the next 6 months
- Balance sheet 43.4m negative. Total creditors 45.7m
- cash flow from all player sales was 2.5m. That's not just Maddison. in 2015 there were 615k expected in add ons. Going forward it is £200k expected
- cost of player purchases per the cash flow £378K per note 8 £278K cant tell which is right
- interest actually paid out other loans £54717 shareholder loans £25k
- new loan we knew about in 2015 received £530k
- cash flow is positive by 626k (2015 was 128k negative)
- total paid out for rent in P&L acc = 491K that would be Ricoh, Higgs, shop and any other
- wages down by £740k because less accrued for Pensions and less National insurance paid but gross wages down 200K to 4.1m
- payments to directors 215k down by 100k
- interest payable on Arvo & Sisu loans 1.45m up from 1.37m. Interest rates seem to be on the new £530k 10% ARVO on 1.75m 11% and on the £6m 19%. No movement in capital on the major loans from ARVO or SISU investors.

Better but still in the mire. I would think that financial "safety" this year has only been achieved because of the recent Wembley windfall. Forget the CT headline. The club made an overall loss and the balance sheet got worse but just at a slower rate than 2015 and before
 

Nick

Administrator
Just re-opened. It is too confusing to try and merge threads without this being lost in the middle of the other one! :(
 

Ashdown

Well-Known Member
Interest on loans, interest and more interest etc etc......always conspires to put us into a loss making situation ?? Question is ? Is any cash being transferred to debtors to reduce the overall size of these loans ?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
little more information
- Otium accounts have been filed but not available yet, when they are keep in mind the difference between internal group transactions and transactions that see money leave or enter the group
- Cash in hand and at bank has improved by a positive £627k but bear in mind the extra loan £530k and maddison money £2.5m....... they only have 627k left out of that and had June July to fund no wonder they were slow on the transfer front, had to rely on loans and freebies there was no pot left to use by August
- the amount of interest that the group has now accrued but not paid out is an eye watering £4,183,466 (accumulated since 2012/13 accounts year)
- actual owing to SISU investors is 28,554,312 and to ARVO £7,736,820 plus the accrued interest
- the group has used debt factoring in the year at a cost of 146k in interest - which debts I wonder
- ARVO have £4.3 in preference shares following capitalisation of part of the loans in previous years so have put in 12m in total split between loans and pref shares
- the audit report is clean except for an emphasis of matter about going concern
- turnover a brief look at other clubs accounts reveals the CCFC turnover to be in the mid range (even excluding transfer fee profits). How is it the directors insist the club can not compete with its peers

Going concern issues
- Continuing support of owners ie not calling loans in (they have not committed to providing new funds themselves)
- the owners comfort letter is not binding (see this case What comfort is a comfort letter? Recent case)
- the looming relegation and its effect on income
- the fact that the Academy Cat 2 is apparently fundamental to our finances (higgs agreement runs out in 4 months)
- the fact that the rent agreement at the Ricoh runs out in 16 months
- the ability to fund the close season, and then fund a new squad
- the need to sell players at the right value to simply pay their way yet build a competitive squad
- there is a need for funding in 6 months time according to the directors - yet not certainty of finding it
- the figures have to show reasonable certainty of being a going concern to at least 27/02/2018

Glad I don't have to sign off on these

What is the situation now having budgeted for a certain level and the team flopped disastrously. ?
 
Last edited:

RegTheDonk

Well-Known Member
Mostly confusing but thank you OSB for reading through the accounts and putting in the "highlights".

May I venture your opinion / educated guess on: how much would a reasonable offer need to be to make SISU think, thats about as much as we can hope for, and bugger off? I don't mean a quid and take on masses of debt, I mean how much would SISU want to hand over a "debt free" club in return? Realise this is a how long is a piece of string type question, but any potential buy out would be wondering the same.
 

CCFC88

Well-Known Member
Have you compared our accounts with that of other L1 clubs at any point? Where do we stand in the L1 pool when comparing
Playing Staff
Revenue (non player sales)
Overhead costs
Interest

Is there one thing that is killing us, I assume what the11/16 we put out on a Saturday aren't commanding one of the highest wage bills in the country? Teams like Bradford and Sheff Utd who can afford to take our best players, is there revenue streets ahead of ours or do they not have they costs/interest payments that we have?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
anyway dumbing it down for us stupid people osb like a nutshell or something ha?
This bit ......
Better but still in the mire. I would think that financial "safety" this year has only been achieved because of the recent Wembley windfall. The club made an overall loss and the balance sheet got worse but just at a slower rate than 2015 and before
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Mostly confusing but thank you OSB for reading through the accounts and putting in the "highlights".

May I venture your opinion / educated guess on: how much would a reasonable offer need to be to make SISU think, thats about as much as we can hope for, and bugger off? I don't mean a quid and take on masses of debt, I mean how much would SISU want to hand over a "debt free" club in return? Realise this is a how long is a piece of string type question, but any potential buy out would be wondering the same.

The club as Otium is worth nothing because of all the loans and preference shares....... you wouldn't take it on

You extract the playing assets but FL will also expect you to take the football creditors ..... so net value nothing probably

I think you try to tempt SISU/ARVO by leaving them Ryton to sell as development land. In the accounts at £340k but with possible development value of £8m?

Ideally ARVO wants North of £12m and then theres something to add on for the SISU investment funds - just not going to happen
 
Last edited:

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Im no expert so dont take it as fact

Walsall had about 6.5m turnover, staff costs 3.4m

Sheffield United's accounts look to have really low turnover? is that a stadium management company?

http://www.sufc.co.uk/documents/20161214-sultd-accounts135-3416814.pdf

wrong set of accounts NIck Sheff Utd had turnover of 10.6m

Walsall figures were on the back of being in L1 playoffs

CCFC88
Turnover wise CCFC is about mid table in L1. Most clubs do not have transfer profits of 2.5m from what I can see. There are about 9 clubs that file as small companies so info not available (Bury, Bradford, Port Vale, Fleetwood, Chesterfield, Northampton, Swindon, Oldham, Rochdale) but audit limit was 6.5m for years covered. Can you see those clubs having bigger turnovers or player sales profits?

Past history shows are total wages CCFC to be about mid table but I haven't had time to compare 2016. CCFC wages has not changed massively in year to 31/05/2016. Again some info is not available from other clubs

info on interest overheads etc is restricted because some teams yet to file others don't have to provide that info to Companies House
 

Nick

Administrator
The club as Otium is worth nothing because of all the loans and preference shares....... you wouldn't take it on

You extract the playing assets nut FL will also expect you to take the football creditors ..... so net value nothing probably

I think you try to tempt SISU/ARVO by leaving them Ryton to sell as development land. In the accounts at £340k but with possible development value of £8m?

Ideally ARVO wants North of £12m and then theres something to add on for the SISU investment funds - just not going to happen

Would take them having Ryton and going with somebody who will build on the break even properly going forward coming in.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Have you compared our accounts with that of other L1 clubs at any point? Where do we stand in the L1 pool when comparing
Playing Staff
Revenue (non player sales)
Overhead costs
Interest

Is there one thing that is killing us, I assume what the11/16 we put out on a Saturday aren't commanding one of the highest wage bills in the country? Teams like Bradford and Sheff Utd who can afford to take our best players, is there revenue streets ahead of ours or do they not have they costs/interest payments that we have?

Quite hard to find Bradford's, Bradford City Football Club Ltd only posts abbreviated accounts as a small company?

The Sheffield United Football Club Limited, in itself has a turnover of £10.4m, pre tax losses on that of £8.6m which really shows you how far away we are from them spending wise, wage bill of £10m including non-playing staff.
 

CCFC88

Well-Known Member
Quite hard to find Bradford's, Bradford City Football Club Ltd only posts abbreviated accounts as a small company?

The Sheffield United Football Club Limited, in itself has a turnover of £10.4m, pre tax losses on that of £8.6m which really shows you how far away we are from them spending wise, wage bill of £10m including non-playing staff.

So who is footing their 8.6m annual losses? Owners?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
This bit might help explain the poor summer recruitment

Cash in hand and at bank 31/05/2016 had improved by a positive £627k to £779 but bear in mind the extra loan £530k from SISU and maddison money £2.5m....... they only have 627k left out of that and had June July to fund no wonder they were slow on the transfer front, had to rely on loans and freebies there was no pot left to use by August. The talk was of money available but was it or were they relying on the upfront money from season ticket sales

The Maddison fee would have contributed to the 2015/16 SCMP budget not the current one
 
Last edited:

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
So who is footing their 8.6m annual losses? Owners?

It says shareholders equity and retained profits, it would have to be equity to meet FFP rules I think.

Blades Leisure Ltd is the parent, this gives more detail. Their first team wage bill was £6.8m.

Then again, not all of their spending is on wages, they invest in improving and maintaining the stadium too.

Interestingly, Mal Brannigan formerly of CCFC was on the Blades Leisure board until late 2015.
 

Irish Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
This bit might help explain the poor summer recruitment

Cash in hand and at bank 31/05/2016 had improved by a positive £627k to £779 but bear in mind the extra loan £530k from SISU and maddison money £2.5m....... they only have 627k left out of that and had June July to fund no wonder they were slow on the transfer front, had to rely on loans and freebies there was no pot left to use by August. The talk was of money available but was it or were they relying on the upfront money from season ticket sales

The Maddison fee would have contributed to the 2015/16 SCMP budget not the current one

So maybe poor recruitment wasn't all Mowbray's fault.
 

SkyBlueCharlie

Well-Known Member
It's interesting to note that all of the outsourcing contracts signed in 2016; Just Sports (shop), O Publishing (Programme?) and Ticketmaster are all for two years and end in 2018 as does the Stadium deal.
 

christonabike

Well-Known Member
Just about to say the same, TM had fook all to spend and any decent loans like Kent and Armstrong's ability were well out of our reach. Doesnt look good. How can anyone try to hold out for £12M etc if you are losing money and likely to be throwing more hard earned into the club.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
It's interesting to note that all of the outsourcing contracts signed in 2016; Just Sports (shop), O Publishing (Programme?) and Ticketmaster are all for two years and end in 2018 as does the Stadium deal.

yes it does seem to imply the intention was not to be at the Ricoh when the current deal ends. Although all contracts should be easy to renew as necessary
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
So if money was so short, it still doesn't explain why he chased players above our level. In fact, it's more strange.

I've always said that, maybe he was promised money that wasn't forthcoming.
Though I doubt we were ever going to have a budget which could realistically temp the likes of Kelvin Wilson.
 

Brylowes

Well-Known Member
Thank OSB for your analysis, don't know what we would do without you.
In your considered opinion, if City were a horse would you shoot it, or think it worth saving.
 

Brylowes

Well-Known Member
So if money was so short, it still doesn't explain why he chased players above our level. In fact, it's more strange as he should have been after the Chris stokes type.

He had already bought Jones by then, can't remember when he got Turnbull in
When was he informed there was no money available?
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
So if money was so short, it still doesn't explain why he chased players above our level. In fact, it's more strange as he should have been after the Chris stokes type.

He had already bought Jones by then, can't remember when he got Turnbull in

Maybe the answer is here:

- the group has used debt factoring in the year at a cost of 146k in interest - which debts I wonder
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top