The lost fan
Banned
And any idiot can see the only money being spent is whats self generated from transfers , cup runs ect , not
an open cheque book !
To put it simply, they must be funding the club. There's no magic money paying the players and staff wages for a start, and they are making fuck all on ticket sales.
So how can anyone of sane mind say they aren't funding the club.
They are bellends, that we know, but to say they aren't funding the club is total lunacy.
Nothing wrong with using the money to fund the clubs losses. However, it means that sisu aren't funding all the losses. Therefore that particular credit to sisu can't be given.
They can't have it both ways, wanting praise for funding the losses whilst using money generated from unexpected windfalls to fund it.
We all want a club that is self sufficient, right?
Well, no. Because I agree with what bigfatronssba has said. Your point as you've just written above is that they aren't funding the club with their own money at all.
Oh I see so you just looking for an argument ! ....... Cock of the highest order !
Nothing wrong with using the money to fund the clubs losses. However, it means that sisu aren't funding all the losses. Therefore that particular credit to sisu can't be given.
They can't have it both ways, wanting praise for funding the losses whilst using money generated from unexpected windfalls to fund it.
You are confusing me.
I thought losses was something like if costs were greater than income. I also thought income could be something like proceeds from cup games and even player trading.
But you seem to suggest something different?
Yep. And the club is in no way self sufficient.
And for anyone to say that Sisu aren't putting extra money in on top on a little cup run and selling a player, is basically saying the club is self sufficient.
Which is complete lunacy.
Hill-I mean why are they continuing to fund the club? What's in it for them?
What do you think I'm suggesting?
My understanding of accounts is that at the start of the financial year the clubs budget will have been set, at which point we are told sisu would be funding the losses for the coming year.
Now it would seem that they have had an unbugeted windfall, of which they have decided to use that money to plug the losses so they themselves do not have to.
Therefore sisu aren't funding all of the budgted loss.
What do you think I'm suggesting?
My understanding of accounts is that at the start of the financial year the clubs budget will have been set, at which point we are told sisu would be funding the losses for the coming year.
Now it would seem that they have had an unbugeted windfall, of which they have decided to use that money to plug the losses so they themselves do not have to.
Therefore sisu aren't funding all of the budgted loss.
Ah, Ok, difficult to say. They must be telling some serious lies to their investors.
I'd guess the original plan was premier league football, which obviously has failed spectacularly. But the investors want that money back, so they can't just fuck it all off and leave.
If they were in the position to cut their losses and go I've no doubt they would have a couple of years ago.
You can't really forecast a cup run - can you?
And you can't really forecast proceeds from player trading.
We also don't know how much we are paying for for the loans.
We also don't know how much they have forecast as income from ticket sales at sixfields and if they have been over-optimistic.
I think there are too many variables to guesstimate if the recent windfall will result in sisu ends up financing less than they expected.
What we do know is they have recently injected a substantial amount as equity ... not as loans.
That means they ARE financing the club and not pocketing anything.
True. Really thinking of going to sixfields to spend the 90 minutes shouting and singing about what's going on. Nothing more than just embarrassing myself and fisher. Coventry city it's in the name!!
I think I understand that if you get £30m you can agree to pay back £40m in 10 years time but surely at some point during that time you think shit this isn't gonna happen here
so you agree its a windfall for sisu rather than the club?
so you agree its a windfall for sisu rather than the club?
The outcome of the judicial review (the fact I'm even typing that on a football forum pisses me off) will be a massive factor.
If they lose it they'll be starting an exit strategy. That when the rest of the shit will hit the fan.
Don't you think their 'exit strategy' in case they lose the JR is to simply hand over the keys to ARVO?
They probably put in their back pocket, robbing bastards.
I joke
For the first time they have to pay the wages as they are not getting in money on the gate and sponsorship will be drying up, so now they are not getting any money out of the club it is only a matter of time as to how long they can carry on with no money comming in and haveing to raise funds to keep paying wages and no profit for their investers.To put it simply, they must be funding the club. There's no magic money paying the players and staff wages for a start, and they are making fuck all on ticket sales.
So how can anyone of sane mind say they aren't funding the club.
They are bellends, that we know, but to say they aren't funding the club is total lunacy.
For the first time they have to pay the wages as they are not getting in money on the gate and sponsorship will be drying up, so now they are not getting any money out of the club it is only a matter of time as to how long they can carry on with no money comming in and haveing to raise funds to keep paying wages and no profit for their investers.
What do you think I'm suggesting?
My understanding of accounts is that at the start of the financial year the clubs budget will have been set, at which point we are told sisu would be funding the losses for the coming year.
Now it would seem that they have had an unbugeted windfall, of which they have decided to use that money to plug the losses so they themselves do not have to.
Therefore sisu aren't funding all of the budgted loss.
They would have done a forecast at the start of the season and as Fisher forecast 3,000 to 7,000 gates their figures are way.
Have they gotten any money out of the club before?
I thought they had put in something like £30m+.
Said before about this, Ranson was obviously entrusted as the footballing mastermind who was going to oversee our breezy ascension into the Premier league. He fucked up big time, so Joy got rid.Ah, Ok, difficult to say. They must be telling some serious lies to their investors.
I'd guess the original plan was premier league football, which obviously has failed spectacularly. But the investors want that money back, so they can't just fuck it all off and leave.
If they were in the position to cut their losses and go I've no doubt they would have a couple of years ago.
so you agree its a windfall for sisu rather than the club?
Some of that is loans with what looked like £1Mpa interest charges (per 2012 SBS&L group accounts)
Add up £500K for Clarke , £750K for cup and £750K for Sixfields income, less £250K Sixfields & Travel costs, £500K academy subsidy, £2M wages, that is a net loss of £750K, even without paying their loan providers.
No but I think that they now have sufficient funds ti ride the NOPM campaign by the stay away fans. It's pretty futile nowThey probably put in their back pocket, robbing bastards.
I joke
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?