Annual report - £18.7 million loss

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Take the 10 million player sales you've highlighted, add the £4M + gate receipts and then deduct the £14M wage budget. You're already at break even with just those factors, before taking any other expenditure into account.

Our turnover was £20m not £14m so deducting a £14m wage bill (I find it hard to believe it's that much given our squad but I'll let it go) leaves a profit/surplus of £6m. I know we had other expenditure + the £10m adjustment but it's still a big jump to an £18.7m loss.
 

Usually, I keep my debit cards in the left pocket of my work trousers and my cash in the right. Sometimes I put my keys in my right pocket too, but other times I leave them in my jacket. From time to time I put my cash and debit cards in my left pocket. Then sometimes, when I wear jeans I take my cash and put it in the right pocket, and I leave the debit cards at home.

That’s basically what Kev McCabe has done with SUFC plc. Moved some stuff around, paid off a credit card or two. The headline number isn't worth much other than as a point for the piggies to taunt us with the possibility of our own demise in the same way they jumped on the £48m debt figure last year. They know feck all... Anyway, there are a lot of questions on the actual numbers that will be answered when we read the full report (or maybe they won't...), so a lot of that is just pointless speculation. We might as well wait for the Annual Report document to become available to us non-shareholding types.

As for the discussion of the piggies in here are their impending sale/administration, what bearing does it have on us? Forget them. They are an amusing diversion, but they are an irrelevance.

For me the most significant part of this news is not the numbers but that when you begin to tie in what was hinted at in the fans forum with Kev Mc and Birchy is now writ large before us. Sheffield United has, whether by force of circumstance or change of philosophy, changed fundamentally as a business and as a club. The attempt to expand the scope of the club so we can afford to spend more and more on players to get us promoted is over. All that spending hasn’t served us well anyhow.

We are focussed again on being a football club. No distractions, no foreign link-ups (except for their limited PR potential). This is it. If the club has £6m income, then it has a budget of £5.9m. No leg-ups, no bail-outs, no rich benefactor pushing money in without recourse to sense. It is a moment of sanity in the world of football where ‘shit or bust’ seems to be the normal business plan.

What I’m personally pleased to see is that there is a statement of intent for stronger linkage between the academy and the first team. We have produced some decent kids over the last few seasons, but there was always a feeling that the academy and the first team were not linked by style or by progression. We produced decent players (like Nicky Law who didn’t get a real chance although he is a midfield kingpin for Rotherham now), but there was always a feeling with Blackie and Warnock that we preferred to buy than develop our own. With Pembo and Speedo there is an opportunity to get some of the talented youngsters through. The U16, U18 and senior teams all seem to have the same commitment to the same style from top to bottom.

So, a new vision, however it came to be? Are we going to be a debt free club that owns its assets, and has a good percentage, even a majority of home grown talent playing stylish passing football? Why not ? Why not???

Vive la difference! Allez les Blades!!!
 
I'm not a "financial type" but my reading of it is as follows. (Please correct me if I'm wrong):-

1) We lost £18.7M despite making a £10.6M profit on transfer fees. Without the big transfer profit we'd have lost £28.3M. We don't have £10.6M worth of players left to sell in 2010/2011!

2) Gate receipts fell by £2M but that was mainly due to not making the play-offs rather than attendances slumping. Since June 2010 attendances HAVE slumped massively. So we're probably set to lose circa £30M this season depending how much the wage bill has been slashed?

3) Speed will have to sell before he can sign anyone in January ("teem and ladle"). Even then probably on on loan unless we get new investment.

4) Speed is apparently an "excellent young manager". Not "potentially an excellent manager" or "a promising young manager". He's just excellent, despite his results, so that's that.

5) We've sold Chengdu, the hotel and 50% of Blades Realty for unspecified sums. Presumably the sales values will be in the annual accounts? We must have lost out in a big way though or why not mention the sales values in the main announcement?

6) All in all, very depressing. WTTWY indeed.

Struggling for time but regarding possible losses of £30M. Lots of these losses are, I believe, write downs. There is no reason to think future losses will be anything like as drastic. The assets are now offloaded so can't be written down.

UTB
 
Some really good posts in the preceeding half dozen (too big to quote!).

I'm happy with United being a self sustaining entity, even if it reduces our short term chances. Just so long as the Speed / academy method is given its head.

The only concern is that we play fair and look long term (while hoping for new investors), yet others continue to take financial piss. Hi Cardiff et al!
 
From what i understand, McCabe has taken on board the property debt to his property companies, and left United with a debt at the same level of the monies owed by West Ham United, which effectively leaves the football club debt free,

McCabe is a property man so the losses and gains will be incorporated in to his property empire whilst the football losses are to be sustained by the football club.

I'd expect to see us bobbing around in this division for a couple of seasons at least whilst the football side steady's itself, and we begin to build a side and hopefully bring back some of the supporters who have disappeared over the last couple of seasons.

One thing i'm glad about is that we no longer have a finanical interest in bloody Chengdu Blades, and we can concentrate on being Sheffield United without the unwanted distractions from China
 
Where in the Beano is the story about loads of cash going to service bank debt regarding assets that are 'below water'?

ooops sorry Micalijo missed this post.
Its in on the Bash Street Kids page...........:D ........... I wudn't worry too much I think we might be reading sumat else quite soon.
 
So, a new vision, however it came to be? Are we going to be a debt free club that owns its assets, and has a good percentage, even a majority of home grown talent playing stylish passing football? Why not ? Why not???

Vive la difference! Allez les Blades!!!

Amen to that!
 
Thats true but you are also missing off other sources of income such as sponsorship, advertising, tv income, prize money, merchandising etc. Our income is not merely 4 million gate receipts.

I didnt say it was, I was offering some perspective into how quickly sources of income can be swallowed up at a football club. I didnt want to try and roll off a full balance sheet. Perhaps my final comment should have read "before taking any other income/expenditure into account."
 
thanks for the explanation Balham.. good luck with the exam btw
sooo.. it would appear that we lost a shed load on chengdu and sold on the hotel to one of Kevs other interests at a knock down price.. hmm
 
Don't know if anybody else caught this tagged onto the end of the Sheffield Star interview with McCabe, but I found it quite interesting:


Negotiations are on-going between United and two potential investors according to McCabe.

"In the last six months or so, we have had quite firm discussions with two parties," he said

Parties we've already heard about, or someone else?
 
The thing with accounts is that you can often get them to say what you want to shift things around and have paper losses outweighing real events. I am a bit concerned re West Ham ever actually giving us hard cash when they have jokers like Dyer costing them a championship team entire wage structure when he plays 10 games a season. I presume we have employed good lawyers to make it watertight (maybe we have their freehold?) so until it is clarified that we haven't got it then I'm not worried.

I think KM has been more transparent than many owners. He has reiterated his desire to move on several times. He has made the club investable and some side deal will be there to pay him off later - and I believe that.

The shifting of some of our "investments" to him/his co's seems a bit odd when playing a waiting game could pay dividends (no investment should be based on a couple of years) but I don't know if losing them takes some turnover away from us in terms of rental yield. It's immaterial really cos it's done.

However, we need to be careful what we wish for and I don't want a Manderic type to be honest.

Lets face it most people pissed and moaned when we came third. Now they moan more when we stand no chance of coming third. I don't think we do expectation of doing well at this club. However, if it looks like we will avoid relegation against all odds with a team of cloggers we seem to love it. (see Bassett top flight - massive away followings despite rarely seeing much to justify it)

Are salaries disclosed in the accounts for individuals? I bet we have some frightening figures in that report. But then I'd love to see a fans poll of who the most overpaid numpty is in the Championship. (Personally think Hull must have a couple of the top five)
 

Being overpaid is about both performance and reward. So Ryan France must be a top candidate...
 
Being overpaid is about both performance and reward. So Ryan France must be a top candidate...

I don't know where Ched Evans would be on the list, but he'd definitey be in the top 1.

:D

UTB
 
£5M later, I'd argue I've already been proved correct. Sadly.

£5 million later? Are we plucking figures out of fresh air at how much he has cost?

I'd be interested to hear how you came to the figure though.
 
£5 million later? Are we plucking figures out of fresh air at how much he has cost?

I'd be interested to hear how you came to the figure though.

£3M transfer fee, £1M per year in wages - We're stuck with him until at least the summer - So that's £5M

I could of course have written £0.5M, and we'd still have been having our pants removed.

However it's cut and carved, he's been a huge disaster.

UTB
 
£3M transfer fee,

Has this figure, or will this figure actually ever be reached? Can you show me?

£1M per year in wages - We're stuck with him until at least the summer - So that's £5M

£1 million per year in wages is just an assumption that he is on this....

But either way, you said.....

£5M later, I'd argue I've already been proved correct. Sadly.

As in, we had already paid £5 million.

It's also by no means guaranteed that he won't be sent on loan/sold sometime soon.
 
Can someone explain please to a layman like me? (apologies if it's lost in previous posts on this thread)

If we have just announced circa £18m losses this last financial year, what is our current debt level to date?

The reason I bring this up is because last years figures where around £48m in total combined PLC and FC, including loans to KM

Are we saying the debt has risen to £66/67m?

Wednesday fans have began quoting this as the figure.

I haven't seen the latest accounts figures, but is there a chance the PLC debt fell?

Confused?
 
Has this figure, or will this figure actually ever be reached? Can you show me?

From what KM and TB have already told us, we've paid in excess of £2M for him so far. The rest is appearance based so unless we sell him or let him rot in the reserves we will pay the balance fairly soon.

£1 million per year in wages is just an assumption that he is on this....

I have frequent conversations with someone who is very much ITK regarding that issue and other matters at the club. You would be shocked at just how accurate alco is.
 
I have frequent conversations with someone who is very much ITK regarding that issue and other matters at the club. You would be shocked at just how accurate alco is.

I personally assume he is on such a wage, so I'm not disputing it. You, Alco or I have no actual fact of this.
 
Can someone explain please to a layman like me? (apologies if it's lost in previous posts on this thread)

If we have just announced circa £18m losses this last financial year, what is our current debt level to date?

The reason I bring this up is because last years figures where around £48m in total combined PLC and FC, including loans to KM

Are we saying the debt has risen to £66/67m?

Wednesday fans have began quoting this as the figure.

I haven't seen the latest accounts figures, but is there a chance the PLC debt fell?

Confused?



I haven't seen the full report as yet but the £48m that everyone keeps harping on about included a £26m mortgage against the hotel and other properties. This has now been converted out of the accounts which will then have been shown in the loss. Basically you are taking the hit on a previous 25 year mortgage into one year. Consequently, even though we are showing a £18m loss the total debt could actually have come down. Can't tell without looking at the accounts though!
 
I personally assume he is on such a wage, so I'm not disputing it. You, Alco or I have no actual fact of this.

That is true Robbie but based on what we've paid and what most of us believe he is earning, alco would be fairly close to the commitment of £5M by the end of this season. At a £3M transfer he aint going to be on peanuts. You have to look where he came from as well. Reserve and academy players earn a lot of money in the PL and that is something I do know as a fact.

The only thing to stop us paying out about that figure is if United stop playing him and I dont see that happening. Who would want to loan or buy him based on his recent form? Also, could you imagine the uproar if we had a player rumoured to be on huge wages, sat in the reserves. We will end up paying a minimum of £5M by the time we're done with him and it looks a fairly safe assumption to me.
 
Can someone explain please to a layman like me? (apologies if it's lost in previous posts on this thread)

If we have just announced circa £18m losses this last financial year, what is our current debt level to date?

The reason I bring this up is because last years figures where around £48m in total combined PLC and FC, including loans to KM

Are we saying the debt has risen to £66/67m?

Wednesday fans have began quoting this as the figure.

I haven't seen the latest accounts figures, but is there a chance the PLC debt fell?

Confused?

The big losses are asset writedowns which are included in the loss figures. For example we have sold our share in Blades Realty for £1 but it had an asset value of Circa £4 million this is therefore recorded as a loss in the accounts. However as we sold it for £1 we also sold any associated debt. This has the effect of reducing the debt overall but also means the loss of a potential revenue generator in the future. We have also done the same with the Hotel therefore the debts for the hotel now belong to Scarborough Holdings. One could argue that this is the right thing to do in the current economic climate but we are now essentially adopting the same Operating Model as other Football Clubs.
I think we are almost debt free but with much reduced assets and could be in 2013 when the Tevez money pays off the remaining debt to the Santander Group.
However this dosen't make things rosy as the accounts also provide the following statement:

The directors have reveiwed the cash flow forecast prepared for the period of 12 months from the date of this report. these forecasts show that the Club can continue as a going concern, but is reliant on the Club raising £5.2 million of further finance.
The Directors are actively seeking this finance from additional equity investment, the sale of ceratin assets, or the raising of new banking facilities. In addition to these initiatives, a cost reduction progremme is underway
 
I haven't seen the full report as yet but the £48m that everyone keeps harping on about included a £26m mortgage against the hotel and other properties. This has now been converted out of the accounts which will then have been shown in the loss. Basically you are taking the hit on a previous 25 year mortgage into one year. Consequently, even though we are showing a £18m loss the total debt could actually have come down. Can't tell without looking at the accounts though!


Cheers MB

Doesn't the mortgage, even tho converted out of the FC accounts, end up on the PLC side tho, in which case whilst the FC debt falls the total debt remains the same?

As you can quite clearly see here, Balance sheets, accounting etc is certainly no strong point of mine!
 

Can someone explain please to a layman like me? (apologies if it's lost in previous posts on this thread)

If we have just announced circa £18m losses this last financial year, what is our current debt level to date?

The reason I bring this up is because last years figures where around £48m in total combined PLC and FC, including loans to KM

Are we saying the debt has risen to £66/67m?

Wednesday fans have began quoting this as the figure.

I haven't seen the latest accounts figures, but is there a chance the PLC debt fell?

Confused?

If as stated £10M is due to property write downs that should have no effect on external debt but may have increase the debt to Scarborough. If the Hotel has been removed from the balance sheet then the associated debt that has been secured against it should also have been reomoved. Losses dont neccessarily manifest themselves into increased debt For instance
f the hotel was down valued by £5 from £20M to £15M then transferred to Sacrborough the tansaction may look like this

Dr Cr

Land & Buildings 5
P & L A/c 5


Land & Buildings 15
Scarborough Loan 15

Mortgage 15
Scarbourough Loan 15

So basically the debt has been reduced by £15M but we have lost the equity that existed in the hotel.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom