Good Business

[alcoblade]

No you misunderstood it. The term net debt in the financial statements actually represents the monies owed in bank overdrafts and loans less cash in hand and at bank which is £47.304M. This ignores our debtors of £30M and indeed our other trade creditors, accrued expenses and deferred income of approx £17M so the figure that is your understanding of net debt would be nearer £34M than £48M.

Well, if true, you've cheered me up just a bit!

UTB

 

[Studge]

This is the first time i've heard anything like this on here studge, despite oodles of people that supposedly know something about accountancy dissecting the accounts.

Are they all wrong?

Well I myself have dissected the accounts countless times on bladesmad and usually come to the same conclusion. Our net debt at 30 June 2009 is £47.304M and increased from £38.986M in the previous year which would correspond with the release of funds to assist with the construction of the hotel. (see note 26 to the accounts on page 61). All the other figures quoted are in the accounts i.e. debtors (note 15 on page 56) Creditors (note 16 & 17).

The trouble is some posters see headline figures but dont really understand the substance behind them. Its the same with our wage bills and player purchases and sales all the information is there in the accounts and I have analsyed these figures on blades mad because people seem to clutch figures from out of the sky.

This for instance was part of my post on bladesmad in response to a thread started by everybodies favourite Curtis to expalin where the money goes.

Quote:

Just to help you from the last two years accounts


Staff costs 2009 £24.86 (First team costs £17.5M)

Staff Costs 2008 £25M (First team costs £20.9M )

Staff Costs 2007 £22.4M (First team costs £19.2M)

Transfer Fees Paid 2009 £5.2M

Transfer Fees Paid 2008 £8.1M

Transfer Fees Paid 2007 £14.2M

Tranfer Fees Received 2009 £7.4M

Transfer Fees Received 2008 £9.3M

Transfer Fees Received 2007 £2.2M

 

[Nick Jansky]

Agreed, hardly a ringing endorsement. But on the field (someone remind McCabe where that is) he achieved far more than McCabe did / has.

UTB

That's arguable. We stayed in the top tier for 3 seasons when football finance was very different to what we have today. In those days there was much more of a level playing field, look what Leeds did back then after their promotion, and that couldn't happen now. If Brealey was around today it is very doubtful that we would have managed one season in the PL, and a relegation under Brealey would have resulted in a complete freefall.

 

[Blade58]

Well I myself have dissected the accounts countless times on bladesmad and usually come to the same conclusion. Our net debt at 30 June 2009 is £47.304M and increased from £38.986M in the previous year which would correspond with the release of funds to assist with the construction of the hotel. (see note 26 to the accounts on page 61). All the other figures quoted are in the accounts i.e. debtors (note 15 on page 56) Creditors (note 16 & 17).

The trouble is some posters see headline figures but dont really understand the substance behind them. Its the same with our wage bills and player purchases and sales all the information is there in the accounts and I have analsyed these figures on blades mad because people seem to clutch figures from out of the sky.

This for instance was part of my post on bladesmad in response to a thread started by everybodies favourite Curtis to expalin where the money goes.

Quote:

Just to help you from the last two years accounts


Staff costs 2009 £24.86 (First team costs £17.5M)

Staff Costs 2008 £25M (First team costs £20.9M )

Staff Costs 2007 £22.4M (First team costs £19.2M)

Transfer Fees Paid 2009 £5.2M

Transfer Fees Paid 2008 £8.1M

Transfer Fees Paid 2007 £14.2M

Tranfer Fees Received 2009 £7.4M

Transfer Fees Received 2008 £9.3M

Transfer Fees Received 2007 £2.2M

Good old studge comes to the rescue again!

It's a shame don't you think that no one from the club can be bothered to put the record straight (if what you're saying is correct of course studge)

 

[Pinchy]

Beighton_Blade, are you Dr Jekyll to beightonblade's Mr Hyde?

I don't remember the book ever saying that Hyde's spelling and syntax went to shit but it does all makes sense now.

At last we know where the missing brain cell is in Beighton!

 

[Blade58]

For what it's worth, and despite being a big fan of McCabe, I agree with all this. He knew what he was doing and knew that ultimately he was quite protected with the loans provided by the various groups of which he heads.

That said, I definitely think he did it with his heart in the right place. He also made three very big misjudgments (namely Chengdu, Robson and Blackwell).

Despite all this, and despite our 'debt' (which I still place in apostrophes as it's a debt like no other in football), I believe we're in a much better position than when he joined and he's the best chairman we've had in my lifetime.

I also believe that investment is close. Much closer than it is for our porcine cousins across the city.

Care to elaborate on that Houso?

Only according to Birchy, he's only just setting out on his adventure in search of the pot of gold!

 

[Beighton_Blade]

At last we know where the missing brain cell is in Beighton!

Oi! Beighton is a hotbed of highly informed, well-educated and intellectual opinion and debate i'll have you know! - The recent arguments regarding the excess bog roll to be found in the Fox as opposed to the Royal Oak only go to highlight this!

UTB!

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Just to help you from the last two years accounts

Staff costs 2009 £24.86 (First team costs £17.5M)

Staff Costs 2008 £25M (First team costs £20.9M )

Staff Costs 2007 £22.4M (First team costs £19.2M)

Transfer Fees Paid 2009 £5.2M

Transfer Fees Paid 2008 £8.1M

Transfer Fees Paid 2007 £14.2M

Tranfer Fees Received 2009 £7.4M

Transfer Fees Received 2008 £9.3M

Transfer Fees Received 2007 £2.2M

Thanks Studge. Presumably this confirms that the sales of Naughton and Walker weren't included for 2009?

Also, I'm struggling to remember us buying £14.2M worth of players in 2007. Would that figure include signing-on and agents fees etc?

 

[Studge]

Good old studge comes to the rescue again!

It's a shame don't you think that no one from the club can be bothered to put the record straight (if what you're saying is correct of course studge)

Perhaps the powers that be think all the shareholders that receive a copy of the accounts are financially informed or at least have got an '0' level in accounts from granville college.

To be fair there has been some recent comments with regards to our level of debt and how its structured from the CEO but perhaps the message does not quite get through to everybody.

I also forgot to commend you on your earlier posts on this thread which I think echo my sentiments with regards to this matter.

 

[Studge]

Thanks Studge. Presumably this confirms that the sales of Naughton and Walker weren't included for 2009?

Also, I'm struggling to remember us buying £14.2M worth of players in 2007. Would that figure include signing-on and agents fees etc?

The sale of the 2 Kyles both happened post 30 06 2009.

With regards to the purchases from memory the following would be the larger fees that spring to mind

Hulse
Killgannon
Davis
Shelton
Fathi
Stead

My understanding is that the cost of the contracts including fees are capitalised and then amortised over the length of the players contract. So say for instance the Beattie deal was £4.5M in total the charge to the clubs profit and loss account would be £1,125,000 per annum plus of course his wages.

 

[oldblade]

Its a load of cock. The clubs debtor list and assets are way more than the debt. Its a smokescreen eagerly latched onto by the insider piggies to take the heat off King Pig and his lack of investment success (or any other kind of success really), and joyfully by some of our own 'supporters' who want a stick to beat the club with for their own ends.

The important thing for the club on the financial side is that in the summer, the mistakes of the Robson era will finally be put to bed. All the player contracts that we dont want renewing (and a couple that we do) are expiring. What is missing is some visible direction from the board and Chairman to help us understand where we go next. We know that we will almost certainly have Blackie in charge next season, and we aren't going to spend a fortune on buying a squad, but we won't have enough contracted players to put an 11 out. So then, what are we to do..? Thats for the board to tell us, when they get around to it...

Sorry Dunc, but whichever way you look at it the debt has and is continuing to impact on the football club.

Yes our assets may more than cover the debt, and it is (at the moment) serviceable, but there is no denying that is is impacting in a negative way on the football club.

The 'reprofiling' of the club is all about gettting costs down and raising money, and that is only being done because of the debt we are in.

In the last annual report and accounts there is a paragraph on page 29 which I am surprised hasn't attracted some discussion. It says that the directors have reviewed cash flow forecasts for the next 12 months (from date of report). "These forecasts show that the Group can continue as a going concern but are reliant on the Group raising further financing facilities, reducing costs, sourcing additional equity investment or selling assets to generate cash of £4.5 million. The Directors have entered into negotiations with certain financial institutions and are confident that such funds can be raised from one or more of the above sources."

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that we haven't secured any additional investment from outside, so the money is being raised by selling players and reducing costs.

I'm not trying to say we're on the verge of collapse, but the financial position doesn't look great to me. And it does appear that the football club is being dragged down by the various other parts of the business that were supposed to supply additional income streams to support the football club.

Also on page 29 it says that the debt in relation to football is now under £2.5 million plus a £2 million working capital facility. That means around £45 million is related to none footballing parts of the business. And I have little doubt that the sale of the two Kyles and others was done as a result of having to manage the debt that the Group as a whole is in.

 

[Micalijo]

That's totally out of order Old. Call yourself a supporter of SUFC? No chance.

Great post. Totally 100% agree re Kyles.

 

[lenners]

There is no way our income covers our outgoings, hence the comment referred to in the accounts and the loans from directors to cover shortfalls in cashflow.
Whichever way you wish to cut the cake, we've royally ferked up the club's finances for f all return.
In the cold light of day, we are where we were when McCabe first came in and looking at contracting further now.

 

[alcoblade]

That's arguable. We stayed in the top tier for 3 seasons when football finance was very different to what we have today. In those days there was much more of a level playing field, look what Leeds did back then after their promotion, and that couldn't happen now. If Brealey was around today it is very doubtful that we would have managed one season in the PL, and a relegation under Brealey would have resulted in a complete freefall.

Ifs, buts and maybe's fella. The fact remains we finished 2 divisions higher than when he came, had 4 promotions and 3 seasons in the top flight - and finished with nothing like the debt we have now, even in relative terms.

I dont think it is arguable that on the field, his tenure was streets ahead of McCabe's.

Off the field, McCabe can be credited with building up the support base impressively, and attaching various other businesses at huge financial cost to us. The impact, positive or negative of that, is yet to be asessed. Right now it's not looking good.

UTB