[Heart of a Niven]

60s 70s Spireite, on 07 February 2016 - 08:58 AM, said:

Like you I just can't understand the real reason why this is being done, unless there is a plan by DA to keep the banqueting side and try to sell of the football club. One reason to be concerned is that the our income immediately goes down for the SCMP, meaning we will be hearing 'we have to reduce the football wages to meet the SCMP financial limits.'

For years we have heard 'a football club needs to make use of its
facilities every day of the year rather than just say 25 times a year', and yet this will be effectively where the club will be at.
Plus the administration burden on the club's staff will increase with the posting of expenses and income to the two different companies, and cross billing from one to the other.
Can't they understand the concept of simple departmental accounting within one company?

I personally believe that DA's motive in seperating the two aspects of the club is far more cynical. By removing the revenue stream that the hospitality side generates, the football side of the business is left exposed to greater financial demands.
In making such a move DA is, to all intents and purposes, casting us (the club) adrift. What worries me is that should the financing of the football side (which is far from transparent) fall further into the red, DA could quite essily just say 'right, you're not paying your way'', offload the 'club' from the business and simply rent a playing surface and a dressing room back to CFC from a newly formed 'Daves Dining & ITV Day Time Quiz Nights Ltd'.
That may sound cynical but I don't see any other reason for seperating the business. Telling us that it will make it easier for us to understand is simply patronising and assumes that many Town fans don't have businesses of their own, and with those businesses (or similar experience from their individual working lives) a far better understanding of profit and loss than his hand-picked team.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Heart of a Niven, on 07 February 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

I personally believe that DA's motive in seperating the two aspects of the club is far more cynical. By removing the revenue stream that the hospitality side generates, the football side of the business is left exposed to greater financial demands.
In making such a move DA is, to all intents and purposes, casting us (the club) adrift. What worries me is that should the financing of the football side (which is far from transparent) fall further into the red, DA could quite essily just say 'right, you're not paying your way'', offload the 'club' from the business and simply rent a playing surface and a dressing room back to CFC from a newly formed 'Daves Dining & ITV Day Time Quiz Nights Ltd'.
That may sound cynical but I don't see any other reason for seperating the business. Telling us that it will make it easier for us to understand is simply patronising and assumes that many Town fans don't have businesses of their own, and with those businesses (or similar experience from their individual working lives) a far better understanding of profit and loss than his hand-picked team.

Absolutely spot on.

[Westbars Spireite]

Dave Allen isn't interested in what anyone else has to say so for me the whole charade is a waste of everyone's time.

He's been given very good advice for free before and dismissed it.

[LuSiVe]

Heart of a Niven, on 07 February 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

I personally believe that DA's motive in seperating the two aspects of the club is far more cynical. By removing the revenue stream that the hospitality side generates, the football side of the business is left exposed to greater financial demands.
In making such a move DA is, to all intents and purposes, casting us (the club) adrift. What worries me is that should the financing of the football side (which is far from transparent) fall further into the red, DA could quite essily just say 'right, you're not paying your way'', offload the 'club' from the business and simply rent a playing surface and a dressing room back to CFC from a newly formed 'Daves Dining & ITV Day Time Quiz Nights Ltd'.
That may sound cynical but I don't see any other reason for seperating the business. Telling us that it will make it easier for us to understand is simply patronising and assumes that many Town fans don't have businesses of their own, and with those businesses (or similar experience from their individual working lives) a far better understanding of profit and loss than his hand-picked team.

That's exactly what I believe his end game is.

[Benno Spire]

spireitenag, on 06 February 2016 - 09:33 PM, said:

At this mornings fans forum Chris Turner stated that his door is always open if fans want to speak to him.

If I can arrange a meeting at the hub the morning of a home game I would be interested to know who would actually be prepared to attend and put their views and questions to him in an adult and reasoned manner ?

Interesting also that he stated the last person who was invited to come down and chat to him and Dave Allen never turned up.

Please let me know if you would like to attend.

Regards Nigel.

Hi Nigel
I would be more than happy to take part in this meeting

[dim view]

spireitenag, on 06 February 2016 - 09:33 PM, said:

At this mornings fans forum Chris Turner stated that his door is always open if fans want to speak to him.

If I can arrange a meeting at the hub the morning of a home game I would be interested to know who would actually be prepared to attend and put their views and questions to him in an adult and reasoned manner ?

Interesting also that he stated the last person who was invited to come down and chat to him and Dave Allen never turned up.

Please let me know if you would like to attend.

Regards Nigel.

Nigel.
I would like to attend please

[Lincs Spireite]

Question for someone to ask please.

If as DA has stated his aim is championship football, how does he intend to achieve it !!!!

[dtp]

Heart of a Niven, on 07 February 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

I personally believe that DA's motive in seperating the two aspects of the club is far more cynical. By removing the revenue stream that the hospitality side generates, the football side of the business is left exposed to greater financial demands.
In making such a move DA is, to all intents and purposes, casting us (the club) adrift. What worries me is that should the financing of the football side (which is far from transparent) fall further into the red, DA could quite essily just say 'right, you're not paying your way'', offload the 'club' from the business and simply rent a playing surface and a dressing room back to CFC from a newly formed 'Daves Dining & ITV Day Time Quiz Nights Ltd'.
That may sound cynical but I don't see any other reason for seperating the business. Telling us that it will make it easier for us to understand is simply patronising and assumes that many Town fans don't have businesses of their own, and with those businesses (or similar experience from their individual working lives) a far better understanding of profit and loss than his hand-picked team.

My basic concern in splitting the business surrounds what "Income" and what "Expenditure" is attributed to both sides of the business.

Regarding "Income", for instance, match day wining and dining, catering in the concourses, etc - is this to be attributed to the "Football" or the "Catering/Banqueting" side - in my opinion it should be the "Football" side because it is all related to the match day experience. Similarly, certain advertising income can benefit both sides of the business so splitting this fairly is difficult.

Regarding "Expenditure" how are business rates, electricity, gas, etc costs going to be split across both businesses - it would be easy to manipulate such costs to benefit one side to the disadvantage of the other. Similarly, non-football related staff wages should be charged to the "Catering/Banqueting" side but what about those salaries paid to people who work for both sides such as the Chief Exec, the Company Secretary, general office staff, expenses of directors (if any), even banqueting and catering staff if all match day income is to be treated as football related. Then there can be issues with other costs like printing & stationary, telephone, computer costs, and more.

It is not easy to separate costs fairly and it can be guaranteed that what one person thinks is correct another one disagrees. More to the point any such separation of any business can be manipulated so to make one side look better than it really is and the other side worse than it actually is.

There lies the problem. How it is solved is the issue.

This post has been edited by dtp: 07 February 2016 - 10:23 AM

[Mr Mercury]

Bowzer spirey, on 07 February 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

Question for someone to ask please.

If as DA has stated his aim is championship football, how does he intend to achieve it !!!!

Buy a PS4?

[spireitenag]

lindo-spireite, on 07 February 2016 - 08:55 AM, said:

Would it be moderated by dalekpete?

Would people who attend have to agree that the club is being ran how it should?

Out of interest, who attends these fans forum things now? Does bodie still go? He's a decent lad and I refuse to believe he's as gullible as others.

Yes Andrew still attends.

A number of those who attend run their own business,so please don't wrongly assume any of us are gullible.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Surely a significant part of the C&B turnover, perhaps even the majority, comes from match-day custom. So how does Allen separate that from non match-day turnover? Would it still be worthwhile? And isn't at least a degree of that income based upon fans choosing to spend money at the Proact because it supposedly helps the team?

The lack of a pub style supporters facility means my friends and I already spend what must amount to a healthy five figure sum in pre/post-match pubs over the course of a season. If the Chairman chooses to further alienate punters such as us he can also forget the half time beers, occasional hospitality and non CFC events we partake of. I'd guess we wouldn't be the only ones, either.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 07 February 2016 - 10:39 AM

[ELTON 2020]

60s 70s Spireite, on 07 February 2016 - 08:58 AM, said:

Like you I just can't understand the real reason why this is being done, unless there is a plan by DA to keep the banqueting side and try to sell of the football club. One reason to be concerned is that the our income immediately goes down for the SCMP, meaning we will be hearing 'we have to reduce the football wages to meet the SCMP financial limits.'

For years we have heard 'a football club needs to make use of its facilities every day of the year rather than just say 25 times a year', and yet this will be effectively where the club will be at.
Plus the administration burden on the club's staff will increase with the posting of expenses and income to the two different companies, and cross billing from one to the other.
Can't they understand the concept of simple departmental accounting within one company?

Isn't this a microcosm of British Leyland in the early 70s?

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on 07 February 2016 - 10:23 AM, said:

Surely a significant part of the C&B turnover, perhaps even the majority, comes from match-day custom. So how does Allen separate that from non match-day turnover?

A question which highlights the real problem for a proper 'clear the air' meeting. Proper answers cannot be provided unless the accounts are on the table for scrutiny, and that won't happen.

[Walton Spireite]

dim view, on 07 February 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

A question which highlights the real problem for a proper 'clear the air' meeting. Proper answers cannot be provided unless the accounts are on the table for scrutiny, and that won't happen.

Nail on head.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dim view, on 07 February 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

A question which highlights the real problem for a proper 'clear the air' meeting. Proper answers cannot be provided unless the accounts are on the table for scrutiny, and that won't happen.

If I remember correctly abridged accounts were voted through prior to Allen's arrival. Though probably at his insistence. I think we can all see why, now.

[The Rev.]

dtp, on 07 February 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

My basic concern in splitting the business surrounds what "Income" and what "Expenditure" is attributed to both sides of the business.

Regarding "Income", for instance, match day wining and dining, catering in the concourses, etc - is this to be attributed to the "Football" or the "Catering/Banqueting" side - in my opinion it should be the "Football" side because it is all related to the match day experience. Similarly, certain advertising income can benefit both sides of the business so splitting this fairly is difficult.

Regarding "Expenditure" how are business rates, electricity, gas, etc costs going to be split across both businesses - it would be easy to manipulate such costs to benefit one side to the disadvantage of the other. Similarly, non-football related staff wages should be charged to the "Catering/Banqueting" side but what about those salaries paid to people who work for both sides such as the Chief Exec, the Company Secretary, general office staff, expenses of directors (if any), even banqueting and catering staff if all match day income is to be treated as football related. Then there can be issues with other costs like printing & stationary, telephone, computer costs, and more.

It is not easy to separate costs fairly and it can be guaranteed that what one person thinks is correct another one disagrees. More to the point any such separation of any business can be manipulated so to make one side look better than it really is and the other side worse than it actually is.

There lies the problem. How it is solved is the issue.

But perhaps not a bad problem to have if the requirement is to give the impression that CFC is a viable option!

[azul]

MDCCCLXVI, on 07 February 2016 - 10:23 AM, said:

Surely a significant part of the C&B turnover, perhaps even the majority, comes from match-day custom. So how does Allen separate that from non match-day turnover? Would it still be worthwhile? And isn't at least a degree of that income based upon fans choosing to spend money at the Proact because it supposedly helps the team?

The lack of a pub style supporters facility means my friends and I already spend what must amount to a healthy five figure sum in pre/post-match pubs over the course of a season. If the Chairman chooses to further alienate punters such as us he can also forget the half time beers, occasional hospitality and non CFC events we partake of. I'd guess we wouldn't be the only ones, either.

It could be self defeating, loss of good will and the fact catering profits will be influenced by the success of the club

That makes me sure that there is something more fundamental behind his plans

[Guest_freelander2_*]

Heart of a Niven, on 07 February 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

I personally believe that DA's motive in seperating the two aspects of the club is far more cynical. By removing the revenue stream that the hospitality side generates, the football side of the business is left exposed to greater financial demands.
In making such a move DA is, to all intents and purposes, casting us (the club) adrift. What worries me is that should the financing of the football side (which is far from transparent) fall further into the red, DA could quite essily just say 'right, you're not paying your way'', offload the 'club' from the business and simply rent a playing surface and a dressing room back to CFC from a newly formed 'Daves Dining & ITV Day Time Quiz Nights Ltd'.
That may sound cynical but I don't see any other reason for seperating the business. Telling us that it will make it easier for us to understand is simply patronising and assumes that many Town fans don't have businesses of their own, and with those businesses (or similar experience from their individual working lives) a far better understanding of profit and loss than his hand-picked team.

Excellent post.

60s 70s Spireite, on 07 February 2016 - 08:58 AM, said:

Like you I just can't understand the real reason why this is being done, unless there is a plan by DA to keep the banqueting side and try to sell of the football club. One reason to be concerned is that the our income immediately goes down for the SCMP, meaning we will be hearing 'we have to reduce the football wages to meet the SCMP financial limits.'

For years we have heard 'a football club needs to make use of its facilities every day of the year rather than just say 25 times a year', and yet this will be effectively where the club will be at.
Plus the administration burden on the club's staff will increase with the posting of expenses and income to the two different companies, and cross billing from one to the other.
Can't they understand the concept of simple departmental accounting within one company?

Excellent post.

A lot more supporters should be getting excited about what some of us fear is being planned.

[BlueDay]

Heart of a Niven, on 07 February 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

I personally believe that DA's motive in seperating the two aspects of the club is far more cynical. By removing the revenue stream that the hospitality side generates, the football side of the business is left exposed to greater financial demands.
In making such a move DA is, to all intents and purposes, casting us (the club) adrift. What worries me is that should the financing of the football side (which is far from transparent) fall further into the red, DA could quite essily just say 'right, you're not paying your way'', offload the 'club' from the business and simply rent a playing surface and a dressing room back to CFC from a newly formed 'Daves Dining & ITV Day Time Quiz Nights Ltd'.
That may sound cynical but I don't see any other reason for seperating the business. Telling us that it will make it easier for us to understand is simply patronising and assumes that many Town fans don't have businesses of their own, and with those businesses (or similar experience from their individual working lives) a far better understanding of profit and loss than his hand-picked team.

Given everything that we are aware of then I have to agree too.

[Snowflake McBedwetter]

We are where we are, but for me the problem is obvious.

Dave Allen (CFC) borrows money off Dave Allen (A&S), then Dave Allen (A&S) makes a profit on the debt Dave Allen (CFC) accrues. Dave Allen (CFC) decides to seperate profitable parts of the business in order to pay Dave Allen (A&S).

The accounts are only available to be viewed at behest of Dave Allen (CFC & A&S).