What I Want To Know
#1
Posted 07 February 2016 - 03:46 PM
But what baffles not only me, but many others on here, is why he apparently continues running an inefficient business which leaks money when he ought to want his money back ASAP. I say ASAP because he must know he is starting - like at Wednesday - to receive condemnation for how he is running the show with especial disdain for the average punter - you and I. Either he chooses to ignore it or he resents it or he revels in it (his frequent unjustified moans re the attendances point to number 2, in which case he comes across as the M in an SM relationship (as he does with no.3). The theory that he is using the financially inept and clueless CT as a shield may have held water before, but with the level of distrust and resentment amongst fans now bypassing CT to critique the owner himself, this conjecture no longer suffices to explain why he maintains the status quo (unless he's so much the "pigheaded Yorkshireman" so often ridiculed on here that he's willing to haemorrhage money in fulfilling it).
All unless there is another explanation. I have to be careful here but what it amounts to is that individuals are profiting in some hidden way from what is happening. I am far from being a financial expert but it does not make sense any other way - as so many others have said - just where is all the money coming into the club going exactly? Is there a detailed and clear set of accounts that account for all expenses? I ask because I genuinely don't know. And if there isn't, would it be possible to get in a qualified, transparent, independent accountant to verify all streams of income and, especially expenditure. But surely DA must already have done something similar, right? As a successful businessman? So, let us concerning fans into the result of the audit, please? It would help put our collective minds at rest. Unless you're either too pigheaded to do so or you've something you prefer to hide?
#2
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:17 PM
Nerima Spireite, on 07 February 2016 - 03:46 PM, said:
But what baffles not only me, but many others on here, is why he apparently continues running an inefficient business which leaks money when he ought to want his money back ASAP. I say ASAP because he must know he is starting - like at Wednesday - to receive condemnation for how he is running the show with especial disdain for the average punter - you and I. Either he chooses to ignore it or he resents it or he revels in it (his frequent unjustified moans re the attendances point to number 2, in which case he comes across as the M in an SM relationship (as he does with no.3). The theory that he is using the financially inept and clueless CT as a shield may have held water before, but with the level of distrust and resentment amongst fans now bypassing CT to critique the owner himself, this conjecture no longer suffices to explain why he maintains the status quo (unless he's so much the "pigheaded Yorkshireman" so often ridiculed on here that he's willing to haemorrhage money in fulfilling it).
All unless there is another explanation. I have to be careful here but what it amounts to is that individuals are profiting in some hidden way from what is happening. I am far from being a financial expert but it does not make sense any other way - as so many others have said - just where is all the money coming into the club going exactly? Is there a detailed and clear set of accounts that account for all expenses? I ask because I genuinely don't know. And if there isn't, would it be possible to get in a qualified, transparent, independent accountant to verify all streams of income and, especially expenditure. But surely DA must already have done something similar, right? As a successful businessman? So, let us concerning fans into the result of the audit, please? It would help put our collective minds at rest. Unless you're either too pigheaded to do so or you've something you prefer to hide?
This
#3
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:31 PM
Nerima Spireite, on 07 February 2016 - 03:46 PM, said:
But what baffles not only me, but many others on here, is why he apparently continues running an inefficient business which leaks money when he ought to want his money back ASAP. I say ASAP because he must know he is starting - like at Wednesday - to receive condemnation for how he is running the show with especial disdain for the average punter - you and I. Either he chooses to ignore it or he resents it or he revels in it (his frequent unjustified moans re the attendances point to number 2, in which case he comes across as the M in an SM relationship (as he does with no.3). The theory that he is using the financially inept and clueless CT as a shield may have held water before, but with the level of distrust and resentment amongst fans now bypassing CT to critique the owner himself, this conjecture no longer suffices to explain why he maintains the status quo (unless he's so much the "pigheaded Yorkshireman" so often ridiculed on here that he's willing to haemorrhage money in fulfilling it).
All unless there is another explanation. I have to be careful here but what it amounts to is that individuals are profiting in some hidden way from what is happening. I am far from being a financial expert but it does not make sense any other way - as so many others have said - just where is all the money coming into the club going exactly? Is there a detailed and clear set of accounts that account for all expenses? I ask because I genuinely don't know. And if there isn't, would it be possible to get in a qualified, transparent, independent accountant to verify all streams of income and, especially expenditure. But surely DA must already have done something similar, right? As a successful businessman? So, let us concerning fans into the result of the audit, please? It would help put our collective minds at rest. Unless you're either too pigheaded to do so or you've something you prefer to hide?
I would stay well clear of saying there are hidden ways individuals are profiting from the football club. The related party notes in the accounts, verified by the auditors, declares any transactions with directors and major shareholders. There is nothing of note there.
One reason for some of the losses last season was the write off to the Community Trust loan; no exact figure was shown although it appears to be at least £130,000. I do agree the club could, to gain all our trust, ask the auditors to explain the poor results last season. What else could be considered as one off expenses? What has been done to make the club more profitable in future?
I will stick to the explanation being some form of financial incompetence. Which is quite different to saying DA doesn't know how to run an incredibly sucessful casino and dog track business.
This post has been edited by 60s 70s Spireite: 08 February 2016 - 01:41 PM
#4
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:34 PM
I'm proudly a 'fairweather fisherman' Mr Allen, give me a reason to get me rod out!!
#5
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:51 PM
#6
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:55 PM
Mr_Tall, on 08 February 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:
And then seeing the value of his shares fall by a much bigger figure each year.
It does beg the question why bother garnering the interest to suffer top rate of taxes on it, whilst the shares value drop substantially.
#7
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:57 PM
60s 70s Spireite said:
And then seeing the value of his shares fall by a much bigger figure each year.
It does beg the question why bother garnering the interest to suffer top rate of taxes on it, whilst the shares value drop substantially.
It would be, but his loans are not being paid back due to the losses. We barely managed to pay interest. After selling over £1million worth of players.
#8
Posted 08 February 2016 - 01:58 PM
Phil V 72, on 08 February 2016 - 01:34 PM, said:
I'm proudly a 'fairweather fisherman' Mr Allen, give me a reason to get me rod out!!
That's a great question (I'm in the same proverbial (fishing) boat)!- only been a handful of times and the thoughts of driving 6 hours round trip or £50 train plus ticket cost of a match.
It may be disloyal but at the moment I'm not particularly tempted up to spend almost £100 (all in) and a day away from home to watch a team I don't really think have been put together or coached well.
Maybe I need to support a team that matches my ambition.
(I may go to Leicester on loan until the end of the season...)
#9
Posted 08 February 2016 - 04:45 PM
#10
Posted 08 February 2016 - 05:08 PM
Not a bad deal, really.
I think the real game changer was the million-plus loss despite on-field success. He'd already been forced to inject more money, partly for supposedly unknown fit-out costs which he blamed upon the previous regime and partly for sacking Sheridan and Co, but this was an unexpected hammer blow to his plans.
I guess it was around that point when it all became more trouble that it was worth.
So now the Chairman's only ambition is getting out as painlessly as possible, with pretty much his entire narrative suggesting as much. Diminishing the debt? The majority is to him and gains interest - so why such sharp focus unless it's to make CFC more saleable? Cutting costs? Talk of increasing revenue streams (more bars and boxes in the East Stand)? All conducive with making the business more attractive to a buyer.
And now we learn he's intent upon somehow separating the C&B business from the football side of things.
I don't think Dave Allen is corrupt or evil; he's just a businessman who's made expensive errors of judgement and seeking damage limitation. Unfortunately what's best for him might not coincide with what's best for our football club. And therein lies the concern.
#11
Posted 08 February 2016 - 05:08 PM
Phil V 72, on 08 February 2016 - 01:34 PM, said:
I'm proudly a 'fairweather fisherman' Mr Allen, give me a reason to get me rod out!!
After Saturday i said "no more". Its clear Dave Allen isnt interested so why should i shell out my hard earned cash to watch what can only be described as a very poor side. Yes i have watched town for over 40 years and all i ever asked for was ONE season in the now named championship which should have been gained last season but the rug was pulled from under Paul Cook long before he left. League Two again beckons and yes we may win it again but we could also drop through the trap door and end up like Stockport. A very fine line, administration a certainty in my opinion and those dreams of championship football are now further away than possibly ever before.
#12
Posted 08 February 2016 - 05:16 PM
MDCCCLXVI, on 08 February 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:
Not a bad deal, really.
I think the real game changer was the million-plus loss despite on-field success. He'd already been forced to inject more money, partly for supposedly unknown fit-out costs which he blamed upon the previous regime and partly for sacking Sheridan and Co, but this was an unexpected hammer blow to his plans.
I guess it was around that point when it all became more trouble that it was worth.
So now the Chairman's only ambition is getting out as painlessly as possible, with pretty much his entire narrative suggesting as much. Diminishing the debt? The majority is to him and gains interest - so why such sharp focus unless it's to make CFC more saleable? Cutting costs? Talk of increasing revenue streams (more bars and boxes in the East Stand)? All conducive with making the business more attractive to a buyer.
And now we learn he's intent upon somehow separating the C&B business from the football side of things.
I don't think Dave Allen is corrupt or evil; he's just a businessman who's made expensive errors of judgement and seeking damage limitation. Unfortunately what's best for him might not coincide with what's best for our football club. And therein lies the concern.
Yes, that's two of us (and I am sure a good lot more) on the same page.
#13
Posted 08 February 2016 - 06:24 PM
MDCCCLXVI, on 08 February 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:
Not a bad deal, really.
I think the real game changer was the million-plus loss despite on-field success. He'd already been forced to inject more money, partly for supposedly unknown fit-out costs which he blamed upon the previous regime and partly for sacking Sheridan and Co, but this was an unexpected hammer blow to his plans.
I guess it was around that point when it all became more trouble that it was worth.
So now the Chairman's only ambition is getting out as painlessly as possible, with pretty much his entire narrative suggesting as much. Diminishing the debt? The majority is to him and gains interest - so why such sharp focus unless it's to make CFC more saleable? Cutting costs? Talk of increasing revenue streams (more bars and boxes in the East Stand)? All conducive with making the business more attractive to a buyer.
And now we learn he's intent upon somehow separating the C&B business from the football side of things.
I don't think Dave Allen is corrupt or evil; he's just a businessman who's made expensive errors of judgement and seeking damage limitation. Unfortunately what's best for him might not coincide with what's best for our football club. And therein lies the concern.
Hear! Hear!
#14
Posted 08 February 2016 - 06:36 PM
MDCCCLXVI, on 08 February 2016 - 05:08 PM, said:
Not a bad deal, really.
I think the real game changer was the million-plus loss despite on-field success. He'd already been forced to inject more money, partly for supposedly unknown fit-out costs which he blamed upon the previous regime and partly for sacking Sheridan and Co, but this was an unexpected hammer blow to his plans.
I guess it was around that point when it all became more trouble that it was worth.
So now the Chairman's only ambition is getting out as painlessly as possible, with pretty much his entire narrative suggesting as much. Diminishing the debt? The majority is to him and gains interest - so why such sharp focus unless it's to make CFC more saleable? Cutting costs? Talk of increasing revenue streams (more bars and boxes in the East Stand)? All conducive with making the business more attractive to a buyer.
And now we learn he's intent upon somehow separating the C&B business from the football side of things.
I don't think Dave Allen is corrupt or evil; he's just a businessman who's made expensive errors of judgement and seeking damage limitation. Unfortunately what's best for him might not coincide with what's best for our football club. And therein lies the concern.
Can't argue with any of that
#15
Posted 09 February 2016 - 12:34 AM
What's up? Has CT got a blackmailing photo of DA in an embrace with someone else's pigeons or summat?
#16
Posted 09 February 2016 - 07:45 AM
Nerima Spireite, on 09 February 2016 - 12:34 AM, said:
What's up? Has CT got a blackmailing photo of DA in an embrace with someone else's pigeons or summat?
It might be easier to solve he riddle of the Bermuda Triangle.
#17
Posted 09 February 2016 - 08:52 AM