[Westbars Spireite]

bigdbh2, on 25 October 2016 - 01:57 PM, said:

He won't be planning to go under. As it is every year we survive, a shortfall in bad years and a small profit in years like last year. In the meantime he receives 5% on his investment. and still owing him circa £9m.

Long term he will sell the club along with the debt, by that time it won't owe him much.

I think the fallacy is that he is trying to run the club into the ground. His best case would be the debt being serviced/reduced year on year and the value of his shares increasing.

Even if we get lucky this year and sell Evans and Ariyibi for the same £2m needed (and it isn't looking likely yet) when does the next lucky year come by in League Two?

[60s 70s Spireite]

azul, on 25 October 2016 - 02:03 PM, said:

Could he then proportion the debt between the stadium company and football club prior to selling the football side.

The club says this will not happen, but yes it is possible, and, on the grounds the football club still makes use of the stadium, there wouldn't be a breach of any covenant presumably.

[Martin63]

The Gimp, on 23 October 2016 - 07:06 AM, said:

Jesus Christ! Please please tell me that's not true

Profit of just under £40k

[Martin63]

freelander2, on 24 October 2016 - 02:22 PM, said:

According to Graham Smyth's (DT Journalist) tweet earlier today, the club are due to release a statement tonight which will summarise the financial results for the year end 30/06/16.

During the trading period, we have


1) Sold Darikwa to Burnley.

2) Sold Clucas to Hull.

3) Sold Morsy to Wigan.

4) Sold Armand to Orient.

5) Averaged home crowds of 6,676.


I wonder what impact the above will have had on the value of the balance sheet, which was £1,807,791 at 30/06/15?


Since we moved to the new stadium, the value of the balance sheet was at its strongest under the old guard, its value was £3,225,189 for the year end 30/06/12. Since then we have experienced many successes, which should have resulted in significant growth in the value of the balance sheet, mainly:


1) Promotion to division 1.

2) JPT Wembley - Runners up.

3) Play Off Semi Finalists.

4) Concerts - Party at the Proact & Tom Jones.

5) Player sales- Bowery to Villa, Cooper to Leeds, Doyle to Cardiff, Roberts to Portsmouth, Darikwa to Burnley, Clucas to Hull, Morsy to Wigan & Gnanduillet to Orient.

6) Losing our manager to Portsmouth (Compensation).

7) Combined home league crowds for seasons 2012/13, 2013/14, 2014/15 & 2015/16 averaged circa 6,328.

Value of balance sheet £1,847,457 30th June 2016

[azul]

60s 70s Spireite, on 25 October 2016 - 02:15 PM, said:

The club says this will not happen, but yes it is possible, and, on the grounds the football club still makes use of the stadium, there wouldn't be a breach of any covenant presumably.

Just wondered about all this manoeuvring with shares and loans. I assume it is to increase his future options. I was thinking more of direct financial options rather than covenents/change of use. I assume those could be changed with enough influence

[dim view]

Sammy Spireite, on 25 October 2016 - 12:02 PM, said:

IF the rumours are to be believed, one person making more in performance bonus than the busines makes in profit is nothing short of scandalous IMHO.

and I see 3 Directors including Ashley have had a drag by having debentures repaid. Ashley has had £5k back. Times must be hard.

[bigdbh2]

Martin63, on 25 October 2016 - 02:35 PM, said:

Value of balance sheet £1,847,457 30th June 2016

So if a buyer or group of buyers came up with £1.8m they theoretically could buy the club and either inherit the debt or take a loan against the company/ground at maybe a lower rate than 5% to pay Dave Allen off and maybe get a hold of the costs?

[Sammy Spireite]

The bottom line remains, seeing the club "go to the wall" makes absolutely no sense to DA, as 3,000,000 shares (60%) in something worthless is worth nothing, and a £2m loan in something unable to pay its bills is pretty much worth nothing, also.

All of which makes the current situation even harder to understand.

Maybe he likes the kudos that comes with owning a football club?

Maybe Pigeon racing isn't what is used to be?

Maybe he is simply providing a very good source of income for his mates?

Maybe he feels 'Football owes him' after years of grief at S6

A profitable, successful club is a far more viable business proposition to Sheikh Maktoum al Maktoum (insert other wealthy names here - real people only though!) than one propped up by £2m players sales (with little/no chance of it repeating) doing poorly on the field, staring relegation in the face with a dwindling fan base and recently in the national media for a host of wrong reasons!

Its hard to see a pleasant end to all this for anyone, on either side of the hired goons.

[Phil V 72]

Sammy Spireite, on 25 October 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:

The bottom line remains, seeing the club "go to the wall" makes absolutely no sense to DA, as 3,000,000 shares (60%) in something worthless is worth nothing, and a £2m loan in something unable to pay its bills is pretty much worth nothing, also.

All of which makes the current situation even harder to understand.

Maybe he likes the kudos that comes with owning a football club?

Maybe Pigeon racing isn't what is used to be?

Maybe he is simply providing a very good source of income for his mates?

Maybe he feels 'Football owes him' after years of grief at S6

A profitable, successful club is a far more viable business proposition to Sheikh Maktoum al Maktoum (insert other wealthy names here - real people only though!) than one propped up by £2m players sales (with little/no chance of it repeating) doing poorly on the field, staring relegation in the face with a dwindling fan base and recently in the national media for a host of wrong reasons!

Its hard to see a pleasant end to all this for anyone, on either side of the hired goons.

However difficult the last 18 months have been, I worry that we've not seen anything like the worst of it yet.

When there are no players to sell and 3500 fans coming in, what then?

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

h again, on 24 October 2016 - 07:19 PM, said:

Unless of course some of the money from player sales was used to reduce the debt - 70% of it should have been according to the word from on high.
As usual the reaction here is long on whinge and short on thought. Like WHERE is all that money going? Last time it could only have been on inflated payments to players - surely we can't have fallen into that particular trap again. But assuming DA took his 70%, that leaves round about 600 grand which should have gone on the playing side. Reduced to 50 grand profit? Nah, doesn't stack up at all - perhaps the full accounts will clear it up, but I'm not holding my breath.

'Doesn't stack up at all'?

'Doesn't stack up at all'?!

Two years ago you dismissed the official accounts as 'meaningless historical documents' because they blew your apologistic agenda out the water.

Peppering your posts with the usual sneering scorn, of course.

Last year you excused the debt rising by insisting it would fall by one and a half million this year following income from Clucas and Darikwa.

Just as you're still insisting there were somehow 'ruinous' contracts yet offering not a single link to substantiate that claim.

Well now we discover the disgusting truth: two million in, debt up, fans blamed.

Seems to me those you once again accuse of whinging have run rings around you.

As they did in terms of Saunders, Alnassar, Bingham, Sutcliffe, Turner, PPP, 'Rafflegate', 'Erniegate', Hird, etc, etc, etc.

The good people of 'Bob's Board' have been saying things 'don't stack up' for years, only to be met by your insults and spin.

An apology is in order before you even think about comments like 'doesn't stack up at all'.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 25 October 2016 - 05:34 PM

[fishini]

MDCCCLXVI, on 25 October 2016 - 05:22 PM, said:

'Doesn't stack up at all'?

'Doesn't stack up at all'?!

Two years ago you dismissed the official accounts as 'meaningless historical documents' because they blew your apologistic agenda out the water.

Peppering your posts with the usual sneering scorn, of course.

Last year you excused the debt rising by insisting it would fall by one and a half million this year following income from Clucas and Darikwa.

Just as you're still insisting there were somehow 'ruinous' contracts yet offering not a single link to substantiate that claim.

Well now we discover the disgusting truth: two million in, debt up, fans blamed.

Seems to me those you once again accuse of whinging have run rings around you.

As they did in terms of Saunders, Alnassar, Bingham, Sutcliffe, Turner, PPP, 'Rafflegate', 'Erniegate', Hird, etc, etc, etc.

An apology is in order before you even think about comments like 'doesn't stack up at all'.

Doesn't surprise you does it Chris? Afterall the court jester has always posted twaddle and lies. Like a couple is an infinite number, league tables do lie and how he didn't report me to the mods

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Could Dave Allen be receiving 'consultancy fees' or something similar?

Would it show up on the accounts if so?

I ask because of this: http://www.footballi...ressure-report/

[Westbars Spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 25 October 2016 - 05:22 PM, said:

'Doesn't stack up at all'?

'Doesn't stack up at all'?!

Two years ago you dismissed the official accounts as 'meaningless historical documents' because they blew your apologistic agenda out the water.

Peppering your posts with the usual sneering scorn, of course.

Last year you excused the debt rising by insisting it would fall by one and a half million this year following income from Clucas and Darikwa.

Just as you're still insisting there were somehow 'ruinous' contracts yet offering not a single link to substantiate that claim.

Well now we discover the disgusting truth: two million in, debt up, fans blamed.

Seems to me those you once again accuse of whinging have run rings around you.

As they did in terms of Saunders, Alnassar, Bingham, Sutcliffe, Turner, PPP, 'Rafflegate', 'Erniegate', Hird, etc, etc, etc.

The good people of 'Bob's Board' have been saying things 'don't stack up' for years, only to be met by your insults and spin.

An apology is in order before you even think about comments like 'doesn't stack up at all'.

Somewhat bewilderingly he was claiming yesterday that the debt could be down even AFTER the headline figures had been announced.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

I think it's important to compare the latest figures with the last full season that BH & AW had full control over club finances, that being year end 30/06/12.

Looking at some of the overheads:

1) Wages, national insurance and staff pension contributions increased from £3,483,833 (06/12) to £4,643,328 (06/16).

2) Legal & professional fees including agent fees increased from £38,960 (06/12) to £269,614 (06/16).

3) Rent increased from £0 (06/12) to £29,139 (06/16). I wonder what this relates to?

4) Sundry establishment expenses increased from £42,578 (06/12) to £89,366 (06/16).

5) Centre of excellence expenses increased from £102,076 (06/12) to £227,390 (06/16).

6) Our administration expenses are £1,448,869 greater than what they were four years ago.


Another interesting one, £4,965 interest was charged to the P&L account relating to overdue tax. I suspect this relates to where tax had been deducted at source on directors' loan interest but not paid to HMRC. If it does, a note was included in the accounts for Y/E 30/06/14 stating that £103,775 of income tax payable to HMRC, a significant portion of which has been outstanding for over 2 years. This is being settled after the year end. Can we assume that this liability to HMRC has still not been settled?

Hubbard & Co managed to generate twice as much profit without selling any player.

img hosting

This post has been edited by freelander2: 25 October 2016 - 05:50 PM

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Westbars Spireite, on 25 October 2016 - 05:41 PM, said:

Somewhat bewilderingly he was claiming yesterday that the debt could be down even AFTER the headline figures had been announced.

I remember him taunting that no one on here was qualified to question the CEO.

Only for an orderly queue of accountants, business folk and senior managers to form.

They still await his apology, just as we all await his own qualifications to comment.

Indeed it appears he's unqualified to question the good people of 'Bob's Board' given how they repeatedly run rings around him.

[Rodney's Moustache]

Humpalumpa, on 25 October 2016 - 08:59 AM, said:

AFC Chesterfield

Why not it would be our club run by genuine town fans

[60s 70s Spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 25 October 2016 - 05:39 PM, said:

Could Dave Allen be receiving 'consultancy fees' or something similar?

Would it show up on the accounts if so?

I ask because of this: http://www.footballi...ressure-report/

No, would be disclosed as a related party transaction.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

freelander2, on 25 October 2016 - 05:44 PM, said:

6) Our administration expenses are £1,448,869 greater than what they were four years ago.

This is staggering.

Just how many more folk have we working in the CFC offices?

Or, perhaps more pertinently, are there expenses hidden under 'Administration' that fans might find unpalatable?

[peakblue]

Sammy Spireite, on 25 October 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:

The bottom line remains, seeing the club "go to the wall" makes absolutely no sense to DA, as 3,000,000 shares (60%) in something worthless is worth nothing, and a £2m loan in something unable to pay its bills is pretty much worth nothing, also.

All of which makes the current situation even harder to understand.

Maybe he likes the kudos that comes with owning a football club?

Maybe Pigeon racing isn't what is used to be?

Maybe he is simply providing a very good source of income for his mates?

Maybe he feels 'Football owes him' after years of grief at S6

A profitable, successful club is a far more viable business proposition to Sheikh Maktoum al Maktoum (insert other wealthy names here - real people only though!) than one propped up by £2m players sales (with little/no chance of it repeating) doing poorly on the field, staring relegation in the face with a dwindling fan base and recently in the national media for a host of wrong reasons!

Its hard to see a pleasant end to all this for anyone, on either side of the hired goons.

Or just simply he got scared when chesterfield were looking like being succesful,thats no good,this cook bloke might get us into the championship.i'll have to put more money in.can't have that.

[azul]

MDCCCLXVI, on 25 October 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

This is staggering.

Just how many more folk have we working in the CFC offices?

Or, perhaps more pertinently, are there expenses hidden under 'Administration' that fans might find unpalatable?

That figure needs broken down yet again before any credence can be given.

I don't see how they can't break the figures down in the same way as they do with the number of staff employed in each area of the business. Not good enough just saying the playing costs remain roughly the same

They asked for questions prior to the meeting!