[Wooden Spoon]

Could this season be a record one for CFC?

Play offs, 4th round of the FA Cup, and around £1,500,000 player sales, on top of the average of 7120+ (CT Figures)

Its got to be pushing £8,000,000.

[Westbars Spireite]

It will be. Turnover in its self means nowt, as the account may yet reveal.

[60s 70s Spireite]

Westbars Spireite, on 01 May 2015 - 09:02 PM, said:

It will be. Turnover in its self means nowt, as the account may yet reveal.

As we say in the profession; turnover for vanity, profit for sanity.

[azul]

Westbars Spireite, on 01 May 2015 - 09:02 PM, said:

It will be. Turnover in its self means nowt, as the account may yet reveal.

Having a high turnover is a far better than having a low turnover

On the other hand how much did those concerts add to the turnover last year and we lost £90K on them.

[Spireite93]

Is there a way to see the accounts in the public domain without being a shareholder?

[Westbars Spireite]

azul, on 01 May 2015 - 09:22 PM, said:

Having a high turnover is a far better than having a low turnover

On the other hand how much did those concerts add to the turnover last year and we lost £90K on them.

In what sense?

A high turnover with a loss is far worse than turning over 50% of it and making money.

[azul]

Westbars Spireite, on 01 May 2015 - 09:31 PM, said:

In what sense?

A high turnover with a loss is far worse than turning over 50% of it and making money.

Of course but there is more margin to make profit with a high turnover than a low turnover. DA talked in terms of turnover when he took over the club, it excited him

There's been 100's of posts agonising over how we could lose so much last season given our turnover. I wouldn't be surprised if a few were yours

Also see the caveat regarding the concerts that turned a loss.

[Westbars Spireite]

azul, on 01 May 2015 - 09:57 PM, said:

Of course but there is more margin to make profit with a high turnover than a low turnover. DA talked in terms of turnover when he took over the club, it excited him

There's been 100's of posts agonising over how we could lose so much last season given our turnover. I wouldn't be surprised if a few were yours

Also see the caveat regarding the concerts that turned a loss.

I would be.

[Wooden Spoon]

Spireite93, on 01 May 2015 - 09:28 PM, said:

Is there a way to see the accounts in the public domain without being a shareholder?

pay a small fee, I believe £5 per "view" to company house. No doubt MP will be better advised on this sort of issue

[Wooden Spoon]

azul, on 01 May 2015 - 09:57 PM, said:

Of course but there is more margin to make profit with a high turnover than a low turnover. DA talked in terms of turnover when he took over the club, it excited him

There's been 100's of posts agonising over how we could lose so much last season given our turnover. I wouldn't be surprised if a few were yours

Also see the caveat regarding the concerts that turned a loss.

That's a very good and valid point.




If the concerts added £500k turn over last year, but added a loss, then this year turn over should reflect a much healthier position.




The thing I`m puzzled with ref the concerts - we made a profit, by hiring the venue to a management company, who marketed the event, sold the tickets etc, and brought in Elton and everyone seemed happy.

DA saw the figures, and though "I can make more on that by cutting out the middle man" ............a fair assumption I suppose.




As it turned out, CFC didn't make a profit (marketing for 2nd day?) so now we ditch the whole thing? Why not just say OK we can play it safe, and in the close season we have a concert or two, and leave it to the marketing experts, and just take a smaller cut from the venue hire? It seems we have simply thrown the baby away with the bath water.

A smaller, if less than expected profit from a venture is surely better than no profit at all? Turners comments about the Leeds concerts again I feel have an influence on decisions at the pro act. Risky, unlikely to make a profit, so forget it.......and yet, the Elton concert, and the way it was set up and run has to be the way forward?

No risk but small profit? Surely the way forward? a modest 50k profit is a good player on loan for the first half of the season....this might, just might help the club to over achieve in terms of gates if the club are doing well on the pitch and pay for a loan player for the second half of the season.

DA also appears to have issue with loan players - Hereford got promoted to L1 on the back of 5 or 6 good loan players, and then they stopped this (due to off field funding) and now no longer exist. If he wants to get CFC to the championship, a good number of top drawer, short term loans can really be the answer.

It seems the problem last year was marketing and sales with the second day, not the event itself. We waited until almost the last week or so before hitting groupon....did the powers that be simply expect sales to occur simply because we put on an event?

For a business that has an owner steeped in the entertainment industry, and a CEO who is a man who has spent his entire life in the professional football environment, off field events at CFC in the last 12 or so months seem to be bordering on the utterly bizarre....... Am I the only person thinking this? What do they talk about in the board room? Is no one asking uncomfortable questions when sat at the big table? Are they too scared? Is the truth too damaging for some individuals?

[Dreaming Spire]

A lot of sense in what you say there, buddy.

[starsky72]

Quote

If the concerts added £500k turn over last year, but added a loss

The concerts didn't make a loss, they simply didnt make as much profit as expected.

[dim view]

a kick in the balls, on 01 May 2015 - 11:20 PM, said:

For a business that has an owner steeped in the entertainment industry, and a CEO who is a man who has spent his entire life in the professional football environment, off field events at CFC in the last 12 or so months seem to be bordering on the utterly bizarre.......

perhaps he should change his name to Chris Turnover.

Various myths or stories have circulated about the concerts....
1. CFC was offered Rod Stewart the year after Elton, but DA turned him down.
2. DA was warned that Tom Jones was no longer the world superstar that DA thought he was. 4000 empty seats is a lot of lost revenue.
3. AS paid the price.

[hewittfan]

starsky72, on 02 May 2015 - 07:06 AM, said:

The concerts didn't make a loss, they simply didnt make as much profit as expected.

Not much of one if we did – at the AGM, Dave Allen said that we had budgeted for a £500,000 profit, but in the event all the money made on Tom Jones was lost on the second day.

[starsky72]

They still didn't contribute to any loss.

[azul]

starsky72, on 02 May 2015 - 08:09 AM, said:

They still didn't contribute to any loss.

The 2014 financial statement from the club clearly states there was "an overall loss across the weekend of approximately £95K"

[starsky72]

Hmmm. Well a good while before the concert weekend the club were saying that enough tickets had been sold for the Saturday to ensure the whole weekend at least broke even.

[LuSiVe]

And this is people's problem with the club. The left hand announcing things totally at odds with the right hand.

[moondog]

dim view, on 02 May 2015 - 07:11 AM, said:

perhaps he should change his name to Chris Turnover.

Various myths or stories have circulated about the concerts....
1. CFC was offered Rod Stewart the year after Elton, but DA turned him down.
2. DA was warned that Tom Jones was no longer the world superstar that DA thought he was. 4000 empty seats is a lot of lost revenue.
3. AS paid the price.

AS ?

[Trigger]

moondog, on 02 May 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

AS ?

Alan Stevenson?