[Westbars Spireite]

Les Ashmore, on 12 November 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

Mike I'm not sure either, But because of the personal attack of a single individual who failed to keep an agreement the whole thing looks like it will not happen again, Nick Johnson had very little time to complete a transcript because of his other work ie Sky & Peak FM etc, I requested a Transcript ASAP so that everybody could be kept in touch but as the "Unofficial" version appeared something had to be done quick so NJ did a brief summary, On thursday No Facebook statements had appeared anywhere, Thursday evening whilst in a business meeting I got a call from a Facebook FF member saying they had not put anything out but everybody was commenting on a Post that had appeared on this Board, I told them to Copy and Paste it stating that if there was to be any Flak it would be directed on this Board and not at either Facebook forums members, Sadly there is Flak
I am receiving requests to keep the FF going but with exclusions, as yet I have not even got an agreement it will continue

Stop being a ******.

(That was f-nny by the way)

This post has been edited by Westbars Spireite: 12 November 2016 - 09:32 AM

[moondog]

Les one of your group on Facebook posted on Thursday morning that he would be posting what said later when he got home from work

[Guest_freelander2_*]

Forever a Spireite, on 11 November 2016 - 11:30 PM, said:

Don't understand your post Freelander

Stop calling Turner names and have a think about why Sir Rodders would rescue Sutcliffe and his questionable enterprise as well as offer employment to Kevin Fitzgerald.

[azul]

60s 70s Spireite, on 12 November 2016 - 08:31 AM, said:

Just to be clear, the words in brown font are AC's secondary responses to our further questions (in red). The further analysis of wages given now takes the wages figure over that disclosed in the accounts, so there must be double counting there.

To be fair to AC and the club, I think we have to agree that the information supplied is way above that normally available from other fellow clubs.
On the financial side one would think the first area to target for savings would be the biggest debit, wages. On the playing side, the top table said 'DA will not cut the players wages budget'. But that still leaves well over £2M to go through with a fine tooth comb.

In answer to my question about comparing us to say Walsall, Burton and Rochdale, CT came back with the response that Walsall have much bigger banqueting facilities, with the venue regularly hosting Asian Weddings (and there is a brochure on their site advertising this). However that doesn't explain why Walsall's total wage bill is some £1.2M less than ours.

There is an almost palpable exasperation coming from the Board as what to do to put things back on track. Other than player sales (why sign Ebabks Blake, Herd, Martinez and indeed loan Novak then?) and dipping into DA's pocket. Although they did insist overheads are being cut.
In response to a further question 'why does the club pay the interest and loan repayments to A and S Leisure, only for DA to have put funds back in', AC said A and S Leisure is Mark Allens responsibility and that's what he wants. Not sure I am entirely convinced. However then came the statement that there was a proposal on the table for all directors to suspend taking interest payments.

The player costs are in reallity about 2.9M (including NI, bonuses and appearance) and manager and coaching wages are 420K thay leaves in the region of 1.3M in other wages. Going over that with a fine tooth comb isn't going to produce the magnitude of savings we require. It is throughly misleading to say your budget is 1.9M when you know you have to add NI and bonuses. OK you don't know how much you have to pay in bonuses down too the penny but you know what your NI will be.

I see why there is exasperation. If you trim 5K here, 10K there and lose a high earner or two then it still won't make up the 1.5M projected loss. I'm actually amazed it is only 1.5M given the decline in just about eveything.

This post has been edited by azul: 12 November 2016 - 10:00 AM

[Guest_freelander2_*]

Les Ashmore, on 12 November 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

Mike I'm not sure either, But because of the personal attack of a single individual who failed to keep an agreement the whole thing looks like it will not happen again, Nick Johnson had very little time to complete a transcript because of his other work ie Sky & Peak FM etc, I requested a Transcript ASAP so that everybody could be kept in touch but as the "Unofficial" version appeared something had to be done quick so NJ did a brief summary, On thursday No Facebook statements had appeared anywhere, Thursday evening whilst in a business meeting I got a call from a Facebook FF member saying they had not put anything out but everybody was commenting on a Post that had appeared on this Board, I told them to Copy and Paste it stating that if there was to be any Flak it would be directed on this Board and not at either Facebook forums members, Sadly there is Flak
I am receiving requests to keep the FF going but with exclusions, as yet I have not even got an agreement it will continue
The Board representatives agreed to a few things which as far as I am aware they have kept to there word, BB gave in a number of requests which are being attended to, The sign across the road has been romoved, The Fans Forum were asked to do one thing, wait for the Official released transcript and that was broken within hours

Les,

Nick Johnson had a thankless task. He knows it, you know it and so do I. He was expected, as a consultant/employee of the club to issue an account which portrayed that the meeting was positive. Other than the board agreed to the meeting and fans of the club and officials entered into dialogue, which in my opinion is long overdue, there were few positives generated from the meeting itself.

With regards to the timing, yes you're right we did agree to wait until NJ had issued the club's release. However, I have absolutely no doubt that Chris's version of events would have followed shortly afterwards. I wonder what reaction you would get if you asked those fans who attended on Wednesday night, which of the two accounts accurately reflect how the meeting went.

The club is in a right old mess and that is down to the two individuals running it, Ashley Carson and Chris Turner, supported by Dave Allen. Regardless of what people may or may not think about those running the club, to witness that we have no plan to address profitability issues in the business or have an idea of when the club will generate sufficient profits every year to meet its financial obligations should be extremely worrying for ALL concerned.

Mike

azul, on 12 November 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

The player costs are in reallity about 2.9M (including NI, bonuses and appearance) and manager and coaching wages are 420K thay leaves in the region of 1.3M in other wages. Going over that with a fine tooth comb isn't going to produce the magnitude of savings we require. It is throughly misleading to say your budget is 1.9M when you know you have to add NI and bonuses. OK you don't know how much you have to pay in bonuses down too the penny but you know what your NI will be.

I see why there is exasperation. If you trim 5K here, 10K there and lose a high earner or two then it still won't make up the 1.5M projected loss. I'm actually amazed it is only 1.5M given the decline in just about eveything.

£1M needs to come off the wage bill, end of story.

[azul]

freelander2, on 12 November 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

£1M needs to come off the wage bill, end of story.

Then it will have to include playing staff

[Guest_freelander2_*]

60s 70s Spireite, on 12 November 2016 - 08:31 AM, said:

Just to be clear, the words in brown font are AC's secondary responses to our further questions (in red). The further analysis of wages given now takes the wages figure over that disclosed in the accounts, so there must be double counting there.

To be fair to AC and the club, I think we have to agree that the information supplied is way above that normally available from other fellow clubs.
On the financial side one would think the first area to target for savings would be the biggest debit, wages. On the playing side, the top table said 'DA will not cut the players wages budget'. But that still leaves well over £2M to go through with a fine tooth comb.

In answer to my question about comparing us to say Walsall, Burton and Rochdale, CT came back with the response that Walsall have much bigger banqueting facilities, with the venue regularly hosting Asian Weddings (and there is a brochure on their site advertising this). However that doesn't explain why Walsall's total wage bill is some £1.2M less than ours.

There is an almost palpable exasperation coming from the Board as what to do to put things back on track. Other than player sales (why sign Ebabks Blake, Herd, Martinez and indeed loan Novak then?) and dipping into DA's pocket. Although they did insist overheads are being cut.
In response to a further question 'why does the club pay the interest and loan repayments to A and S Leisure, only for DA to have put funds back in', AC said A and S Leisure is Mark Allens responsibility and that's what he wants. Not sure I am entirely convinced. However then came the statement that there was a proposal on the table for all directors to suspend taking interest payments.

With regards to the interest on directors' loans being suspended, I had to smile.

Take any of the directors who have no control over what's going off, having witnessed the demise of the club, the bad publicity, etc, would you agree to that proposal? My only word would be, bye.

azul, on 12 November 2016 - 10:13 AM, said:

Then it will have to include playing staff

Without doubt.

[azul]

freelander2, on 12 November 2016 - 10:16 AM, said:

With regards to the interest on directors' loans being suspended, I had to smile.

Take any of the directors who have no control over what's going off, having witnessed the demise of the club, the bad publicity, etc, would you agree to that proposal? My only word would be, bye.


Without doubt.

Well, if we are relagated that will happen anyway. Also turnover will drop which might be a good thing, we'll sell less, so we'll lose less on those sales. Maybe these people claiming DA wants us in L2 have a point (tonge in cheek).

One thing I find ironic is that when DA stated he was splitting banqueting off from the football side one theory (and a good one) was he was doing it so he point to how much the football side cost, so he could justify cutting it. In the end we had to force the figures out of them and are now discussing it. Was it a cunning plan.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

azul, on 12 November 2016 - 10:30 AM, said:

Well, if we are relagated that will happen anyway. Also turnover will drop which might be a good thing, we'll sell less, so we'll lose less on those sales. Maybe these people claiming DA wants us in L2 have a point (tonge in cheek).

One thing I find ironic is that when DA stated he was splitting banqueting off from the football side one theory (and a good one) was he was doing it so he point to how much the football side cost, so he could justify cutting it. In the end we had to force the figures out of them and are now discussing it. Was it a cunning plan.

I think that's got to be a question for Monday. If you stripped out all football related income from the C&B department, what's left?

[60s 70s Spireite]

azul, on 12 November 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

The player costs are in reallity about 2.9M (including NI, bonuses and appearance) and manager and coaching wages are 420K thay leaves in the region of 1.3M in other wages. Going over that with a fine tooth comb isn't going to produce the magnitude of savings we require. It is throughly misleading to say your budget is 1.9M when you know you have to add NI and bonuses. OK you don't know how much you have to pay in bonuses down too the penny but you know what your NI will be.

I see why there is exasperation. If you trim 5K here, 10K there and lose a high earner or two then it still won't make up the 1.5M projected loss. I'm actually amazed it is only 1.5M given the decline in just about eveything.

On players wages CT held up a report that he said detailed each and every League One club's player costs (presumably they have to be reported to EFL to ensure clubs meet the salary cost management protocol). He said we were in the lower third I recall.

Would be nice to have access to this to do a real comparison.

[azul]

freelander2, on 12 November 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

I think that's got to be a question for Monday. If you stripped out all football related income from the C&B department, what's left?

It would be interesting.

I don't pay much attention to what is happenig in the lounges midweek but it hardly appears to be the 365 day venue that was promised and even some of that seems to be related to the football club (no matter how losely)

However, looking across at the empty posh seats every second week would suggest the match day stuff is dropping at an alarming rate.

I think the bottom line is you can't seperate what is happening on the field and what is happening in the lounges

This post has been edited by azul: 12 November 2016 - 10:49 AM

[Jbspire]

Its a good job we haven't paid CT his 5% yet as the last set of accounts showed a £194k cash balance. If we are right that he is owed 5% on approx £2m of player sales that would put us in serious cash difficulty . Remember that cash is fact and profit is opinion as my first boss said to me!

[azul]

60s 70s Spireite, on 12 November 2016 - 10:48 AM, said:

On players wages CT held up a report that he said detailed each and every League One club's player costs (presumably they have to be reported to EFL to ensure clubs meet the salary cost management protocol). He said we were in the lower third I recall.

Would be nice to have access to this to do a real comparison.

Yeah, but they just snapshots and I presume will not include bonuses. I keep hearing the 1.6/1.8/1.9M figure from him, which is misleading. So, as I think you are suggesting, are we comparing like for like?

[60s 70s Spireite]

Jbspire, on 12 November 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

Its a good job we haven't paid CT his 5% yet as the last set of accounts showed a £194k cash balance. If we are right that he is owed 5% on approx £2m of player sales that would put us in serious cash difficulty . Remember that cash is fact and profit is opinion as my first boss said to me!

True.
But I have seen a number of insolvencies where large sums of cash were in the bank, but all in demand debts couldn't be met.

[60s 70s Spireite]

azul, on 12 November 2016 - 10:55 AM, said:

Yeah, but they just snapshots and I presume will not include bonuses. I keep hearing the 1.6/1.8/1.9M figure from him, which is misleading. So, as I think you are suggesting, are we comparing like for like?

I am indeed questioning whether we are comparing like with like. Fact is Walsall''s overall wage bill is far less than ours. Who are they paying who we are not?

[Jbspire]

60s 70s Spireite, on 12 November 2016 - 10:56 AM, said:

True.
But I have seen a number of insolvencies where large sums of cash were in the bank, but all in demand debts couldn't be met.

Yep agree, not really looked at accounts in detail so the commission debtor was all I knew about and is a large proportion of the cash held

[Les Ashmore]

moondog, on 12 November 2016 - 09:39 AM, said:

Les one of your group on Facebook posted on Thursday morning that he would be posting what said later when he got home from work

Correct he did, But he was instructed not to and didn't Post anything when I spoke to him he thought the official Transcript would be ready to post he said

This post has been edited by Les Ashmore: 12 November 2016 - 11:15 AM

[Goku]

Who gives a flying f**k when different peoples versions of events were posted, it doesn't matter one bit. Look at the club's dogsh*** summary on the OS. Timing doesn't matter. There are much bigger things to worry about.

This post has been edited by Goku: 12 November 2016 - 11:16 AM

[azul]

60s 70s Spireite, on 12 November 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

I am indeed questioning whether we are comparing like with like. Fact is Walsall''s overall wage bill is far less than ours. Who are they paying who we are not?

There are two things here, the playing side and admin side.

When PC came it was publicised we were moving to performace related payments (bonus driven). So it depends what model they are following and therefore what they may (and others) report to the league.

On the administration side things were run on a shoestring with a lot of goodwill at Saltergate. There is no way we could run the club that way now but have we strayed too far from those days?

Are we behaving like we are some corporate monster rather than a small business

This post has been edited by azul: 12 November 2016 - 11:20 AM

[dim view]

moondog, on 12 November 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

Please find attached the Questions/ Information request on the accounts presented to AC before the forum, along with his responses which included in a covering email the following detail relating to this year's accounts.

Thanks Moondog.

I see the Trust owe £101k. Has anybody any idea what the figure was last year?