[Wooden Spoon]

Call me simple if you like, but....

When we moved to the new ground we had debts. We knew this, and the debts were higher than DA had originally anticipated. However, I understood it that the debts, were, largely structured,ie, to be paid for a fixed term at a fixed rate. 5 and 10 years to DA. So, even though the debts may have risen technically, are we at the point where the 5 year loan is almost up? If not, why not? The bulk of the debts originally were not all debentures at an ongoing interest rate with no re raiment plan, so where are we with this?

Can this question be asked at the monthly "fans rep forum"?

The concerts. I was under the impression that the losses made by the party at the pro act was more than covered by Tom Jones. Overall we made a profit, albeit smaller than budgeted for. Can this be broken down? So we can see where we are?

[martatcross]

the concerts lost 95K
DA original debt has been increased due to loses
The council are owed and the interest that as accrued
The club need to stop money flying out the window money they dont have.

This post has been edited by martatcross: 24 October 2014 - 07:03 AM

[dim view]

a kick in the balls, on 24 October 2014 - 01:07 AM, said:

Call me simple if you like, but....

When we moved to the new ground we had debts. We knew this, and the debts were higher than DA had originally anticipated. However, I understood it that the debts, were, largely structured,ie, to be paid for a fixed term at a fixed rate. 5 and 10 years to DA. So, even though the debts may have risen technically, are we at the point where the 5 year loan is almost up? If not, why not? The bulk of the debts originally were not all debentures at an ongoing interest rate with no re raiment plan, so where are we with this?

Can this question be asked at the monthly "fans rep forum"?

The concerts. I was under the impression that the losses made by the party at the pro act was more than covered by Tom Jones. Overall we made a profit, albeit smaller than budgeted for. Can this be broken down? So we can see where we are?

why don't you buy a few shares and get the Annual Report?.

Random recollections from last night, in no particular order......

The club has a tax debt of £104k which got 'lost but not lost' in the accounts. It is being paid immediately with, hopefully, no fine.
The accounts in the previous regime were a mess, with major use of a black hole - 'Other Operational Activities'.
Player bonus's have been streamlined.
Gardner is going to be a great player.
So is Clucas.
DA says the Tom Jones concert was a success. I don't agree with him - there were 4000 empty seats.
Monies that the Trust should be paying the club will be formalised soon.
DA wants to offer the Council a deal to write off it's loan if the Director's do similar. How that benefits the council is uncertain.
No plans to get Johnson back - he's a great prospect, more pleasing to the eye than Banks, but hasn't scored.
Roberts puts his hamstring problems down to the lack of regular commuting.
Schools deal for the Yeovil game should ensure a full East stand.
The Hub is flourishing.
The new Box is rate nice. The tennant has paid for the glass/door and has done a deal to share match day rental money with the club.
Gbolly and Michael are looking rate prospects.
Maguire (who I predict will make a first team appearance next season) is going out on loan.
Our player budget is about middle of the road in L1.
CFC has no financial liability to the Village - although someone said there are CCJ's outstanding and Ashley said these would be paid.


Can't think of 'owt else at the minute.

[Westbars Spireite]

CCJs outstanding and still talk of the 'previous regime'? How many years ago are we talking about?

[BodieUK]

a kick in the balls, on 24 October 2014 - 01:07 AM, said:

Call me simple if you like, but....

When we moved to the new ground we had debts. We knew this, and the debts were higher than DA had originally anticipated. However, I understood it that the debts, were, largely structured,ie, to be paid for a fixed term at a fixed rate. 5 and 10 years to DA. So, even though the debts may have risen technically, are we at the point where the 5 year loan is almost up? If not, why not? The bulk of the debts originally were not all debentures at an ongoing interest rate with no re raiment plan, so where are we with this?

Can this question be asked at the monthly "fans rep forum"?

The concerts. I was under the impression that the losses made by the party at the pro act was more than covered by Tom Jones. Overall we made a profit, albeit smaller than budgeted for. Can this be broken down? So we can see where we are?

The purpose of the AGM is for questions such as this. Not the Fans Forum - The fans forum is concerned with the service the club provides, not necessarily financially matters and in depth on-the-pitch activities

This post has been edited by BodieUK: 24 October 2014 - 08:21 AM

[brianclose]

dim view, on 24 October 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

why don't you buy a few shares and get the Annual Report?.

Random recollections from last night, in no particular order......

The club has a tax debt of £104k which got 'lost but not lost' in the accounts. It is being paid immediately with, hopefully, no fine.
The accounts in the previous regime were a mess, with major use of a black hole - 'Other Operational Activities'.
Player bonus's have been streamlined.
Gardner is going to be a great player.
So is Clucas.
DA says the Tom Jones concert was a success. I don't agree with him - there were 4000 empty seats.
Monies that the Trust should be paying the club will be formalised soon.
DA wants to offer the Council a deal to write off it's loan if the Director's do similar. How that benefits the council is uncertain.
No plans to get Johnson back - he's a great prospect, more pleasing to the eye than Banks, but hasn't scored.
Roberts puts his hamstring problems down to the lack of regular commuting.
Schools deal for the Yeovil game should ensure a full East stand.
The Hub is flourishing.
The new Box is rate nice. The tennant has paid for the glass/door and has done a deal to share match day rental money with the club.
Gbolly and Michael are looking rate prospects.
Maguire (who I predict will make a first team appearance next season) is going out on loan.
Our player budget is about middle of the road in L1.
CFC has no financial liability to the Village - although someone said there are CCJ's outstanding and Ashley said these would be paid.


Can't think of 'owt else at the minute.

Gardner and Clucas are both 24 so theyd better hurry up if they are going to be great players.

[brianclose]

brianclose, on 24 October 2014 - 08:38 AM, said:

Gardner and Clucas are both 24 so theyd better hurry up if they are going to be great players.

Haha I knew I'd get negged for this. The simple fact is that this is all unneccessary spin, probably paving the way for a couple of high profile departures of our players that can be called great (eg Morsy) in January. Gardner has no football league form in the book to speak of at 24. Clucas looks more promising but hardly a world beater so far. Instead of saying they are going to be great players lets give them a good run of games and find out.

Neither have shown so far that they are fit to lace Johnsons boots long term, yet we seem to have a very blase attitude about him going back.

[Andy Spireite]

BodieUK, on 24 October 2014 - 08:20 AM, said:

The purpose of the AGM is for questions such as this. Not the Fans Forum - The fans forum is concerned with the service the club provides, not necessarily financially matters and in depth on-the-pitch activities

Isn't the fans forum there to address any questions the fans have?

[Phil V 72]

brianclose, on 24 October 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

Haha I knew I'd get negged for this. The simple fact is that this is all unneccessary spin, probably paving the way for a couple of high profile departures of our players that can be called great (eg Morsy) in January. Gardner has no football league form in the book to speak of at 24. Clucas looks more promising but hardly a world beater so far. Instead of saying they are going to be great players lets give them a good run of games and find out.

Neither have shown so far that they are fit to lace Johnsons boots long term, yet we seem to have a very blase attitude about him going back.

I think it's more acceptance, there's not much we can do about it until January even if we wanted to.

Plus, if AVFC send him out on loan again mid-November to the Championship and he's a success it will be very hard for us to secure a further spell for him loan or permanent. We've put him in the shop window and his performances can't have gone unnoticed

I would love to have him here all season, but it won't happen and we have to look at what we've got surely, or to players we can afford to bring in.

This post has been edited by Phil V 72: 24 October 2014 - 10:12 AM

[dalekpete]

Westbars Spireite, on 24 October 2014 - 07:41 AM, said:

CCJs outstanding and still talk of the 'previous regime'? How many years ago are we talking about?

The CCJs are not on the Club but were said to be on the Village- there is a close relationship but it is independent.

[brianclose]

Phil V 72, on 24 October 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

I think it's more acceptance, there's not much we can do about it until January even if we wanted to.

Plus, if AVFC send him out on loan again mid-November to the Championship and he's a success it will be very hard for us to secure a further spell for him loan or permanent. We've put him in the shop window and his performances can't have gone unnoticed

I would love to have him here all season, but it won't happen and we have to look at what we've got surely, or to players we can afford to bring in.

More likely to be somewhere like MK Dons where he was on trial in the summer.

[Phil V 72]

brianclose, on 24 October 2014 - 10:15 AM, said:

More likely to be somewhere like MK Dons where he was on trial in the summer.

They've already got the best midfield playmaker outside the Prem in Randall

[Xerxes]

brianclose, on 24 October 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

Haha I knew I'd get negged for this.

I'm not surprised you seem to be relentlessly negative about everything. Please, if you're on a colossal downer stay off here, it might be contagious

[azul]

dim view, on 24 October 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

why don't you buy a few shares and get the Annual Report?.

Random recollections from last night, in no particular order......

The club has a tax debt of £104k which got 'lost but not lost' in the accounts. It is being paid immediately with, hopefully, no fine.
The accounts in the previous regime were a mess, with major use of a black hole - 'Other Operational Activities'.
Player bonus's have been streamlined.
Gardner is going to be a great player.
So is Clucas.
DA says the Tom Jones concert was a success. I don't agree with him - there were 4000 empty seats.
Monies that the Trust should be paying the club will be formalised soon.
DA wants to offer the Council a deal to write off it's loan if the Director's do similar. How that benefits the council is uncertain.
No plans to get Johnson back - he's a great prospect, more pleasing to the eye than Banks, but hasn't scored.
Roberts puts his hamstring problems down to the lack of regular commuting.
Schools deal for the Yeovil game should ensure a full East stand.
The Hub is flourishing.
The new Box is rate nice. The tennant has paid for the glass/door and has done a deal to share match day rental money with the club.
Gbolly and Michael are looking rate prospects.
Maguire (who I predict will make a first team appearance next season) is going out on loan.
Our player budget is about middle of the road in L1.
CFC has no financial liability to the Village - although someone said there are CCJ's outstanding and Ashley said these would be paid.


Can't think of 'owt else at the minute.

I suppose it will make it slightly easier for the council to sell to the electorate

No harm in trying I suppose and certainly morally correct

[Wooden Spoon]

dim view, on 24 October 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

why don't you buy a few shares and get the Annual Report?.

funny you should say that, I emailed Ashley notifying him of my change of address following on from the post by VM, and guess what came through the post this very morning?? A very nice A5 booklet CFC2001 limited financial statement for the year ending 30june 2014 Company number 04273743!!!!!!!




So, to try to answer the OP point about the fixed loans - point 15 page 15 says debenture loans are £6,108,374 and point 15 on page 16 has one year due - £1998,478 then between 1 and 2 years £247,152 between 2 and 5 years £741455 and over 5 years £1,009,871

I`m reading that as a loan in just over a year of almost £2,000,00 will be due - (is that due or is that paid off?) and so on for the others.

It doesn't really answer the original question. So, I guess the OP is still a fair question and would "simplify" thing for fans in terms of understanding the clubs structured debts with Da we had at the start of the Proact/B2net era.

This post has been edited by a kick in the balls: 24 October 2014 - 02:39 PM

[brianclose]

Xerxes, on 24 October 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

I'm not surprised you seem to be relentlessly negative about everything. Please, if you're on a colossal downer stay off here, it might be contagious

Are you one of the message board mafia? How very dare you tell me to stay off here!

Put me on ignore if you dont like it sunshine.

[Wooden Spoon]

a kick in the balls, on 24 October 2014 - 02:29 PM, said:

funny you should say that, I emailed Ashley notifying him of my change of address following on from the post by VM, and guess what came through the post this very morning?? A very nice A5 booklet CFC2001 limited financial statement for the year ending 30june 2014 Company number 04273743!!!!!!!




So, to try to answer the OP point about the fixed loans - point 15 page 15 says debenture loans are £6,108,374 and point 15 on page 16 has one year due - £1998,478 then between 1 and 2 years £247,152 between 2 and 5 years £741455 and over 5 years £1,009,871

I`m reading that as a loan in just over a year of almost £2,000,00 will be due - (is that due or is that paid off?) and so on for the others.

It doesn't really answer the original question. So, I guess the OP is still a fair question and would "simplify" thing for fans in terms of understanding the clubs structured debts with Da we had at the start of the Proact/B2net era.

page 19 - debts due within 1 year - £5,268,324




So again, are these "due" ie, will be called in, or will this debt have been paid off as part of a structured loan?

[azul]

a kick in the balls, on 24 October 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

page 19 - debts due within 1 year - £5,268,324




So again, are these "due" ie, will be called in, or will this debt have been paid off as part of a structured loan?

It will have to be a very successful season to pay that off

I feel some re-structuring of debt will be necessary

[Town_Fan]

Does anyone actually know how much the council have actually received thus far or are the trough snorting council members still playing dumb?

[Wooden Spoon]

azul, on 24 October 2014 - 03:30 PM, said:

It will have to be a very successful season to pay that off

I feel some re-structuring of debt will be necessary

this is the thing. It was said when we moved DA had 2 loans with CFC. One over 5 years and one over 10 years. With a structured payment plan. So by that the first one should be due this year ending. So the simple question - is it due, and needs to be paid off, or it due and will have been paid off?