[Tylerdurdencfc]

itsc, on 19 February 2017 - 08:12 PM, said:

Mike

I think we have to look at the figures first when we moved to the stadium, we spent things that we couldn't really afford and hence the reason we had to get DA to save us the first time round.

I don't think any thought was put into the actually running costs of the club when we moved either so the business plan from Day 1 failed and
It would be interesting to see if there actually was one? Or budget figures that could be used to ensure running costs where kept to within the target.

Sometimes when it is someone else's money you are spending it is not the same as your own and in larger organisations this can happen and you see overspends

So all in all it's been a problem from day one of the new stadium

Didn't we make an £80k profit the first season when it was run by Barry and Carol, without selling anyone, they were then conveniently shifted out under the cloud that things weren't being run properly.

More likely they got in the way.

[Spire-Power]

To me, admin is the cost of running the stadium (buildings repairs rent water council tax phones heating lighting). Maybe office and ground staff but not playing staff?

This post has been edited by Spire-Power: 19 February 2017 - 08:51 PM

[Guest_freelander2_*]

itsc, on 19 February 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

Mike

That is PART of the problem not THE problem

The original cost is not a red herring at all, how can it be when we have had to have a loan to bail us out ? That affects the profitability of the business year on year

I think you are blinkered in your assessments, recheck the overhaul running costs over the first 5 years perhaps ?

There was said to be a £2M funding shortfall on the stadium build, the interest charge to the P&L associated with that additional funding is £100K! It's a nominal cost when compared against the significant increase in wages, NI & pension costs.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

Spire-Power, on 19 February 2017 - 08:47 PM, said:

To me, admin is the cost of running the stadium (buildings repairs rent water council tax phones heating lighting). Maybe office and ground staff but not playing staff?

Hopefully this will work.

how do you print screen

[Spire-Power]

Out of my league. Staff costs are separate from admin and motor costs on my self assessment return!

[60s 70s Spireite]

Cost of funding £100k less in 2016 than in 2012. Mmm....

[Mr Mercury]

itsc, on 19 February 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

Mike

That is PART of the problem not THE problem

The original cost is not a red herring at all, how can it be when we have had to have a loan to bail us out ? That affects the profitability of the business year on year

I think you are blinkered in your assessments, recheck the overhaul running costs over the first 5 years perhaps ?

So if that PART of the problem has been about for SEVEN years why is it still an issue. I think you're blinkered in your appraisal.

[The Black Triangle]

freelander2, on 19 February 2017 - 09:06 PM, said:

Hopefully this will work.

how do you print screen

Your saying year 1 we made 80k without player sales and year 2 we made 40 with exceptional player sales?

[Guest_freelander2_*]

The Black Triangle, on 19 February 2017 - 09:28 PM, said:

Your saying year 1 we made 80k without player sales and year 2 we made 40 with exceptional player sales?

The first column is the P&L for y/e 2012 & the second column is for y/e 2016.

Your analysis is correct.

[Stockholm Spireite]

dtp, on 19 February 2017 - 08:19 PM, said:

Was it really?

And, you know that for a fact?

Yes I do. This powder has been kept dry ever since

[Tylerdurdencfc]

So we are nearly £1million down in terms of the TV and league income plus the commercial side of things.

That couple with increases in staff wages and national insurance contributions and agent fees have seen the losses build, therefore you have to question why has commercial income reduce by nearly £600k this in 2016 compared to 2012 and why has it been allowed that staff wages have increased by over a million quid at the same time.

Plus what has the extra £125k been spent on at the centre of excellence? Anyone know?

This post has been edited by Tylerdurdencfc: 19 February 2017 - 10:15 PM

[The Black Triangle]

freelander2, on 19 February 2017 - 09:44 PM, said:

The first column is the P&L for y/e 2012 & the second column is for y/e 2016.

Your analysis is correct.

Magic stuff then to replace Hubbard with Turner and Carson. He's a sharp cookie, that Dave Allen.

[The Black Triangle]

freelander2, on 19 February 2017 - 09:44 PM, said:

The first column is the P&L for y/e 2012 & the second column is for y/e 2016.

Your analysis is correct.

Looking again, a few things leap out.

Player excellence centre costs 150k more. Agents fees 230k more, wages and NI 1.4 million higher.

Was 2012 L2 though?

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

itsc, on 19 February 2017 - 08:12 PM, said:

Mike

I think we have to look at the figures first when we moved to the stadium, we spent things that we couldn't really afford and hence the reason we had to get DA to save us the first time round.

I don't think any thought was put into the actually running costs of the club when we moved either so the business plan from Day 1 failed and
It would be interesting to see if there actually was one? Or budget figures that could be used to ensure running costs where kept to within the target.

Sometimes when it is someone else's money you are spending it is not the same as your own and in larger organisations this can happen and you see overspends

So all in all it's been a problem from day one of the new stadium

Steve.

I can understand your loyalty to DA and Co given your company's recent appointment as IT provider and being the 'go to' match day sponsor.

However I feel that loyalty is blinding you to reality.

CFC is insolvent. It's a situation that's developed year on year during DA's tenure. What's more we've been at the new stadium for seven years so any flaws in the owner's business plan should've been ironed out long ago. However all we've witnessed is the debt continuing to spiral, scandals that're surely too regular to be mere coincidence and the CEO overseeing all this belatedly sidelined.

No other of DA's businesses are run like this which raises huge questions in the minds of objective onlookers.

[Skywalker]

At the time of the stadium move, a friend of mine was part of a consortium looking to invest. They had access to the books and once analysed decided the investment proposal wasn't viable. The business plan proposed to them was in their words 'flawed'. At around the same time, I attended a party where BH was a guest. Barry stated that Dave Allen was the only only viable source of investment to facilitate the move to the new ground.

[60s 70s Spireite]

Skywalker, on 20 February 2017 - 10:22 AM, said:

At the time of the stadium move, a friend of mine was part of a consortium looking to invest. They had access to the books and once analysed decided the investment proposal wasn't viable. The business plan proposed to them was in their words 'flawed'. At around the same time, I attended a party where BH was a guest. Barry stated that Dave Allen was the only only viable source of investment to facilitate the move to the new ground.

I can't see how the normal 'investment' model is appropriate for a lower league club like ours. To generate the funds to pay for the stadium will be impossible, the club needs a far higher capital base than it currently has. But there again one wouldn't expect to have seen the losses our club has suffered after all the transfer fees received.
This article on the BBC is worth a read. As regards the last paragraph, as a number of us have stated before, CFC Losses can't be offset against A & S Leisure as they are not part of the same 'tax' group.
Why would you buy a lower league club:
http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/36266364

[60s 70s Spireite]

itsc, on 20 February 2017 - 11:00 AM, said:

Chris


Nothing to do with loyalty and people are well aware of our appointment not sure why you have to keep repeating yourself, perhaps the old age setting in

22k Loss, 80k Profit in first couple of years wasn't it, but all depends on how well the team do in a season ?
When we won Div 2 with Cookie I seem to think we lost about 1M and we did again when we won in 2010/11 season (Players bonuses etc..)

If you invest in something you expect rewards sometimes this doesn't happen.

We aren't insolvent (yet) as DA has agreed to pay each year, once he stops doing that we are knackered.

Our interest payment were higher in the first couple of years, that has been reduced.
Sometimes you have to rely on people to do a job when you are spinning a few plates

So CFC have nothing to learn for the likes of Walsall, Rochdale, Wycombe, Exeter? Nothing to learn from their mistakes?

[Guest_freelander2_*]

itsc, on 20 February 2017 - 11:14 AM, said:

Mike

Any reason why you chose 2012 ? or was it because we made a profit in that Year

2011 was a loss when we won the league wasn't it ?

So major Differences are Agent Fees and Centre of Excellence, we can do something about one but not the other I don't think

Smaller Players Budget means probably mid table and low Gates
Larger Players Budget should mean pushing for promotion and bigger gates, but we know in reality that doesn't work sometimes

Funny game football

I'm missing the full accounts for 2011 & 2014.

2012 was selected because it was the strongest year under the control of Hubbard & Walters. Which year would you like me to compare 2016 against? Whichever year you compare it against, it tells the same story, our current wage bill is unsustainable.