Tales From The Front Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Bottom line is Steve Lansdown, Keith Dawe fortifiy the balance sheet by increasing the share capital to off-set the huge losses. Even if you discount the exceptional items of new stadium investment, there is still a big trading deficit as explained in the chairmans statement. We caanot expect to get to the play-off final every year so we need more revenue streams and that is why the new stadium is vital. cardiff have seen a big increase in attendance from a similalr (but worse) former stadium to AG. What this shows is that if City's expenditure is equal to its income you can forget your Nicky Maynards etc, so it really is best to support the wishes of the board who have promoted the ground move, becuase they beleive it is the only viable way to sustain and gain a return on their ever increasing investment. There is no utopia or fantasy solution to running a football club I'm affraid and the latest accounts all to well illustrate that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Pretty alarmed at this. Occasionally pay attention to the financial results, £1m loss here or there, but for it to treble in a year!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tales From The Front Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Pretty alarmed at this. Occasionally pay attention to the financial results, £1m loss here or there, but for it to treble in a year!?! It is exactly the difference between financial reality and the crys of "sack the board" up and down the country. Its the side of football that has little interest in the stands until disaster strikes...a la Leeds and then the hunt for a scape goat starts. We should be very grateful that we have a board who have acknowedged that the current business model only works with their continuious investment and personal expense and has therefore worked tirelessely to try and ensure that a new model is put in place. That in a nutshell is why tommorow nights meeting is so vitally important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Fair enough, don't know the lingo. The same bit about "going concern" has been there the last few years. Nibor, what's it like to be "owned" by an accountant? PS What happened to City Ben? He was going to get back to us. Must be a page-turner.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Nibor, what's it like to be "owned" by an accountant? If it ever happens I'll be sure to let you know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 "Most of this goes on wages and our wage bill even now is in the lower half of the Championship table. "We only stay in this division because we have a very supportive board of directors who continue to pump money into the club to make it viable." It really does make you appreciate our board. And indeed our manager who makes a team in the bottom 12 financially into a top 6 team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippycar Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iWurzel Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 The worrying figures that stand out for me are: Accumulated losses of £23,334,334 Other operating charges of £4,584,361 The ongoing losses are just staggering and exactly what are the other operating charges and why are they so high? I would suggest looking at the structure of the P&L that other operating charges are everything apart from finance charges, staff costs and depreciation/amortisation. So this will include everything from maintenance to running the shop, to catering costs, security, you name it it's probably in there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Ben Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Ben Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 ... and just as I was typing that CS has helpfully released a report picking out what the commercial upsides would be. As follows: Commercial outlets Hotels Sponsorship Banqueting Other sports/ents/concerts It talks of £10m in salaries for 360 people - that's more than I expected. If they think that salaries in the new development will be that much you can expect that revenue will be 2x - 3x that. Not all of that would come to City, but you're getting a feel for the scale of the development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 Nibor, what's it like to be "owned" by an accountant? PS What happened to City Ben? He was going to get back to us. Must be a page-turner.... lols, did Nibor get 'wtf pwned' by a bean counter? he'll never live it down! Anyways, some very interresting points on this thread, cheers to the number crunchers who posted their thoughts. My personal thoughts are that SL wears his City hat before his businessman hat more offen than not. We fans see the benifit of his love for Bristol City crystal clear. He is taking a risk, but its a risk of passion and not pure profit, the potential rewards are massive for Bristol City, and what good is money if you can't do somthing worthwhile with it? No good it being sat in the bank forever, where is the fun in that, you can't take it with you and noone will remeber you when your gone for having a lot of naughts after a number on your bank balance will they? but SL has the oppertunity to leave a great legacy for us, somthing we can be proud of, he can be proud of. There is more to life that profit margins and while its important to run our club as profitable as we can, its not everything, I think SL understands this oh too well, and bloody good on him for it too, we are fortunate to have him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zookeeper Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 Interesting to see that the £3m stadium loan was funded by SL with him being owed £5m in total. Also the club spend a net £1.15M on transfer fees since the accounts were done. I'd also assume that some of these professional fees in relation to the stadium could be capitalised as part of the project? Is that not the case until it has been given the go ahead or an asset created? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Ben Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 Yep, that's right Mr Keeper. SL has paid for everything. He's owed a lot more that £5m in total! That loan isn't on bad terms for either party either - 2% more than Barclays' base rate. Probably given the risk attached to lending to us any commercial loan would be more expensive than that. He is "rolling up" the interest though - means he doesn't get paid a penny until the very end of the term. This is great for City from a cash perspective for City, but it does mean the debt is more expensive - the interest compunds. On the adviser fees - I think you're right. These should be able to be capitalised, but probably not until there is an asset in the course of construction. Which isn't yet. This is just another example of the accounting funnies though, which can muddy the water significantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.