Breaking News Accounts Released 2011/12

[Mick]

I have sent an email to Ron direct asking if it was correct we had paid rent for the first time, and his response was "No its not correct.".

Make of that what you will but doesnt sound like money has been paid/taken....

Ah but what is not correct ?

We have paid rent OR it was the first time .

 

[Firestorm]

Interesting, although I'm more curious about the £6.85m investment that has been made from the Roots Hall company.

RHL is the company set up solely to own RH and facilitate a tax efficient sale. RHL as the owner of RH will be the only company allowed to obtain a loan secured on RH . Any funds advanced by Sainsbury will have to go to RHL who in turn lend it to the football club

 

[chapperzUK]

RHL is the company set up solely to own RH and facilitate a tax efficient sale. RHL as the owner of RH will be the only company allowed to obtain a loan secured on RH . Any funds advanced by Sainsbury will have to go to RHL who in turn lend it to the football club

I see, it just confused me a bit as it is shown as a fixed asset. I guess that is why the creditors for RHL has nearly doubled to around £20m?

 

[Jam_Man]

Interesting, although I'm more curious about the £6.85m investment that has been made from the Roots Hall company.

Isnt that just the money Sainsbury lent us ?

Or is that new since 2010 ?

 

[Firestorm]

Ah but what is not correct ?

We have paid rent OR it was the first time .

The accounts say charged not paid. Also says waived in recent times not for the first time.
Anyone who had seen that bit in the accounts would answer No to that particular question.

Its a way of putting some income into RHL (to the detriment of the football clubs liabilities) so that they look like they are capable of servicing the debt to Sainsbury.

Some may call it smoke and mirrors but its seems kosher to me. But not being a qualified accountant I may be misguided

 

[Firestorm]

I see, it just confused me a bit as it is shown as a fixed asset. I guess that is why the creditors for RHL has nearly doubled to around £20m?

I think thats because its a loan without repayments and no fixed repayment date as opposed to a defined maturity date. But its starting to get a bit beyond my knowledge....

 

[chapperzUK]

I think thats because its a loan without repayments and no fixed repayment date as opposed to a defined maturity date. But its starting to get a bit beyond my knowledge....

Same here, I've only had limited experience with associated companies and most I've done accounts for are when there are 2 owned by the same person(s).

Just a thought, could it be the purchase of the properties around Roots Hall or is that Sainsburys that is acquiring that?

 

[class]

To echo what Chapperz has said, just because the accounts disclose that £450k rent has been charged, it does not necessarily mean that cash has changed hands between the companies. It would be shown as an intercompany transaction.

 

[Cricko]

To echo what Chapperz has said, just because the accounts disclose that £450k rent has been charged, it does not necessarily mean that cash has changed hands between the companies. It would be shown as an intercompany transaction.

Lol, yep those old intercompany transfers are a god send ;)

 

[Pubey]

So there's no evidence of money moving out of the club to the owning companies (apart from the admin fees/costs?)

 

[Cricko]

So there's no evidence of money moving out of the club to the owning companies (apart from the admin fees/costs?)

It's a tad difficult I would say Jon to move actual money about when there is none to start with...It is just shifting paperwork at times to make one company seem more solvent than another when it suits.

 

[Wise Head]

These accounts for the club yr ended 31/07/12, show what has been achieved by Ron in his quest to take us forward in his first 13 years in charge.

When he took over we owned our own ground worth approx £10/12 million at the time but with an overdraft of £4 million, leaving net asset value of £6/8 million approx.

After 13 years of Ron, we don't own the ground, have no assets and have net borrowing and hence negative net asset value of £11.45 million.

While we were in theory being charged £520k a year in rent by one of Ron's company we have always been assured that this has been waived - not anymore as £450k was charged in this set accounts. Debt is now approaching 4 times our annual turnover, the new ground hasn't begun and even if built won't have a main stand - what a complete & utter shambles off the pitch.

 

[Jam_Man]

These accounts for the club yr ended 31/07/12, show what has been achieved by Ron in his quest to take us forward in his first 13 years in charge.

When he took over we owned our own ground worth approx £10/12 million at the time but with an overdraft of £4 million, leaving net asset value of £6/8 million approx.

After 13 years of Ron, we don't own the ground, have no assets and have net borrowing and hence negative net asset value of £11.45 million.

While we were in theory being charged £520k a year in rent by one of Ron's company we have always been assured that this has been waived - not anymore as £450k was charged in this set accounts. Debt is now approaching 4 times our annual turnover, the new ground hasn't begun and even if built won't have a main stand - what a complete & utter shambles off the pitch.

Someone suggested he deserved a statue recently too....

The debts may well be cleared by the development, but as we arent able to finance the 4th stand Im not sure how thats possible.

 

[Firestorm]

These accounts for the club yr ended 31/07/12, show what has been achieved by Ron in his quest to take us forward in his first 13 years in charge.

When he took over we owned our own ground worth approx £10/12 million at the time but with an overdraft of £4 million, leaving net asset value of £6/8 million approx.

After 13 years of Ron, we don't own the ground, have no assets and have net borrowing and hence negative net asset value of £11.45 million.

While we were in theory being charged £520k a year in rent by one of Ron's company we have always been assured that this has been waived - not anymore as £450k was charged in this set accounts. Debt is now approaching 4 times our annual turnover, the new ground hasn't begun and even if built won't have a main stand - what a complete & utter shambles off the pitch.

The accounts for 1996 showed total assets of 4m . Vic then ramped them up to make them more attractive to buyers but I cant see that they were anywhere near 10m . They had to be written down within the next two years.
Thats, however, just my understanding from the accounts of that period. Could you tell me where the 10m figure you have quoted comes from .

 

[Smiffy]

These accounts for the club yr ended 31/07/12, show what has been achieved by Ron in his quest to take us forward in his first 13 years in charge.

When he took over we owned our own ground worth approx £10/12 million at the time but with an overdraft of £4 million, leaving net asset value of £6/8 million approx.

After 13 years of Ron, we don't own the ground, have no assets and have net borrowing and hence negative net asset value of £11.45 million.

While we were in theory being charged £520k a year in rent by one of Ron's company we have always been assured that this has been waived - not anymore as £450k was charged in this set accounts. Debt is now approaching 4 times our annual turnover, the new ground hasn't begun and even if built won't have a main stand - what a complete & utter shambles off the pitch.

Spot on.

No doubt about it, we have gone backwards in a massive way.

With a debt probably in excess of £12m for 2012/13 my fear is we are now well past the point of no return.

How on earth are we going to be able to service that debt with a 3 sided shambles?

Here are most of the League 2 clubs Key Financials.....How anyone can say we are in a similar boat to most other League 2 clubs is beyond me....

Oxford: Liabilities = £1,661,805
Assets = £295,917
Net Worth = £-6,069,640

Accrington: Liabilities = £469,152
Assets = £243,042
Net Worth = £-327,224

Scunthorpe: Liabilities = £1,146,350
Assets = £473,461
Net Worth = £3,022,455

Fleetwood: Liabilities = £24,066
Assets = £14,975
Net Worth = £107,303

Rochdale: Liabilities = £551,176
Assets = £1,101,152
Net Worth = £951,824

Burton: Liabilities = £489,251
Assets = £243,241
Net Worth = £5,703,632

Newport: Liabilities = £586,326
Assets = £234,941
Net Worth = £-700,931

Daggers: Liabilities = £503,443
Assets = £410,889
Net Worth = £482,593

AFC Wombles: Liabilities = £1,676,448
Assets = £938,035
Net Worth = £281,192

Morecambe: Liabilities = £962,827
Assets = £367,983
Net Worth = £6,124,240

Plymouth: Liabilities = £1,526,463
Assets = £517,728
Net Worth = £-4,446,678

York: Liabilities = £2,650,188
Assets = £283,043
Net Worth = £-818,809

Cheltenham: Liabilities = £1,839,032
Assets = £775,020
Net Worth = £753,631

Hartlepool: Liabilities = £13,026,391
Assets = £525,928
Net Worth = £-12,281,355

Pompey: Liabilities = £10,246,414
Assets = £14,472,649
Net Worth = £3,627,324

Mansfield: Liabilities = £3,912,852
Assets = £359,667
Net Worth = £-3,493,696

Bristol R: Liabilities = £7,141,313
Assets = £436,689
Net Worth = £-6,662,116

Wycombe: Liabilities = £1,911,812
Assets = £1,153,331
Net Worth = £-367,468

Torquay: Liabilities = £757,150
Assets = £263,316
Net Worth = £434,494

Northampton: Liabilities = £1,674,857
Assets = £209,383
Net Worth = £-7,570,061

Other than Hartlepool, we are the worst looking club in League 2 by quite some distance. It gives me hope Hartlepool are still around though. Quite how I don't know, with their gates.

Interesting that half of these clubs have a Net Worth in the black. So the fact we are getting on for -£10m + net worth is very worrying.

 

[chapperzUK]

Where did you get those figures from? Would be interested to do a bit of research myself.

Also, it is 2011/12 the accounts were submitted for and not 2012/13 which actually makes it worse.

 

[Smiffy]

Where did you get those figures from? Would be interested to do a bit of research myself.

Also, it is 2011/12 the accounts were submitted for and not 2012/13 which actually makes it worse.

I just took the key financials from the Company Check website. Yes I was sad enough to search all the clubs. Some I couldn't find as they probably have some weird alternate name.

Yes I know it was 11/12, so as you say I suspect it will look even worse for 12/13 when submitted. Although perhaps the Wembley trip may have reduced the losses slightly?...

 

[chapperzUK]

I just took the key financials from the Company Check website. Yes I was sad enough to search all the clubs. Some I couldn't find as they probably have some weird alternate name.

Yes I know it was 11/12, so as you say I suspect it will look even worse for 12/13 when submitted. Although perhaps the Wembley trip may have reduced the losses slightly?...

Well Ron did say we would break-even ....

Although the debt would probably still go up as for the first part of the season we were still making a loss each month until tickets for Wembley went on sale.

 

[Smiffy]

Well Ron did say we would break-even ....

Although the debt would probably still go up as for the first part of the season we were still making a loss each month until tickets for Wembley went on sale.

Hmmm. Well I guess we will find out by this time next year...

:nope:

 

[londonblue]

The accounts for 1996 showed total assets of 4m . Vic then ramped them up to make them more attractive to buyers but I cant see that they were anywhere near 10m . They had to be written down within the next two years.
Thats, however, just my understanding from the accounts of that period. Could you tell me where the 10m figure you have quoted comes from .

Indeed. Vic over valued Roots Hall in order to secure loans against it.

As an aside, anyone that would trust the accounts drawn up under Vic Jobson as gospel would have to have their head read. He was worse than Ron.