Ron speaks

[canveyshrimper]

I think it was whitewashed and the club used as security for the debt.



Possibly West Brom, but I can't agree that the Middlesbrough model is a good one. Selling off the high-earners is necessary, but it depends on people being willing to take them on. When we transfer listed Peter Clarke there were no takers!

We tried to get rid of Foran and no-one wanted him either.

Middlesbrough managed to sell Downing & Alves for over 20 million, and they would have been two of the big wage earners. Huth & Tuncay were both sold to Stoke I think.

 

[BrettieAngell]

Middlesbrough managed to sell Downing & Alves for over 20 million, and they would have been two of the big wage earners. Huth & Tuncay were both sold to Stoke I think.

Yeah they did.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Middlesbrough managed to sell Downing & Alves for over 20 million, and they would have been two of the big wage earners. Huth & Tuncay were both sold to Stoke I think.

My point was that you can't guarantee on being able to off-load players. It's therefore a risky model.

 

[canveyshrimper]

My point was that you can't guarantee on being able to off-load players. It's therefore a risky model.

Indeed, and if you look back at Leeds they had to have a fire sale and they were not getting anywhere near the market value for a lot of the players they were forced to sell.

 

[BrettieAngell]

Indeed, and if you look back at Leeds they had to have a fire sale and they were not getting anywhere near the market value for a lot of the players they were forced to sell.

Wet Spam aswell.

 

[Richard_Cadette]

What I still don't accept is why this has happened?

The club did not spend wildly whilst in the Championshop - far from it - had they of speculated a little more, we may have stood a fighting chance of staying up. I doubt the wages increased so dramatically to be out of step with the huge increase in revenue, and let's not forget, we have been running on a wafer thin squad for the best part of 4/5 years now - if the club is in serious difficulties because of that, then yes, it is serious mis management because we are paying the small group of players we did have far too much money!

Did we not go (and forgive me if I'm wrong with the exact numbers) from a £1.5m profit to a £2.5m deficit in one year? If I am remembering correctly, that's a turn rounf od £4m!! Does that sound right to you??

Times are hard at the moment, no one can deny that, but as a club, in terms of people coming through the turnstiles, then we have been 'recession proof'. Commercially, there would undoubtedly have been a hit, but again, to the degree we now find ourselves in? I'm sorry, it doesn't add up, at all.

 

[McNasty]

What I still don't accept is why this has happened?

The club did not spend wildly whilst in the Championshop - far from it - had they of speculated a little more, we may have stood a fighting chance of staying up. I doubt the wages increased so dramatically to be out of step with the huge increase in revenue, and let's not forget, we have been running on a wafer thin squad for the best part of 4/5 years now - if the club is in serious difficulties because of that, then yes, it is serious mis management because we are paying the small group of players we did have far too much money!

Did we not go (and forgive me if I'm wrong with the exact numbers) from a £1.5m profit to a £2.5m deficit in one year? If I am remembering correctly, that's a turn rounf od £4m!! Does that sound right to you??

Times are hard at the moment, no one can deny that, but as a club, in terms of people coming through the turnstiles, then we have been 'recession proof'. Commercially, there would undoubtedly have been a hit, but again, to the degree we now find ourselves in? I'm sorry, it doesn't add up, at all.

I think the club employ nearly 100 staff so the non-playing staff must be about 65 and I think the commercial revenue has diminished in the last year or so, the club are nearly £500 short as the Zone didn't sponsor a player this year and in these hard times I am sure the overheads for the club have risen and income dropped.

 

[GBJ]

What I still don't accept is why this has happened?

The club did not spend wildly whilst in the Championshop - far from it - had they of speculated a little more, we may have stood a fighting chance of staying up. I doubt the wages increased so dramatically to be out of step with the huge increase in revenue, and let's not forget, we have been running on a wafer thin squad for the best part of 4/5 years now - if the club is in serious difficulties because of that, then yes, it is serious mis management because we are paying the small group of players we did have far too much money!

Did we not go (and forgive me if I'm wrong with the exact numbers) from a £1.5m profit to a £2.5m deficit in one year? If I am remembering correctly, that's a turn rounf od £4m!! Does that sound right to you??

Times are hard at the moment, no one can deny that, but as a club, in terms of people coming through the turnstiles, then we have been 'recession proof'. Commercially, there would undoubtedly have been a hit, but again, to the degree we now find ourselves in? I'm sorry, it doesn't add up, at all.

I can't remember where it was posted, or even who posted it, but there was a list of figures relating to our finances, where it stated nearly £300k went on Administartion fee's. What is that classed as? Does it secretly stand for.

Something else.

 

[Cricko]

GBJ you can't say that. Post edited.

 

[weststander]

I can't remember where it was posted, or even who posted it, but there was a list of figures relating to our finances, where it stated nearly £300k went on Administartion fee's. What is that classed as? Does it secretly stand for.

Something else.

I believe that £100k of that was spent on the share issue, we were told at the AGM we empoyed a top notch bunch of solicitors and that they were expecting a much bigger take up on the offer.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

What I still don't accept is why this has happened?

The club did not spend wildly whilst in the Championshop - far from it - had they of speculated a little more, we may have stood a fighting chance of staying up.

It is exactly that sort of attitude that gets clubs into such serious problems. We did speculate: we signed Richie Foran in a disastrous panic move.

I wouldn't necessarily say we spent wildly, but I do think we spent beyond our means in an attempt to stay in the division. Clarke, Hammell, Francis, Ricketts, McCormack, Paynter, JCR. They all cost big wages and some of them cost big transfer fees as well. We also expanded our squad size, after constant moaning during our consecutive promotions, which means extra costs as well as wage increases.

I doubt the wages increased so dramatically to be out of step with the huge increase in revenue, and let's not forget, we have been running on a wafer thin squad for the best part of 4/5 years now - if the club is in serious difficulties because of that, then yes, it is serious mis management because we are paying the small group of players we did have far too much money!

Our squad hasn't been wafer thin for the last couple of years. We've had about 7 options up front for the last few years until we off-loaded Revell and Walker from the wage bill.

Did we not go (and forgive me if I'm wrong with the exact numbers) from a £1.5m profit to a £2.5m deficit in one year? If I am remembering correctly, that's a turn rounf od £4m!! Does that sound right to you??

No, it doesn't sound right to me, but the figure that sticks out to me as exceptional is the profit, not the loss. We had exceptional success on the field, the type that you can't bank on. This produced a temporary spike in profits, helped by the fact that Ron's company wrote off substantial debts.

Times are hard at the moment, no one can deny that, but as a club, in terms of people coming through the turnstiles, then we have been 'recession proof'. Commercially, there would undoubtedly have been a hit, but again, to the degree we now find ourselves in? I'm sorry, it doesn't add up, at all.

The sums add up and balance in the sense of the double-entry book-keeping system, but they don't add up in the sense of producing a profit.

The club was previously being propped up by Ron Martin's company's overdraft. The credit crunch and property recession have taken this away.

 

[OldBlueLady]

It is exactly that sort of attitude that gets clubs into such serious problems. We did speculate: we signed Richie Foran in a disastrous panic move.

I wouldn't necessarily say we spent wildly, but I do think we spent beyond our means in an attempt to stay in the division. Clarke, Hammell, Francis, Ricketts, McCormack, Paynter, JCR. They all cost big wages and some of them cost big transfer fees as well. We also expanded our squad size, after constant moaning during our consecutive promotions, which means extra costs as well as wage increases.

You're way off there, there's a very well documented story about how little he actually did cost in both wages and transfer fees.

 

[ElstreeBlue]

It is exactly that sort of attitude that gets clubs into such serious problems. We did speculate: we signed Richie Foran in a disastrous panic move.

I wouldn't necessarily say we spent wildly, but I do think we spent beyond our means in an attempt to stay in the division. Clarke, Hammell, Francis, Ricketts, McCormack, Paynter, JCR. They all cost big wages and some of them cost big transfer fees as well. We also expanded our squad size, after constant moaning during our consecutive promotions, which means extra costs as well as wage increases.




Our squad hasn't been wafer thin for the last couple of years. We've had about 7 options up front for the last few years until we off-loaded Revell and Walker from the wage bill.




No, it doesn't sound right to me, but the figure that sticks out to me as exceptional is the profit, not the loss. We had exceptional success on the field, the type that you can't bank on. This produced a temporary spike in profits, helped by the fact that Ron's company wrote off substantial debts.



The sums add up and balance in the sense of the double-entry book-keeping system, but they don't add up in the sense of producing a profit.

The club was previously being propped up by Ron Martin's company's overdraft. The credit crunch and property recession have taken this away.

I agree, YB - the profit was unusual and was down to the success on the field. But we have had other success over the last few years, excellent cup draws and cup runs, higher attendances, etc. Whichever way you look at it, the club has had several events that should have been windfalls to enable Tilly to spend on building the team if we had spent within our means, rather than those events having covered over the cracks of poor financial management. The club has over-spent and not budgeted properly to balance the books. Not a sustainable way to run the club.

I think the best thing that Ron Martin has done in the last few years was one of the least popular. When certain players were demanding even more money from our club about 15 months ago, he did exactly the right thing and didn't rise to their ridiculous wage demands. How many people who were then claiming we should have given in to Clarke, Bailey, etc's wage demands and were criticising Martin for not doing so, having no ambition, etc still think that would have been a wise course of action?

We should never have spent money on things we couldn't afford. The money that drained away on Clarke, Foran, Ricketts, Paynter, etc in the Championship was a huge gamble and risked our future, and none of them proved a good investment. Worse still was not planning for the highly likely relegation and keeping our cost level at Championship levels. Had that lesson not been learnt from about 12 years ago when the same thing nearly ruined us?

I can't believe that some people on this board are not bothered enough to ask just HOW and WHY the board could possibly have racked up an ANNUAL loss of £2.4m. They still blindly trust the board to look after the club because we have a chairman who likes speaking to the fans and making populist statements. ESPECIALLY as the long-term financial plan for the club's stability at the new stadium has still never been properly explained to the fans. It has seemed to me that the club has been living on borrowed time in order to get the new development built, but then what for the club? The club would be a mere tenant and no doubt required to pay rent. If it's making such a big loss now, how would things have been any better in the new stadium unless we got a massive increase in attendances again? Yes, a new stadium would be nice to watch games from, but when has the financial viability FOR THE CLUB and not the stadium operating company ever been properly explained?

Because of the credit crunch, things have come crashing down sooner than they would otherwise have done. But how could we have expected to live with such big losses and expect to survive?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

You're way off there, there's a very well documented story about how little he actually did cost in both wages and transfer fees.

Well documented where?

I'd suggest he cost more in transfer fees, signing on fees and wages than Mark Bentley, the player he effectively replaced*.






*As in he took his place, not that he was as good as the God-like Benno.

 

[OldBlueLady]

Well documented where?

I'd suggest he cost more in transfer fees, signing on fees and wages than Mark Bentley, the player he effectively replaced*.

*As in he took his place, not that he was as good as the God-like Benno.

Ok, maybe well verbalised is a better way of putting it. Not my story so I'm not going to report something so obviously hearsay, but suffice to say, he apparently took a massive drop in wages to come to us from Preston so that he could PLAY.

 

[Firestorm]

I can't remember where it was posted, or even who posted it, but there was a list of figures relating to our finances, where it stated nearly £300k went on Administartion fee's. What is that classed as? Does it secretly stand for.

Something else.

If you were referring to my post I said that Administrative expenses (that it expenses not asscociated with wages ) was, for the year to 31/7/08 2M.

That would be, rental on B&L and RH, 500k (whilst being waived they still have to be accounted for, Electricity bills , Council tax on both RH and B&L . Cost of maintaining the ground and the training ground. ( i have had a chance to think about it since posting that they were an unknown quantity.
It may well include things like police and st johns fees as well