Thetownend.com

http://thewashbag.com/2012/04/24/counting-the-cost-of-failure/

1.3 mill loss then.

And to think there were some saying we didn't spend enough.

That'll be all those players ln 10k a week ;)

That's last season, bear that in mind.

Will that include Austin money?

We spent 500k this year though.

I have had a skim read.  Frustrating that we're looking in the rear view mirror, to an extent (given that the accounts under discussion are for the year ended 31/05/2011), but interesting none the less.  Not great, but neither am I horrified; the 2010/11 season being one of the lowest points in our history.  Andrew Fitton gets good marks as a scout (Ferry, Caddis) but those redundancy costs...ouch!

I will give it a closer read later on.

Yeah

It's not that bad considering it includes investing in Caddis, Ferry, Ritchie and Flint. As you said, looking in the rear view mirror, It's hard to believe that those players won't see us at least recoup that money in the future.

That will include agents fees and signing on fees etc

What sort of contract was Hart and Mcpharlane on where they get quite a sizable redundancy?

How sizable?

£263,982 , ok thats for five members of staff: Danny Wilson, Peter Shirtliff, George Wood, Paul Hart and Ian McPartland

i'm not sure how contracts and stuff works, but shouldn't wilson and  hart have been sacked without compensation?

Those cunts should have been paying us.

Very true.  One of the anomalies (or quirks) of financial reporting for football clubs is that the carrying values of the better, more marketable players are not capitalised and shown as balance sheet assets.  All for understandable reasons - how exactly would you obtain the fair value for a player?  But nevertheless it does mean that the financial statements recognise the cash outlay in the P&L account, but not the associated asset value in the balance sheet...which skews the picture.  Club accounts are going to look rosy in the years when we sell talent and less so when we buy - which is misleading, unless the spending is profligate.

Hart and MacParland were both on very short term contracts with bonuses linked to survival....which we did not so I would imagine it would not have been much of a golden handshake more of a shitty fuck off.

accounts can be misleading. particularly with players.

for example at liverpool stevie g is worth £0 on the accounts and andy carroll £35m.

Wonder how many threads on the Oxford forum there will be about this?

Surely it's better to keep player values off the balance sheet as if they appeared as an asset it would push the club into profit upon which they would pay tax.

As for Oxford, they also made a loss of about £200-300,000, and that's for staying in League 2 and with the prospect of staying there for a while.

Another successful season next year will easily turn that loss round, if indeed the Wembey visit, FA Cup run and winning the League hasn't already done that.

I would expect, though, that the cost of the 'wasted' signings this season wont make for good reading.

£1.3m, while a large amount for us, is probably chicken-feed for our backers

it still goes down as a loan to the club though, the blog says theres £10m or so debt - what if they remove their backing and ask for the money to be repaid

There's always that risk

But why take over the club (and its debt) in the first place?

On a different topic, does anyone know how many ST's we've sold for next season?

It's all about having supportive backers.  If the present owners did as you suggest, withdrew their backing and asked for all their cash back, it would be self-defeating.  The club would not be able to find the money, the value of the owners' investment in the club would fall to zero, the club would fold and the owners would end up selling the goal posts and kit bags to recoup a small part of their investment.  The thing is, they are supportive owners and we all know that isn't going to happen.

A much more likely exit route, if/when they do eventually sell up, would be to sell the club as a going concern to a new owner...as is now happening at Reading.  Clearly, it is in the present owners' financial interests that the club/business thrives in order to provide a future return on their investment.  This is also why we can be reasonably sure that ground redevelopment is going to be fairly high now on the 'to do' list, because of its potential to act as a catalyst for future growth.

a couple of weeks ago at the end of phase one the club said around 4000...so hopefully add a few hundred to that figure

In an ideal world yes.  In the real world no.  We gave them the contracts so they are intitled to compo if we terminate the it early.

So if i got the sack from my job...i could get compensation?!

Depends why you got sacked

Contracts in the worlds of football and real life arent the same.  They should be but they arent

Paying 'compensation for loss of office' while asking the employee to sign a Compromise Agreement, in which they waive any rights to make any future claims on the employer, is a mechanism often used by employers to avoid potential legal pitfalls in the future.

Depends on what your contract says. As I understand it football uses contracts of a fixed length, so when the contract is terminated early, the rest of the contract period should be paid (or at least provide a negotiating point) For most of us plebs, we'll only have a specified notice period as opposed to a fixed contract end date.  Plus what Ardiles said.

" The transfers to new pastures of Gordon Greer, Sean Morrison, Charlie Austin and David Prutton generated a net receipt of £1,664,815"

So what was the real figure that Charlie was sold for, at the time we were told 1.6 or is my memory going. That total figure suggest it was a hell of a lot less than that.

Hang on.

We got money for Prutton?

Or, the total figure may have included add-ons that may feature in more recent years' accounts ?

Or we had to pay Poole Town a substantial %

£1.6 was probably the total including all the additional little bits coming off.  In reality Burnley would only have plaid a small fraction the amount up front!

Agreed, they are probably paying it off over the next two seasons!

I always thought the full initial figure would appear on the P&L - even if its paid over a number of years. What wouldnt be included would be add-ons for appearences and stuff.

Premiership teams must be looking at him now that he's scored a few goals in the championship, hopefully we'll get a good sell on %

There will be bits in there maybe relating to additional payments if:

Austin makes so many appearances.
Austin is part of the Burnley side that gets back up.
Or scores so many goals.  

Hopefully there is an entitlement to a sell on fee in there as well!

But surely you cant recognise money you havent received?

I think i'm right in saying that would be shown in the cash flow

Think I read somewhere that Rotherham (?) got a decent payout from Le Fondre 'cos Reading went up

something like 300,000 i read yesterday. evans will probably spend it all on food, the fat cunt.

No, it is a contingent asset which gets disclosed as note to the accounts but is not included in profit & loss or balance sheet.

To be honest £1.2M is a big loss, but less than I thought. Not sure I want to see  this seasons accounts though.

This should bring home the fact we are lucky to at present have generous backers. If they pulled out we'd be fucked. I think the same is true of 90%+ of clubs though.

Well done Wilson, I was just waiting to see who'd be the first to spot that !

Actually think this years will be better.

Wouldn't be at all surprised. Our wage bill will be less, attendances are almost the same as last season and the two cup runs will have generated a fair bit of revenue I expect.

How will the money that Arbib and Black thrown into the club the shown in next years books?

Will it be added to the turnover to bump up that figure to bring us in line with the turnovers rules or will it just to the long term loans the club has?

Revenues should be stronger, especially with the cup run receipts - but also with the 'walk up' being as high as they are (as fans of other clubs keep reminding us).  Costs - who can tell?  I hope we kept it sensible.

That would be a fantastic achievement.

Not sure how you can state that our wage bill will be less, given the turnover and quantity of players we've got through. 

We got rid of some big earners.

Also, a lot of the foreign contingent were apparently not getting much at all. Don't forget also that the turnover is misleading because of the mass clear out we had. Our squad is quite big, but it isn't that big.

Look how many and who we released

anybody got a link to the p/l accounts, balance sheets & other financial statements

How does this compare to previous seasons of the Wray & Fitton era

I'm sure if the washbag has downloaded the accounts from HMRC he can make the full accounts available somewhere as a pdf so the rest of the detail can be read rather than just the headline figure

I will upload the accounts tonight or later in the week when I have some free time

Do it now pissface

They're  on my home pc cuntchops

50p and a pack of Lidl pork scratchings. Nonetheless a result!

thank you

They've already loaned the club significant sums over the 2010 and 2011 accounts, and as anticipated they'll make further contributions which will show in the 2012 accounts. Previous sums have been loans and on favourable terms, but these fall for replayment in 2013, so not 'long term loans'...

As for this year's contributions to get around the turnover rules, not quite sure how that'll show in accounts. Have to wait and see next year...

Here's they are.

Exactly this. That said we have spent money on players and then there's the players we have paid off as well. Not to mention Di Canio and his staff who are probably on a fair whack.