Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: FA Cup draw  (Read 24540 times)
suttonred

Offline Offline

Posts: 12510





Ignore
« Reply #90 on: Sunday, November 18, 2018, 23:10:15 »

Correct. I've been suckered 3 times already this season.
Logged
Batch
Not a Batch

Offline Offline

Posts: 55172





Ignore
« Reply #91 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 07:27:50 »

the good news is that for those games available in the UK  using a VPN to order you can waste just over £5 instead. bargain.
Logged
Legends-Lounge

Online Online

Posts: 8157

Non PC straight talking tory Brexit voter on this




Ignore
« Reply #92 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 07:49:50 »

This post could easily sit in the who to blame thread. However one looks at things, it is painfully obvious we need new personnel to reinforce the unbalanced squad. So let’s hope we get past Woking and land a fuck-off tie away at say Man U, Man C, Arsenal or another giant in the premier league to get a cash boost to enable Power to do just that.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #93 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 09:15:01 »

This post could easily sit in the who to blame thread. However one looks at things, it is painfully obvious we need new personnel to reinforce the unbalanced squad. So let’s hope we get past Woking and land a fuck-off tie away at say Man U, Man C, Arsenal or another giant in the premier league to get a cash boost to enable Power to do just that.

But would he? It seems to me that Power sees STFC as just a piece of his business interests, so that any money generated by it can be used in any other part of his "empire"  I susppose conversely the reverse might apply, in time of need.

However  fans assume that if money is made by what they recognise as STFC, it should be spent on STFC and not say Waterford.   I'd imagine becasue it's his club Power assumes any money generated can be spent as Lee Power sees fit.
Logged
4D
Or not 4D that is the question

Offline Offline

Posts: 21800


I can't bear it 🙄




Ignore
« Reply #94 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 09:52:29 »

You have got to keep your customers happy, there's already a drop in attendance. Be hard to get that back.
Logged
Legends-Lounge

Online Online

Posts: 8157

Non PC straight talking tory Brexit voter on this




Ignore
« Reply #95 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 10:48:44 »

But would he? It seems to me that Power sees STFC as just a piece of his business interests, so that any money generated by it can be used in any other part of his "empire"  I susppose conversely the reverse might apply, in time of need.

However  fans assume that if money is made by what they recognise as STFC, it should be spent on STFC and not say Waterford.   I'd imagine becasue it's his club Power assumes any money generated can be spent as Lee Power sees fit.

But would he? Only he knows if he would.

I suspect you are right and I agree it’s his business and once we hand it over the money is his to use as he sees fit. Not all but most fans would see it that way. The fans entitlement though once the money has been handed over is to expect something that’s fit for purpose or has some returned value against it.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #96 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 10:57:55 »

But would he? Only he knows if he would.

I suspect you are right and I agree it’s his business and once we hand it over the money is his to use as he sees fit. Not all but most fans would see it that way. The fans entitlement though once the money has been handed over is to expect something that’s fit for purpose or has some returned value against it.

I've been wondering if there's any obvious correlation between us turning to shit and Power acquiring Waterford... namely the timing of lack of investment in us coinciding with investment in them?
Logged
Batch
Not a Batch

Offline Offline

Posts: 55172





Ignore
« Reply #97 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 11:43:32 »

Not all but most fans would see it that way. The fans entitlement though once the money has been handed over is to expect something that’s fit for purpose or has some returned value against it.

I doubt many fans would support taking profits generated by STFC to fund Waterford, should it ever be proven. In fact it would be negligent to fail one business to fund another, and potentially illegal for the directors to support that.

I'm not sure I see where this profit is coming from mind.
-------
Surely more likely he's getting what ever funding he has and directing it to Waterford, and keeping us (barely) ticking along with an exit strategy in mind.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #98 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 12:01:07 »

I doubt many fans would support taking profits generated by STFC to fund Waterford, should it ever be proven. In fact it would be negligent to fail one business to fund another, and potentially illegal for the directors to support that.

I'm not sure I see where this profit is coming from mind.
-------
Surely more likely he's getting what ever funding he has and directing it to Waterford, and keeping us (barely) ticking along with an exit strategy in mind.

Is it illegal? I genuinely don't know.

We have apparently made some money out of player sales.... no need to list we know who they are, and then this season the Flint windfall.

Power claimed in the recent interview that went on covering loses.... possibly true. However if the club is still losing money despite reducing the wage bill, and transfer funds drying up due to poor recruitment and turd polishing.... it should be time for him to look at selling.
Logged
Batch
Not a Batch

Offline Offline

Posts: 55172





Ignore
« Reply #99 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 12:31:13 »

Is it illegal? I genuinely don't know.

I thought the responsibility was to that to act in the best interests of the company, not just the majority shareholder.

Profit taking itself can't be illegal. I guess they'd show they were paying peter and paul, hence no case.

I am of course most likely utterly wrong.
Logged
RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 11649




Ignore
« Reply #100 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 13:51:39 »

Is it illegal? I genuinely don't know.

We have apparently made some money out of player sales.... no need to list we know who they are, and then this season the Flint windfall.

Power claimed in the recent interview that went on covering loses.... possibly true. However if the club is still losing money despite reducing the wage bill, and transfer funds drying up due to poor recruitment and turd polishing.... it should be time for him to look at selling.

based on the limited accounts that we can get hold of, the club is probably close to break even now, but did run losses for the first couple of years that player sales will have paid back - the loans increased after being initially wiped off.  That suggests someone was providing finance to the club and it wasn't a bank.  Either Power or someone else was loaning the club money to cover operational costs, player sales moved us into a position to pay down some of those loans.
Logged
RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 11649




Ignore
« Reply #101 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 14:06:32 »

Actually, looking at the accounts, you can probably just about work out the following happening until the start of last season:

Power paid himself back a considerable sum over two years, most likely from transfer fees, BUT, the debt to him increased.  This appears to be because we purchased land at the cost of about 2.5m and he funded most of it.  Possibly the training ground?

We have over 2m in debtors, which is probably the transfer fees for players like Ajose/Byrne?

We still owe 2m to Black - we have an unsecured debenture on the books for that value.

Overall, we probably made a profit - the land purchase will be charged to the accounts through depreciation in coming years, the player sales were realised.  He paid himself back money, but we still owe him nearly 2m (he had been close to covering off all his investment the prior year).

Assuming the training ground is actually a club asset, we appear to be in good shape on the books - certainly the first time our assets and debtors is anywhere close to what we owe people.

My hunch - we build the training ground and the profit making bits of that, he makes some money, passes that through the club and covers some operational losses (no transfers coming in now) and pays himself off the rest of the money he owes himself.  Power comes out of it smelling of roses financially.  The club is better off on the balance sheet, add in potential ground development and he has his exit strategy - he can sell the club for money, something previously unheard of for us.

The downside for us - maybe a year or two away and the account suggest his focus has been on non football related activities on the balance sheet, so we can expect the same budget as now for that period.  He's been paying down the debt to himself related to covering the operational losses in the first couple of seasons.  The question is whether he' likely to take a hit based on division we are in, he's certainly done enough to protect himself from that though.   As a business we are in good health vs. five years ago, but does the risk on income put people off paying?
Logged
horlock07

Offline Offline

Posts: 18726


Lives in Northern Bastard Outpost




Ignore
« Reply #102 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 14:13:56 »

Is it illegal? I genuinely don't know.

We have apparently made some money out of player sales.... no need to list we know who they are, and then this season the Flint windfall.

Power claimed in the recent interview that went on covering loses.... possibly true. However if the club is still losing money despite reducing the wage bill, and transfer funds drying up due to poor recruitment and turd polishing.... it should be time for him to look at selling.

Just out of interest who is going to want to buy a company with no assets which is losing cash, apart from someone like Dominic Chappell (of Jed McCrory)?

As Power funded us making losses for much of the earlier years of his ownership I can see no great problem with him taking cash out and doing with it as he likes?

As for the legality of it, associated companies fund each other all the time, but we will never know as we are so two bit we don't have to present full accounts, although cannot those who have shareholdings (albeit pointless after St Andrew of Fitton altered the structure) ask to see the full accounts?
Logged
horlock07

Offline Offline

Posts: 18726


Lives in Northern Bastard Outpost




Ignore
« Reply #103 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 14:17:29 »


Assuming the training ground is actually a club asset, we appear to be in good shape on the books - certainly the first time our assets and debtors is anywhere close to what we owe people.



The legal declaration on the planning application for the training ground says the land is owned by Mr L Power, whilst the application is made in the name of the club suggesting that there is a difference between the two, although its very blurred with him essentially being the sole shareholder in the club (sort of)
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #104 on: Monday, November 19, 2018, 14:50:32 »

Actually, looking at the accounts, you can probably just about work out the following happening until the start of last season:

Power paid himself back a considerable sum over two years, most likely from transfer fees, BUT, the debt to him increased.  This appears to be because we purchased land at the cost of about 2.5m and he funded most of it.  Possibly the training ground?

We have over 2m in debtors, which is probably the transfer fees for players like Ajose/Byrne?

We still owe 2m to Black - we have an unsecured debenture on the books for that value.

Overall, we probably made a profit - the land purchase will be charged to the accounts through depreciation in coming years, the player sales were realised.  He paid himself back money, but we still owe him nearly 2m (he had been close to covering off all his investment the prior year).

Assuming the training ground is actually a club asset, we appear to be in good shape on the books - certainly the first time our assets and debtors is anywhere close to what we owe people.

My hunch - we build the training ground and the profit making bits of that, he makes some money, passes that through the club and covers some operational losses (no transfers coming in now) and pays himself off the rest of the money he owes himself.  Power comes out of it smelling of roses financially.  The club is better off on the balance sheet, add in potential ground development and he has his exit strategy - he can sell the club for money, something previously unheard of for us.

The downside for us - maybe a year or two away and the account suggest his focus has been on non football related activities on the balance sheet, so we can expect the same budget as now for that period.  He's been paying down the debt to himself related to covering the operational losses in the first couple of seasons.  The question is whether he' likely to take a hit based on division we are in, he's certainly done enough to protect himself from that though.   As a business we are in good health vs. five years ago, but does the risk on income put people off paying?

As expected then, Power takes money from the club when he can to at least cover for example the initial money to get rid of the umbongo.... with the FL, back in the days of Fredi Mercs.  It's also possible he's used monies generated on the training ground purchase.... the technical ownership being moot.

I've always backed the idea of sustainability, and us having a natural sort of position in the pecking order, but if we are to be non league as a result, I'd rather be non league as a Trust run club.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8   Go Up
Print
Jump to: