New beginnings - 25% Truth, 80% Bollocks

[4D]

So, does that £3.6m in admin costs include the wage bill?

Maybe for the admin staff, I'd imagine players wages is in cost of sales.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

Another dumbass question.

Is there any breakdown on transfer fees received/spent.

[Oaksey Moonraker]

Maybe for the admin staff, I'd imagine players wages is in cost of sales.

That's my understanding from an explainer the other STFC did is the cost of sales is the player costs (including tax and national insurance etc).

[Outletred]

We need a fully scrutinised breakdown of all the costs - which I very much doubt we will ever see

Over 8m is very high can’t imagine the playing budget being even a quarter of that

[STFC_Manc]

Another dumbass question.

Is there any breakdown on transfer fees received/spent.

Yes, in the year they spent £100k (section 5 of the notes)

£10k disposal (this is the value in the books, not what we received)

[STFC_Manc]

We need a fully scrutinised breakdown of all the costs - which I very much doubt we will ever see

Over 8m is very high can’t imagine the playing budget being even a quarter of that

£1.15m of this relates to a donation for the supporters half of the stadium. True value is c£7m of costs.

[Posh Red]

£1.15m of this relates to a donation for the supporters half of the stadium. True value is c£7m of costs.

Isn’t that broadly similar to another couple of teams that have published accounts recently?

Does seem high, but if it’s in line with other clubs maybe it is true

[RobertT]

7m would indeed be broadly inline with the top half teams in terms of expenditure and is not a million miles away from the year before.  Devil is in the detail, as always.

It does verify that Anthony Hall is a plonker though, because he was spouting the 8m number before Christmas, ringing alarm bells.  Well, that is because it includes a one off transaction of 1.15m and not because you trade with over 8m of costs.  I imagine he will get all excited when preparing the 23/24 accounts because he think he will have found over a million in savings.

What he should have been doing is lamenting the fact the Revenues were down (excluding that one off gain).  Yes, the Man City game and play offs were in prior year, but it would seem like the other revenues were probably stagnant.  The wooly aim was to increase revenues enabling higher spend on player budgets.  He can probably mark the club down as having failed that, and nothing much suggests 23/24 has the chance of improving the situation, the end of season concert being the only idea and isn't that in the 24/25 accounting period?

[4D]

Isn’t that broadly similar to another couple of teams that have published accounts recently?

Does seem high, but if it’s in line with other clubs maybe it is true

Tranmere's is similar, but the detail is still needed.

[Power to people]

What about court costs and legal fee's where would they appear ?

I'm intrigued if has been mentioned Clem has moved debt owed to himself into Axis what would the benefit of this be ?
If for e.g. Clem sold Axis tomorrow would the new owner then be able to chase stfc for the debt and put stfc in admin due to non payment of debt as the debt is owed to Axis not Clem - or any I understanding this incorrectly ??

[RobertT]

What about court costs and legal fee's where would they appear ?

I'm intrigued if has been mentioned Clem has moved debt owed to himself into Axis what would the benefit of this be ?
If for e.g. Clem sold Axis tomorrow would the new owner then be able to chase stfc for the debt and put stfc in admin due to non payment of debt as the debt is owed to Axis not Clem - or any I understanding this incorrectly ??

In a word, yes - any debt owed to a company would transfer with any change of ownership of that company.  As it stands, Clem is the owner of Axis Football Investments, but I suppose he was also once the sole owner of the parent company of STFC.  It at least does not appear that the debt is secured, so they'd join a queue (and the trade creditors seem to be growing in size).

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

Begs the question of where Clem got the money to pay off those creditors even though he rolled that debt into a personal one.

[RobertT]

Begs the question of where Clem got the money to pay off those creditors even though he rolled that debt into a personal one.

It seems that the Liquidator in Australia may feel some of that came from money he was supposed to pay his creditors of Axis UK and NSW.

The line I was referring to, as trade creditors, is the amounts owed < 12 months.  These are usually your local suppliers.  It's not a red flag necessarily, but you don't want that growing if your business topline isn't growing either.

[STFC_Manc]

7m would indeed be broadly inline with the top half teams in terms of expenditure and is not a million miles away from the year before.  Devil is in the detail, as always.

It does verify that Anthony Hall is a plonker though, because he was spouting the 8m number before Christmas, ringing alarm bells.  Well, that is because it includes a one off transaction of 1.15m and not because you trade with over 8m of costs.  I imagine he will get all excited when preparing the 23/24 accounts because he think he will have found over a million in savings.

What he should have been doing is lamenting the fact the Revenues were down (excluding that one off gain).  Yes, the Man City game and play offs were in prior year, but it would seem like the other revenues were probably stagnant.  The wooly aim was to increase revenues enabling higher spend on player budgets.  He can probably mark the club down as having failed that, and nothing much suggests 23/24 has the chance of improving the situation, the end of season concert being the only idea and isn't that in the 24/25 accounting period?

It does seem that his grasp on numbers isn't great, which is far from ideal!

On the growing revenue, without seeing details around one offs, it's impossible to say.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

Kieran Maguire

Swindon did not buy any players for fees in 22/23

Swindon only spent £75k on infrastructure assets.

Total borrowings are over £5 million and increased by over £400k in the year

Swindon submit 22/23 accounts. Club saying it broke even but a bit disingenuous as benefitted from a £2.3m donation from the Nigel Eady Trust which is likely to be allocated to stadium purchase & as such might be better treated as a capital injection or grant.