Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 16:01:37 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 16:09:17 GMT 1
Maybe someone who understands some of these terms could explain.
Does the £1m+ (before depreciation) net income from KSDL mean that the club is effectively getting its service charge back and is playing 'for free'? (but whilst elsewhere describing the stadium rental as a millstone).
What reasons would Dean have for issuing new share capital, when all his previous injections have been directors loans as far as I know.
Massimo Cellino has recently been doing same with Leeds, and, not to scaremonger, but some reasonable sounding folk mentioned this often happens ahead of a buy out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 16:13:10 GMT 1
Not sure on the first point, but on the second I speculate that it may be linked to our FFP losses. Injecting equity in the form of issuing new shares is one of the favoured means of having acceptable losses.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 16:14:52 GMT 1
Maybe someone who understands some of these terms could explain. Does the £1m+ (before depreciation) net income from KSDL mean that the club is effectively getting its service charge back and is playing 'for free'? (but whilst elsewhere describing the stadium rental as a millstone). What reasons would Dean have for issuing new share capital, when all his previous injections have been directors loans as far as I know. Massimo Cellino has recently been doing same with Leeds, and, not to scaremonger, but some reasonable sounding folk mentioned this often happens ahead of a buy out. Think that may be to do with FFP. Clubs were allowed to lose £3m plus a further £5m of shareholder investment. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 16:18:48 GMT 1
Simply backs up what many of us on here have said, but equally as many fail to comprehend - we are struggling to compete in this hopelessly financially lop-sided league.
Also noteworthy that there has been a drastic (9%) fall in the level of away supporters. We have all seen the crap level of support offered by many away teams in this division, so it's not just Town who are struggling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 16:25:54 GMT 1
Simply backs up what many of us on here have said, but equally as many fail to comprehend - we are struggling to compete in this hopelessly financially lop-sided league. Also noteworthy that there has been a drastic (9%) fall in the level of away supporters. We have all seen the crap level of support offered by many away teams in this division, so it's not just Town who are struggling. Spot on. There'll be some who'll look at that and see we've made a profit on transfers of over £10m during the last three years and ask why it hasn't be reinvested - completely ignoring the fact that we've racked up over £20m in total losses over the same period. It certainly looks, as feared, that FFP is going to have no impact. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 16:37:36 GMT 1
From Waccoe...
"Debt for share swap means that the holder of the debt has exchanged their rights under the debt for equity (shares).
The same holder of debt and the same holder (now) of the new shares.
It is a means of cleaning up the balance sheet - usually for a good reason.
It also means that a valuation of the company has taken place in order to place a price on an individual share.
The clean up of the balance sheet is usually done in order to get grade A financing, or to facilitate buy outs, or further equity injection".
|
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Jul 4, 2015 16:43:24 GMT 1
Interesting to note that walk up income fell by a "worrying 15%" and yet they've decided to increase walk up prices for next season by £3 over those tickets bought in advance. They can't be too worried about it with that strategy.
|
|
|
|
Post by joshuajones on Jul 4, 2015 17:04:31 GMT 1
Maybe fans should start a thread to raise money (such as previous efforts for the banners and for the Bradford fire) for the whole season and then towards the end of the season that money can be put forward to the club to sign a player. And we can have a thread on here, twitter and Facebook to decide which position the fans want to put the money towards. And maybe when the meetings occur with the fans, SLO and board etc they can suggest the players they are looking at for the position the fans picked and then we can all vote on who we want the club to pursue? Ultimate fan power?
Granted bit extreme but would love to have contributed towards say putting a mill forward and having a little vote on position and player choice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 17:13:33 GMT 1
Far too many big fancy words for me to understand any of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on Jul 4, 2015 17:18:10 GMT 1
Not sure on the first point, but on the second I speculate that it may be linked to our FFP losses. Injecting equity in the form of issuing new shares is one of the favoured means of having acceptable losses. FFP the limit for allowable losses that can be covered by the owners’ equity conversion - buying more shares
I found this on a Boro website when I was trying to understand how they could even contemplate signing Stewart Downing for £5m on £70,000 a week link
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 17:30:49 GMT 1
Find it odd that the directors are reporting that the major assets of the club are wrongly valued in the accounts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Solihull Terrier on Jul 4, 2015 18:42:21 GMT 1
Find it odd that the directors are reporting that the major assets of the club are wrongly valued in the accounts. Perfectly allowable to do that as long as they are under valued and not over valued. They are right to be cautious when it comes to something as fickle as transfer valuations. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 18:56:32 GMT 1
Find it odd that the directors are reporting that the major assets of the club are wrongly valued in the accounts. Perfectly allowable to do that as long as they are under valued and not over valued. They are right to be cautious when it comes to something as fickle as transfer valuations. Indeed, did wonder why there wasn't a stink about the way in which Ken Davy *seemed* to transfer assets (in the form of shares in KSDL) between entities at a rate below the book asset value. Thats an actual crime isn't it? (So I presume he didn't actually do that). (Think I've made that "safe") |
|
|
|
Post by mids on Jul 4, 2015 22:21:16 GMT 1
Far too many big fancy words for me to understand any of that. Try a bit harder  syllables aint scary |
|
|
|
Post by mids on Jul 4, 2015 22:22:14 GMT 1
Perfectly allowable to do that as long as they are under valued and not over valued. They are right to be cautious when it comes to something as fickle as transfer valuations. Indeed, did wonder why there wasn't a stink about the way in which Ken Davy *seemed* to transfer assets (in the form of shares in KSDL) between entities at a rate below the book asset value. Thats an actual crime isn't it? (So I presume he didn't actually do that). (Think I've made that "safe") Kenneth doing illegal stuff...never  |
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Jul 4, 2015 22:39:32 GMT 1
What I find a bit worrying and a bit strange is that season ticket holders not turning up is running at 20% per home game, over 2000 fans, which is high give the number of ticket holders we have.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmythebulldog on Jul 4, 2015 22:44:12 GMT 1
What I find a bit worrying and a bit strange is that season ticket holders not turning up is running at 20% per home game, over 2000 fans, which is high give the number of ticket holders we have. It's only high if you have perspective - what's the division average? Anyone? |
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Jul 4, 2015 22:56:53 GMT 1
What I find a bit worrying and a bit strange is that season ticket holders not turning up is running at 20% per home game, over 2000 fans, which is high give the number of ticket holders we have. It's only high if you have perspective - what's the division average? Anyone? I appreciate that some people live outside the area and might not be able to attend night games but per game it seems a bit high. Bet other clubs with more season ticket holders than us aren't posting such high absentees per game. |
|
|
|
Post by Beech's Nuts on Jul 5, 2015 0:31:18 GMT 1
What I find a bit worrying and a bit strange is that season ticket holders not turning up is running at 20% per home game, over 2000 fans, which is high give the number of ticket holders we have. It's only high if you have perspective - what's the division average? Anyone? Well statto.com won't be any help for that one! Bizarrely, as far as home fans were concerned, season card holders who didn't attend (2254) were more than than non-season card attendees (walk-ups 2,157). It also looks like they've rounded the percentages to the nearest 10%: 2254/8952=25.18% with12/13 being 2143/9258=23.15%. In reality the situation worsened by over 2 percentage points. I hope that they're more honest with the money  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 0:43:54 GMT 1
Maybe someone who understands some of these terms could explain. Does the £1m+ (before depreciation) net income from KSDL mean that the club is effectively getting its service charge back and is playing 'for free'? (but whilst elsewhere describing the stadium rental as a millstone). What reasons would Dean have for issuing new share capital, when all his previous injections have been directors loans as far as I know. Massimo Cellino has recently been doing same with Leeds, and, not to scaremonger, but some reasonable sounding folk mentioned this often happens ahead of a buy out. I estimate we made approximately 90k profit on KSDL Income/Attendance fees, so slightly better than playing for free now shares are returned. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 1:01:26 GMT 1
Indeed, did wonder why there wasn't a stink about the way in which Ken Davy *seemed* to transfer assets (in the form of shares in KSDL) between entities at a rate below the book asset value. Thats an actual crime isn't it? (So I presume he didn't actually do that). (Think I've made that "safe") Kenneth doing illegal stuff...never Is that what you're suggesting? I'm not. To be clear. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 1:09:32 GMT 1
It's only high if you have perspective - what's the division average? Anyone? I appreciate that some people live outside the area and might not be able to attend night games but per game it seems a bit high. Bet other clubs with more season ticket holders than us aren't posting such high absentees per game. It seems about right and perfectly reasonable to me. When I was a season ticket holder, I missed probably 4 games a season on average due to being on holiday, work, weddings and not being arsed. And so did pretty much everyone I know. 4 out of 23 is pretty close to missibg 20%. |
|
|
|
Post by rooo on Jul 5, 2015 7:53:35 GMT 1
The season card no shows includes freebies which includes players tickets, corporate giveaways, boxholders, opposition giveaways etc. Not just our own fans not turning up.
walk ups are basically any non- season card holder. It doesn't matter if they pay for a ticket days before or at the turnstiles, they are counted as walk up.
Hope that's clearer
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 8:11:22 GMT 1
^ ^ ^ Thanks for explaining, Rooo. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 10:06:39 GMT 1
The drop in away support will also partially be down to us not being in our first season in the division. The previous season we were still anewish away day for many and so the novelty has lessened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 10:15:48 GMT 1
Far too many big fancy words for me to understand any of that. or maybe like me,you just keep an eye on the football side of it,and let the money men look after the financial side |
|
|
|
Post by iangreaves on Jul 5, 2015 11:12:48 GMT 1
Interesting to note that walk up income fell by a "worrying 15%" and yet they've decided to increase walk up prices for next season by £3 over those tickets bought in advance. They can't be too worried about it with that strategy. They've also made it a lot harder to turn up and get in with the electronic system. You can't just turn up at the turnstile and pay cash. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 11:17:18 GMT 1
Interesting to note that walk up income fell by a "worrying 15%" and yet they've decided to increase walk up prices for next season by £3 over those tickets bought in advance. They can't be too worried about it with that strategy. I still think that the club have made a big mistake with the walk up prices. |
|
rocky
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,067
|
Post by rocky on Jul 5, 2015 11:31:45 GMT 1
The 'Player trading' section explains yet again what the club's position has to be & why, yet every time a player is sold, all we get from some is the usual 'don't sell your best players' & 'no ambition' horseshit.
|
|
syllables aint scary 
