The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 I agree with GStar. £15million Mortgage. £ 4Miliion Rolling loan against season ticket income. £15Million Cash injections recorded as loans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbydan Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Managed right and there is profit to me made, Blackpool 20m and Newcastle 10m are good examples. WBA are another profitable club, and I think 9 clubs posted a profit including the big boys. Don't know much about newcastle but Blackpool are a shambles atm may have made £20m but they spend no money on players hence why they keep loosing managers & selling their best players, no investment in the club / facilities the pitch is terrible & the training facilities are a joke. The owners also paid themselves £25 mill last year & the majority of their cash is because they went up & came straight back down again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 I agree with GStar. £15million Mortgage. £ 4Miliion Rolling loan against season ticket income. £15Million Cash injections recorded as loans. £15.5m long term debt £3m revolving loan (unless it's suddenly shot up) £15.5m loan capital Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Nah you're right. £36m in debt and losing over 7mil a year is quite prudent actually. 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> As previously stated though, £15million of that debt is secured against the ground. £4million secured against future season ticket income which seems pretty achievable. And the rest is what the owners have put into the club but, for reasons unbeknown to us, have decided to treat them as loan capital rather than equity. This could be for tax reasons, an agreement between the ownership group but either way I find it hard to believe the owners are going to call their own loans in if it would put the club in financial difficulty and jeoparidse their rather substantial investment. On the second point, could you tell me how much of the £7 million 'loss' actually represents a cash loss and how much is just paper losses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 That indicates to me that the £5.8m signalled may have grown to £7m and be all further loan capital. Was the £34million they stated current debt or as at end of June 2012? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Don't know much about newcastle but Blackpool are a shambles atm may have made £20m but they spend no money on players hence why they keep loosing managers & selling their best players, no investment in the club / facilities the pitch is terrible & the training facilities are a joke. The owners also paid themselves £25 mill last year & the majority of their cash is because they went up & came straight back down again And that's shambolic? Then what would you call a club that's just recorded losses if 8m, the owners still bankrolling them, despite cutting back wherever possible, and as far as I can see taking no ROI ? I'm not calling Derbys strategy btw, just can't understand how you think blackpools cash balance is shambolic, you may think the way they run it is, but once again I would guess they are going to be cash sufficient for a no of years yet, something a lot of clubs can't say, including ones relegated from the PL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 £15.5m long term debt £3m revolving loan (unless it's suddenly shot up) £15.5m loan capital Thanks Ramblur. I'm sure your figures are more precise than mine. I think all is fine and in control other than I would prefer the loan capital to have been introduced as equity thus meaning our book debt would be £18.5 million with the bulk of that being the mortgage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudding Jack Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 it's not that bad when you've got assests though is it.... potentially with the sale of hughes... thats all wiped clean. the seasons before we had nowt to sell. non of the current first team( except roberts because he's not far from his pention) have lost value but gained. between hughes, hendrick, bennet, brayford,fielding alone there must be.....errrr....roughly...nearly ....maybe....13 odd million quid there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudding Jack Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 it's not that bad when you've got assests though is it.... potentially with the sale of hughes... thats all wiped clean. the seasons before we had nowt to sell. non of the current first team( except roberts because he's not far from his pention) have lost value but gained. between hughes, hendrick, bennet, brayford,fielding alone there must be.....errrr....roughly...nearly ....maybe....13 odd million quid there. Yet per the accounts Brayford and Fielding would have lost the club a few hundred thousand! Of course it is right not to value players in the accounts because it would be impossible to put a figure on them. Plus who says they are ever going to be sold or sign a new contract? We could value Hughes at £10million in the accounts but then in 3 years time he could leave the club for £0 if his contract expired! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbydan Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 And that's shambolic? Then what would you call a club that's just recorded losses if 8m, the owners still bankrolling them, despite cutting back wherever possible, and as far as I can see taking no ROI ? I'm not calling Derbys strategy btw, just can't understand how you think blackpools cash balance is shambolic, you may think the way they run it is, but once again I would guess they are going to be cash sufficient for a no of years yet, something a lot of clubs can't say, including ones relegated from the PL. Not the bank balance but the state of the club. Bank lines are all well & good for the Oyston's that own the club & pay themselves millions of pounds & put nothing into the club but I'd rather have GSE in charge than them lot. The fans have now set up a group to hold protests against the owners its got that bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Was the £34million they stated current debt or as at end of June 2012? Interestingly,the wording in the DET was "now stands".Unless it actually meant' now stands at the end of the financial year just reported',it would seem to me that SR's £50m+ investment claim would have to rely on an equity injection,because the loan capital is already accounted for within the £34m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Thanks Ramblur. I'm sure your figures are more precise than mine. I think all is fine and in control other than I would prefer the loan capital to have been introduced as equity thus meaning our book debt would be £18.5 million with the bulk of that being the mortgage. The long term debt has been around £15.5m for a few years now,and seems to reduce by a few £k a year.I've yet to see a year end figure for the revolving loan over £3m (was just a little over that once).I've certainly not seen a repayment or reborrowing in the £4m range. Interestingly,only the equity injections and purchase price are classed under the heading "Investment" in the General Sports Derby UK Ltd (the Company,as opposed to consolidated) balance sheet.This makes me wonder if they eventually want to call in the loan capital and leave a more compact investment figure -only guessing mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Interestingly,the wording in the DET was "now stands".Unless it actually meant' now stands at the end of the financial year just reported',it would seem to me that SR's £50m+ investment claim would have to rely on an equity injection,because the loan capital is already accounted for within the £34m. A bit of guess work but I wonder if the capital for the new screens was financed by equity rather than debt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 A bit of guess work but I wonder if the capital for the new screens was financed by equity rather than debt? I reckon we're over £4m short of the £50m (if I'm right on the c£7m for this year) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Not the bank balance but the state of the club. Bank lines are all well & good for the Oyston's that own the club & pay themselves millions of pounds & put nothing into the club but I'd rather have GSE in charge than them lot. The fans have now set up a group to hold protests against the owners its got that bad Then Im not sure what you are getting at, the question was raised if it was possible to make money in the PL, even with the 11m the Director took out, it was. Im pretty sure somewhere down the line our investors will want to be taking money out of our club rather than putting it back in, the sooner the better Id say as that would mean we are successfull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 The long term debt has been around £15.5m for a few years now,and seems to reduce by a few £k a year.I've yet to see a year end figure for the revolving loan over £3m (was just a little over that once).I've certainly not seen a repayment or reborrowing in the £4m range. Interestingly,only the equity injections and purchase price are classed under the heading "Investment" in the General Sports Derby UK Ltd (the Company,as opposed to consolidated) balance sheet.This makes me wonder if they eventually want to call in the loan capital and leave a more compact investment figure -only guessing mind. Scrap the last sentence-flawed logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bourneyesterday Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Nope, nowhere near. The reason we are no longer near the 12th best supported club in the league is because the owners have failed to deliver on the pitch ( the only place that matters as far as i am concerned) I love the fact that the GSE supporters will use the " football is a business these days, you can't expect the owners to throw their money away" as an excuse for lack of investment and then expect the ' customers' of this "business' to disregard the paucity of the 'product' and just turn up and pay for it out of blind faith. Build a decent team and they will come in the region of 33,000. Having said that i think the squad have punched above their weight so far this season so well done to them and NC, competing despite the owners not because of them. COYR's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stedcfc Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Nah you're right. £36m in debt and losing over 7mil a year is quite prudent actually. 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> The club does have debts but it also has a playing squad which I would suggest is worth at least £20m (which isn't recognised in the accounts as clubs cannot internally value their players). Add to that the value of Pride Park and its obvious were not in any financially bad situation. I expect to see us at least breaking even if we do sell any of our players as the value will be almost all profit as even the players bought have had their value written down over their contract. We'll see the first chunk of that with the Shackell sale which is in the start of the next set of accounts. Now that the club has players of value it is in a much better situation than it was when it was making the same losses and the majority of our starting 11 wern't even owned by Derby (loans). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stedcfc Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Yet per the accounts Brayford and Fielding would have lost the club a few hundred thousand! Of course it is right not to value players in the accounts because it would be impossible to put a figure on them. Plus who says they are ever going to be sold or sign a new contract? We could value Hughes at £10million in the accounts but then in 3 years time he could leave the club for £0 if his contract expired! Its also not allowed under the accounting rules. Otherwise people would be generating allsorts of ridiculous values for employees/assets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.