DutchWhites Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Hmmmmm, I'm missing something here.Debt = 53.5m Income = 50.4m Deficit = 3.1m Do we not have any expenditure? Not quite sure whether the figures are before or after expenses - just taken from what Sluffy provided. If expenses are not included then the deficit will be much bigger - mainly due the wages!
Sluffy Posted April 27, 2009 Author Posted April 27, 2009 (edited) It is a dream and an ambition to play in any UEFA competition BUT did I say anywhere in this thread that the club should be aiming for that under current financial climate of the club? All I said was that it should be aiming to increase its attendances and try to convert some floaters into being true die hard fans. Even by your figures TV/FA = GBP32mm Other income = GBP18.4mm Total GBP50.4mm Club debt = GBP53.5mm and increasing. Deficit of GBP3.1mm Remember the TV/FA money is dependent on position in the league and as such is a moving variable and not a guaranteed sum - higher position more money, lower position less money. Each position is guaranteed the same as last year and TV rights are spread equally over the 3 seasons on the contract based on basic number of televised games but can increase if more games are televised. How is the club going to bridge that gap, which in reality will continue to increase under present financial climate? Well I don't know where to begin really! Ok, in July 2008, the club received ?50.4 million in football income - it also received a further ?8.6 million from other activities, such as the hotel - I did inform you of this on the Southampton thread. You appear not to have taken this into account what so ever! You should also know that the balance sheet only tells you the business trading up to the day the accounts were published - so any further expenditure (as Traf as already pointed out) and INCOME will determine if the debt goes up or DOWN. The fact is ?26 million in loans are required to be paid back before next July - I assume most of that will be funded from this seasons prize money. Unless the banks give us new credit (we are in the middle of a credit crunch) or Eddie Davies puts his hands deeper in his pockets (he reportedly lost ?33 million due to the credit crunch) I would expect the debt to be significantly reduced by the time the next accounts are published this July. As for the Premiership prize money being more the higher the position we finish - that is true. However to take as a comparison at the end of the 2007/8 season Blackburn finished in 7th place (a Europe league place this year - and a position we have only bettered once in nearly fifty years) and received ?40.2 million. We finished 16th and received ?32 million. That equates to ?8.2 million difference for finishing nine places lower or about ?900,000 per place. Say we finish 14th this season, and places are worth a million. So we would have to have gambled ?7 million on buying players to achieve 7th place and a Europe League place. All a bit of a theoretical argument anyway because we did try to buy Veloso for ?12 million and were turned down! So I guess we lost out ?7 million by not getting a Europa place but then again saved ourselves ?12 million by not buying Veloso! Finally the debt of ?53.5 million is on the TRADING ACCOUNT as a banker you should know that the business also as CAPITAL ASSETS (such as the hotel in Burnden Leisure's case) too that can ultimately be sold off to pay outstanding debts. I thought being a banker you would be aware of such things? Edited April 27, 2009 by Sluffy
DutchWhites Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 (edited) Finally the debt of ?53.5 million is on the TRADING ACCOUNT as a banker you should know that the business also as CAPITAL ASSETS (such as the hotel in Burnden Leisure's case) too that can ultimately be sold off to pay outstanding debts. I thought being a banker you would be aware of such things? And as I keep saying, yes I work for a Bank but only a pen pusher within th MO - I do not and have never not dealt with specifics of companies profits losses or whatever as that it not my remit - I work out rate fixings, and make sure that rollover are done on time each month, open up accounts, currency transfers etc and that money does come in via Swift and that all midas activity is inputted correctly by the Operations Team! It is NOT Middle Office duties to oversee each account in detail and we do not deal with the customer - only other agent banks with regards to pledging loans Intricacies (sp) of trading accounts or whatever, as I have said before are done by our front office staff and overlooked by our Risk and Audit departments. So stop trying to assume that just because I work in a Bank I know everything - I have never said i did and I know I don't. Yes I used to work for a mainstream retail bank in their securities department (credit documentation) and that meant I was dealing with persoanl loans and mortgages (again as Back Office staff and not customer facing - it is up to the account managers to know their customer inside out). I know is whats is profit and what is loss - and that losses equals danger of bankruptcy. Rant over! (now picked up my dummy and given it a good wash! ) And yes, Mr Magoo you can say Dutch 1 Sluffy 3 or whatever. I am just sick to death of being told because I work for a bank I am meant to know. So basically meaning a cleaner working for Burnden Leisure is meant to know everything that happens finiancially with the company, right? (well they do work for Burnden Leisure and as suc h should be aware of such things!) Edited April 27, 2009 by DutchWhites
Smiffs Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Do you realise this thread is taking up room in cyberspace that could be used for porn?
Gonk Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Do you realise this thread is taking up room in cyberspace that could be used for porn? you need to have a few of these threads running to throw the government snoopers off the scent though
Traf Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Dutch, re: Mr Magoo. he posts those made up scores, because he doesn't really understand the conversation you and Sluffy are having. It's not the most interesting debate we've had on here, but it's quite refreshing to see a reasoned argument/discussion between 2 posters without resorting to petty insults.
DutchWhites Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Phew connection back online and do apologise for the last outburst with regards my job but just to re-iterate that no one has any confsuion or doubt... I have a prtfolio of about 500 files/customers, these come in from the frontline/front office and it is these staff that are meant to know their customers inside out etc - something known as Are You In Control. I take instruction from the Front Office and the only risk participation I take is to make sure that any future drawdowns of their facilities do not go over the agreed limit - if its near or does go over then instructions are fed back up towards the Front office and to the Risk team. Therefore I do not know thw customers, I do not have access to Bloomberg (the subscription service rather than whats on Sky) and official ratings and reports. As it is I am doing less of the day to day operations as I am currently on a special task team loooking at new software, cost savings and general efficiency across the board not only in my office but the whole European Group (and have to report to HQ in Asia) so I know even less, at this current moment in time, with regards to customer issues. And as Bolton Wanderers/Burnden Leisure are not one of our customers I do not havde readily access to their accountss, unlike some. Anyways, lets get this thread back on track and just one more ppoint.... Sluffy in your post when you posted the nfigures it did read that the general overall total was GBP53.4mm and as such I took that as the final figure. Another thing wit those figures, it does not take into account the reduction of TV rights which is a certainty this season, as already discussed in another thread, due to less games being televised (and if you take UEFA in as well - no UEFA games either). So the figures for this season do not look as bright as last season with information already known.
Guest Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Phew connection back online and do apologise for the last outburst with regards my job but just to re-iterate that no one has any confsuion or doubt... I have a prtfolio of about 500 files/customers, these come in from the frontline/front office and it is these staff that are meant to know their customers inside out etc - something known as Are You In Control. I take instruction from the Front Office and the only risk participation I take is to make sure that any future drawdowns of their facilities do not go over the agreed limit - if its near or does go over then instructions are fed back up towards the Front office and to the Risk team. Therefore I do not know thw customers, I do not have access to Bloomberg (the subscription service rather than whats on Sky) and official ratings and reports. As it is I am doing less of the day to day operations as I am currently on a special task team loooking at new software, cost savings and general efficiency across the board not only in my office but the whole European Group (and have to report to HQ in Asia) so I know even less, at this current moment in time, with regards to customer issues. And as Bolton Wanderers/Burnden Leisure are not one of our customers I do not havde readily access to their accountss, unlike some. Anyways, lets get this thread back on track and just one more ppoint.... Sluffy in your post when you posted the nfigures it did read that the general overall total was GBP53.4mm and as such I took that as the final figure. Another thing wit those figures, it does not take into account the reduction of TV rights which is a certainty this season, as already discussed in another thread, due to less games being televised (and if you take UEFA in as well - no UEFA games either). So the figures for this season do not look as bright as last season with information already known. Hi dutch I don't think they will be lower this year: Overall guaranteed amount up Guaranteed payout at 10 games UEFA wasn't a lot
Mr Magoo Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Thank you Traf (re: Mr Magoo. he posts those made up scores, because he doesn't really understand the conversation you and Sluffy are having.) I was just lightening things up ab it, i have read all of this section and yes i do understand what they were saying. No offence Dutch & Sluffy Interesting debate.
Casino Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Hi dutch I don't think they will be lower this year: Overall guaranteed amount up Guaranteed payout at 10 games UEFA wasn't a lot only cos we refused that 32 million offer for us v some estonian nose pickers
tylswhite Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Hi dutch I don't think they will be lower this year: Overall guaranteed amount up Guaranteed payout at 10 games UEFA wasn't a lot Agree with that. We will probably get more TV money this season than last. TV money is our biggest income and this will be the case for a long time imo. Ticket sales wont have much of an impact on a club like ours imo.
Traf Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Thank you Traf (re: Mr Magoo. he posts those made up scores, because he doesn't really understand the conversation you and Sluffy are having.) I was just lightening things up ab it, i have read all of this section and yes i do understand what they were saying. No offence Dutch & Sluffy Interesting debate. Just checking, mate!
Sluffy Posted April 28, 2009 Author Posted April 28, 2009 Anyways, lets get this thread back on track and just one more ppoint.... Sluffy in your post when you posted the nfigures it did read that the general overall total was GBP53.4mm and as such I took that as the final figure. Another thing wit those figures, it does not take into account the reduction of TV rights which is a certainty this season, as already discussed in another thread, due to less games being televised (and if you take UEFA in as well - no UEFA games either). So the figures for this season do not look as bright as last season with information already known. Well I'm amazed that someone who by their own admission has worked in two different banks - that you don't seem to have even a rudimentary understanding of a businesses Trading Account! Anyway you will note the figure I quoted from the latest published Burnden Leisure accounts did indeed state that total football revenue. That amount was ?50.4 million and NOT GBP53.4mm as you have stated above! I hope you don't make ?3 million errors on your clients portfolios!!! If you care to look at the last published accounts for Burnden Leisure you will see that it made ?50.4 million from total football revenue You also seemed to have completely forgotten to take into account other income such as that from the hotel - even though I did inform you of this information directly on the 'Southampton' thread. Burnden Leisure is inextricably linked to BWFC - its turnover is reported to be something like ?60 million Bolton Wanderers related and ?10 million the hotel and other ! As for your claim that TV income will be down, others on this thread have already corrected you! I trust that for your own sake that the company report you are working on in regards to "cost savings and general efficiency across the board not only in my office but the whole European Group" is infinitely better researched and analysed than the case you are presenting on here! Mr Magoo - thank you - no offence what so ever taken by me.
DutchWhites Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Well I'm amazed that someone who by their own admission has worked in two different banks - that you don't seem to have even a rudimentary understanding of a businesses Trading Account! Anyway you will note the figure I quoted from the latest published Burnden Leisure accounts did indeed state that total football revenue. That amount was ?50.4 million and NOT GBP53.4mm as you have stated above! I hope you don't make ?3 million errors on your clients portfolios!!! You also seemed to have completely forgotten to take into account other income such as that from the hotel - even though I did inform you of this information directly on the 'Southampton' thread. As for your claim that TV income will be down, others on this thread have already corrected you! I trust that for your own sake that the company report you are working on in regards to "cost savings and general efficiency across the board not only in my office but the whole European Group" is infinitely better researched and analysed than the case you are presenting on here! Mr Magoo - thank you - no offence what so ever taken by me. Enlighten me here, How can TV revenues be up this year when we have been featured less (although we will be paid for the BASIC amount) and no UEFA games when the new TV contract started last season and it is split over the 3 year period and we are only getting the basic amount (when we got paid more last season as more games were televised)? As I understand it it is not based on position in PL but a basic + additional (for any extra over the basic amount) Well I'm amazed that someone who by their own admission has worked in two different banks - that you don't seem to have even a rudimentary understanding of a businesses Trading Account! - as you may have well read in my other job at a high street bank it was retail customer only (i.e. common veryday people and NOT businesses. And as I have already said in my present job all that is taken care by Front Office, Risk and the Aufdit teams. So why should I have a rudimentary understanding when I never come across it? Mr Magoo, no offence meant by what I posted - was just trying to lighten it a little (unsuccessfully)
Casino Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Agree with that. We will probably get more TV money this season than last. TV money is our biggest income and this will be the case for a long time imo. Ticket sales wont have much of an impact on a club like ours imo. as a percentage, its obviously small fry, but the 7? ish million we take through the gate isn't an amount we could easily wave goodbye to, as every penny we get is spent dead easy to think gate receipts don't matter, but quite wrong imo
Sluffy Posted April 28, 2009 Author Posted April 28, 2009 Enlighten me here, How can TV revenues be up this year when we have been featured less (although we will be paid for the BASIC amount) and no UEFA games when the new TV contract started last season and it is split over the 3 year period and we are only getting the basic amount (when we got paid more last season as more games were televised)? As I understand it it is not based on position in PL but a basic + additional (for any extra over the basic amount) Not sure why you addressed the question directly to me even though others answered you on this point but I will reply (as the point was raised before Traf's request to stick to the original topic). Sky money is not split equally over the three years of its contract - payment is increased annually - hence why clubs receive more Sky money year on year. Each year half of all Sky's broadcast revenue is split equally among all 20 Premier League clubs. A further 25% is distributed depending on how many televised games a club appears in. The remaining 25% of funds are awarded based on where a club finishes in the league table - (so your understanding that payment is not influenced by league position is incorrect), with higher ranking sides getting bigger pay outs. However there is an agreement of a minimum amount to be paid for televised games - even though teams may be broadcasted less than the minimum agreed - in other words Bolton will get paid for an agreed number of matches even though we may not actually be featured that many times - so less Premiership games screened this year - as compared with last year - will equate to broadly what we were paid last season (but overall income will increase due to annual payment rise). As for UEFA TV income - Traf quoted on the 'BWFC on Sky thread' - that proposed TV revenue for the game we rejected to be screened only amounted to ?25,000. We obviously will lose what little income we did receive from other UEFA Cup games last season - but I suggest that the club actually made a loss on the UEFA Cup as a whole (I believe we had to get to the semis to break even) and so the club will actually make a nett profit this season from not competing in the competition even allowing for the loss from losing its UEFA Cup TV income.
bwfc6ix Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Not sure why you addressed the question directly to me even though others answered you on this point but I will reply (as the point was raised before Traf's request to stick to the original topic). Sky money is not split equally over the three years of its contract - payment is increased annually - hence why clubs receive more Sky money year on year. Each year half of all Sky's broadcast revenue is split equally among all 20 Premier League clubs. A further 25% is distributed depending on how many televised games a club appears in. The remaining 25% of funds are awarded based on where a club finishes in the league table - (so your understanding that payment is not influenced by league position is incorrect), with higher ranking sides getting bigger pay outs. However there is an agreement of a minimum amount to be paid for televised games - even though teams may be broadcasted less than the minimum agreed - in other words Bolton will get paid for an agreed number of matches even though we may not actually be featured that many times - so less Premiership games screened this year - as compared with last year - will equate to broadly what we were paid last season (but overall income will increase due to annual payment rise). As for UEFA TV income - Traf quoted on the 'BWFC on Sky thread' - that proposed TV revenue for the game we rejected to be screened only amounted to ?25,000. We obviously will lose what little income we did receive from other UEFA Cup games last season - but I suggest that the club actually made a loss on the UEFA Cup as a whole (I believe we had to get to the semis to break even) and so the club will actually make a nett profit this season from not competing in the competition even allowing for the loss from losing its UEFA Cup TV income. http://soccerlens.com/20072008-premier-lea...v-revenue/7415/ This is for last season, but still shows the TV revenue and how it increased from the season before that.
fruitbat69 Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Not sure why you addressed the question directly to me even though others answered you on this point but I will reply (as the point was raised before Traf's request to stick to the original topic). Sky money is not split equally over the three years of its contract - payment is increased annually - hence why clubs receive more Sky money year on year. Each year half of all Sky's broadcast revenue is split equally among all 20 Premier League clubs. A further 25% is distributed depending on how many televised games a club appears in. The remaining 25% of funds are awarded based on where a club finishes in the league table - (so your understanding that payment is not influenced by league position is incorrect), with higher ranking sides getting bigger pay outs. However there is an agreement of a minimum amount to be paid for televised games - even though teams may be broadcasted less than the minimum agreed - in other words Bolton will get paid for an agreed number of matches even though we may not actually be featured that many times - so less Premiership games screened this year - as compared with last year - will equate to broadly what we were paid last season (but overall income will increase due to annual payment rise). As for UEFA TV income - Traf quoted on the 'BWFC on Sky thread' - that proposed TV revenue for the game we rejected to be screened only amounted to ?25,000. We obviously will lose what little income we did receive from other UEFA Cup games last season - but I suggest that the club actually made a loss on the UEFA Cup as a whole (I believe we had to get to the semis to break even) and so the club will actually make a nett profit this season from not competing in the competition even allowing for the loss from losing its UEFA Cup TV income. Hi sluf How much would we have earned if we had won the Uefa cup last year.Also when you say break even;do the club have to pay for there own travel hotel etc on there UEFA trips or do UEFA pay for that. Cheers Fbat
Carlos Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 Hi sluf How much would we have earned if we had won the Uefa cup last year.Also when you say break even;do the club have to pay for there own travel hotel etc on there UEFA trips or do UEFA pay for that. Cheers Fbat I assume you are attempting to take the piss?
fruitbat69 Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 I assume you are attempting to take the piss? Nope that is why I am asking the question
Traf Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 UEFA do not provide accommodation for clubs playing abroad. That's why the Macedonians stayed in the Holiday Inn facing the ground, because it's cheap.
HR Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 How can reasoned debate go on for so long with people repeating themselves backwards and forwards without talking in detail about wages? They are the catalyst for our finances, Megson has reduced these by around 30%, a players transfer fee in accounting terms is written off over the period of his contract or until he is sold. How the clubs debt is structured and when creditors are due are what matters. or some shit like that...
mixup Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 If it is any help, I have a copy of the audited accounts to 30 June 2008 in front of me. At that date Burnden Leisure had ?72.7 million pounds of liabilities falling due within one year and ?32.6 million falling due after more than one year. About half of this is (?51.7 million) is interest-bearing borrowings. The amounts due for payment within one year include ?38.9 million of accruals (up from ?14.0 million in the previous year). This is not explained but is most likely to mainly comprise deferred obligations on player transfers, agents fees and the like. Liabilities also include ?6.5 million of deferred income. i.e Monies received prior to the year end but which relate to future periods. In the accounting year the club spent ?35.1 million on player acquisitions taking on increased debt to fund the difference between purchases and sales of players.
no balls Posted April 28, 2009 Posted April 28, 2009 If it is any help, I have a copy of the audited accounts to 30 June 2008 in front of me. I'm sorry to lower tone of this clearly intelligent debate, but I have to ask: Why?
Recommended Posts