The Club's Finances

[no balls]

So who's winning then, Sluffy or Dutchwhite?

Howd on, I reckon mixup could come up on the outside at the final furlong!

[Carlos]

So who's winning then, Sluffy or Dutchwhite?

 

Sluffy won a long time ago, he's to busy bombarding us with information too realise it.

[Smiffs]

Sluffy won a long time ago, he's to busy bombarding us with information too realise it.

 

Your spelling is shocking.

[Carlos]

Your spelling is shocking.

 

Your not wrong

 

I'd been at a computer all day, your eyesight goes all funny.

[Smiffs]

Your not wrong

 

Was that irony or sarcasm?

 

[Carlos]

Was that irony or sarcasm?

 

 

Irony I think.

[DutchWhites]

I'll let sluffy have that one as he seems a bit too close with all the facts and figures - which makes me believe he is on the inside :-)

Plus I couldn't be bothered with regards to searching on the net.

 

Anway just on way back home today, well I do need to be back for the Wigan game, after spending last couple of days off celebrating/feeling upset (sp) with the Dutchies. Queens Day and the awful tragedy in Apeldoorn.

 

Queens Day is such a great couple of days just to get wasted and have fun with the Dutchies - always try to make it over for it, ever since I first experienced it 5 years ago!!!!

[bolty58]

I'll let sluffy have that one as he seems a bit too close with all the facts and figures - which makes me believe he is on the inside :-)

Plus I couldn't be bothered with regards to searching on the net.

 

Anway just on way back home today, well I do need to be back for the Wigan game, after spending last couple of days off celebrating/feeling upset (sp) with the Dutchies. Queens Day and the awful tragedy in Apeldoorn.

 

Queens Day is such a great couple of days just to get wasted and have fun with the Dutchies - always try to make it over for it, ever since I first experienced it 5 years ago!!!!

 

 

Like dykes eh?

[Traf]

There's nowt wrong with sticking your fingers in dykes.

[Sweep]

There's nowt wrong with sticking your fingers in dykes.

as long as it's not Dick Van Dyke

[mixup]

I'm sorry to lower tone of this clearly intelligent debate, but I have to ask: Why?

It's an interesting question but did you mean why bother reading the accounts or why bother commenting.

The club's debt or to be more precise the 'net debt' has been referred to on a number of occasions with contributors having only a limited understanding of what it means.

Over the last two financial years the Club spent ?49.5 million on new players but paid only ?25 miillion. The rest has to be found and is additional to the ?53.5 million referred to as debt. Most, if not all, of the money from the sale of Nicholas Anelka had already been received by the date of the last balance sheet.

[no balls]

It's an interesting question but did you mean why bother reading the accounts or why bother commenting.

 

Blimey, it's ages since I asked that, & I've got a rubbish memory BUT I think I asked why, in a flippant way, to why did you have a copy of the audited accounts to 30 June 2008 in front of you. It just seemed an odd thing to have to hand.

[Guest]

It's an interesting question but did you mean why bother reading the accounts or why bother commenting.

The club's debt or to be more precise the 'net debt' has been referred to on a number of occasions with contributors having only a limited understanding of what it means.

Over the last two financial years the Club spent ?49.5 million on new players but paid only ?25 miillion. The rest has to be found and is additional to the ?53.5 million referred to as debt. Most, if not all, of the money from the sale of Nicholas Anelka had already been received by the date of the last balance sheet.

mixedup

 

not the time or the place, but really, you are not correct on those figures

 

tbc

[Mounts Kipper]

Whichever way you look at it it is a lot of money however the club have a good number of assets not least the players, I would guess the players we have would conservatively sell at 30 million, the hotel for another trench of money and also the office space and exhbition halls must be worth a few bob, the nett difference between are 50 million of debt and are assets would be very little and would probably be covered by a parachute payment if we did go down.

[mixup]

mixedup

 

not the time or the place, but really, you are not correct on those figures

 

tbc

With respect it seems unreasonable to say that the figures are incorrect without explaining which figures and why.

I have no personal information but rely entirely on the figures in the Annual Reports and audited accounts.

Note 11 in the 2007 audited accounts shows that the club spent ?14,373,000 on player acquisitions in that year, the lions share being Nicolas Anelka.

Note 11 in the 2008 accounts shows a figure of ?35,114,000 on acquisitions in that year.(Andy O'Brien, Gary Cahill, Matt Taylor, Gretar Steinsson, Johan Elmander and Fabrice Muamba).

That adds up to ?49.5 million in two years.

The cash flow statement (note 25) shows payments on purchase of players of ?12,606,000 in 2007 and ?12,380,000 in 2008.

That adds up to payments over the two financial years of ?25 million and therefore leaves ?24.5 million outstanding.

The outstanding amounts appear to be included in Accruals in Note 16 (Creditors: amounts falling due within one year) which increased from ?14,005,000 in 2007 to ?38,880,000 in 2008.

The cash flow statement also shows that sale of players brought in ?1,843,000 in 2007 and ?14,867,000 in 2008. As the sales of Nicolas Anelka and Abdoulaiye Faye are reported to have been for ?14 million and ?2 million respectively most of this money was clearly received before 30 June 2008.

Note 17 shows details of the borrowings totalling ?51,720,000 which are the main components of the net debt of ?53.5 million.

It does not include accruals, deferred income, trade creditors or tax and social security creditors.

[Guest]

With respect it seems unreasonable to say that the figures are incorrect without explaining which figures and why.

I have no personal information but rely entirely on the figures in the Annual Reports and audited accounts.

Note 11 in the 2007 audited accounts shows that the club spent ?14,373,000 on player acquisitions in that year, the lions share being Nicolas Anelka.

Note 11 in the 2008 accounts shows a figure of ?35,114,000 on acquisitions in that year.(Andy O'Brien, Gary Cahill, Matt Taylor, Gretar Steinsson, Johan Elmander and Fabrice Muamba).

That adds up to ?49.5 million in two years.

The cash flow statement (note 25) shows payments on purchase of players of ?12,606,000 in 2007 and ?12,380,000 in 2008.

That adds up to payments over the two financial years of ?25 million and therefore leaves ?24.5 million outstanding.

The outstanding amounts appear to be included in Accruals in Note 16 (Creditors: amounts falling due within one year) which increased from ?14,005,000 in 2007 to ?38,880,000 in 2008.

The cash flow statement also shows that sale of players brought in ?1,843,000 in 2007 and ?14,867,000 in 2008. As the sales of Nicolas Anelka and Abdoulaiye Faye are reported to have been for ?14 million and ?2 million respectively most of this money was clearly received before 30 June 2008.

Note 17 shows details of the borrowings totalling ?51,720,000 which are the main components of the net debt of ?53.5 million.

It does not include accruals, deferred income, trade creditors or tax and social security creditors.

I was pissed, so couldn't find the desire.

 

I will address it, later.

[Sluffy]

With respect it seems unreasonable to say that the figures are incorrect without explaining which figures and why.

I have no personal information but rely entirely on the figures in the Annual Reports and audited accounts.

Note 11 in the 2007 audited accounts shows that the club spent ?14,373,000 on player acquisitions in that year, the lions share being Nicolas Anelka.

Note 11 in the 2008 accounts shows a figure of ?35,114,000 on acquisitions in that year.(Andy O'Brien, Gary Cahill, Matt Taylor, Gretar Steinsson, Johan Elmander and Fabrice Muamba).

That adds up to ?49.5 million in two years.

The cash flow statement (note 25) shows payments on purchase of players of ?12,606,000 in 2007 and ?12,380,000 in 2008.

That adds up to payments over the two financial years of ?25 million and therefore leaves ?24.5 million outstanding.

The outstanding amounts appear to be included in Accruals in Note 16 (Creditors: amounts falling due within one year) which increased from ?14,005,000 in 2007 to ?38,880,000 in 2008.

The cash flow statement also shows that sale of players brought in ?1,843,000 in 2007 and ?14,867,000 in 2008. As the sales of Nicolas Anelka and Abdoulaiye Faye are reported to have been for ?14 million and ?2 million respectively most of this money was clearly received before 30 June 2008.

Note 17 shows details of the borrowings totalling ?51,720,000 which are the main components of the net debt of ?53.5 million.

It does not include accruals, deferred income, trade creditors or tax and social security creditors.

 

I think one of the points Bolton Diver may be getting at is that although we have spent ?49.5 million on players in 2007 and 2008 - we also at the same time obtained ?49.5 million worth of assets too.

 

You have quite rightly pointed out that these transfers have to be paid for - but you don't seem to have taken into account that the clubs assets will have risen ?49.5 million also - and could be sold to recover some/all/more of the total transfer fees paid (and outstanding).

 

So as well as to say that we only have paid ?25 million in transfer fees for 2007 and 2008 you would also have to take account of the income from the sale of those assets too - ?16.6 million - thus a truer reflection would be a short fall of about ?8 million on transfer dealings outstanding during that two year period.

Edited May 2, 2009 by Sluffy

[mixup]

I think one of the points Bolton Diver may be getting at is that although we have spent ?49.5 million on players in 2007 and 2008 - we also at the same time obtained ?49.5 million worth of assets too.

 

You have quite rightly pointed out that these transfers have to be paid for - but you don't seem to have taken into account that the clubs assets will have risen ?49.5 million also - and could be sold to recover some/all/more of the total transfer fees paid (and outstanding).

 

So as well as to say that we only have paid ?25 million in transfer fees for 2007 and 2008 you would also have to take account of the income from the sale of those assets too - ?16.6 million - thus a truer reflection would be a short fall of about ?8 million on transfer dealings outstanding during that two year period.

You are right in saying that the net cash outflow on players in the two years is just over ?8 million but the point I was making is that the audited accounts demonstrate a liability to pay ?24.5 million more than this. This is in addition to the net debt of ?53.5 million and not part of it and according to the accounts was due to be paid during the current financial year.

Of course the investment in players is represented by assets which have a value and, of course, values may go up or down. Nicolas Anelka's value thankfully went up by quite a bit, but investment in players, though necessary, is a risky business.

The business as a whole also has a value and the Board can be in no doubt that this is largely dependent on maintaining Premiership status.

Over the last two years the Board have pushed the boat out further than many have realised and the need to recruit more playing staff at the end of this season is obvious. When much of the competion has deeper pockets supporters need to be realistic in their expectations.

[Taffy White]

so in brief summary of all thats been said, if we stay in the Prem were ok - if we get relegated were in deep sh1T ?

[Rembrandt]

With respect it seems unreasonable to say that the figures are incorrect without explaining which figures and why.

I have no personal information but rely entirely on the figures in the Annual Reports and audited accounts.

Note 11 in the 2007 audited accounts shows that the club spent ?14,373,000 on player acquisitions in that year, the lions share being Nicolas Anelka.

Note 11 in the 2008 accounts shows a figure of ?35,114,000 on acquisitions in that year.(Andy O'Brien, Gary Cahill, Matt Taylor, Gretar Steinsson, Johan Elmander and Fabrice Muamba).

That adds up to ?49.5 million in two years.

The cash flow statement (note 25) shows payments on purchase of players of ?12,606,000 in 2007 and ?12,380,000 in 2008.

That adds up to payments over the two financial years of ?25 million and therefore leaves ?24.5 million outstanding.

The outstanding amounts appear to be included in Accruals in Note 16 (Creditors: amounts falling due within one year) which increased from ?14,005,000 in 2007 to ?38,880,000 in 2008.

The cash flow statement also shows that sale of players brought in ?1,843,000 in 2007 and ?14,867,000 in 2008. As the sales of Nicolas Anelka and Abdoulaiye Faye are reported to have been for ?14 million and ?2 million respectively most of this money was clearly received before 30 June 2008.

Note 17 shows details of the borrowings totalling ?51,720,000 which are the main components of the net debt of ?53.5 million.

It does not include accruals, deferred income, trade creditors or tax and social security creditors.

 

The quoted transfer fees for those players adds up to around ?26m. Does that ?35m include their wages for the whole of their signed contracts too ?

[frank_spencer]

The quoted transfer fees for those players adds up to around ?26m. Does that ?35m include their wages for the whole of their signed contracts too ?

 

At a guess the ?35m probably includes any signing on fees and assorted rubbish like that

[mixup]

The quoted transfer fees for those players adds up to around ?26m. Does that ?35m include their wages for the whole of their signed contracts too ?

The six players quoted are the main ones. There will be a few others of lesser amounts. The figures include agents fees and these can amount to a lot even where the transfer fee is not very much. The biggest fee was Johan Elmander over which estimates have varied including speculation as to whether the amounts payable were in Euros or GBP. I don't know the answer.

Despite a profit of ?8.5 million on player transfers last year the Club lost ?8.1 million. To put it another way the expenditure was ?16.6 million more than normal income.

These figures are peanuts to many Premiership clubs and their owners but Bolton Wanderers are not in that position. I expect that the lower numbers of playing staff and backroom staff over the last year are connected to the need to get the finances in better shape.