Club Accounts 2016/2017

[letsallsingtogether]

I think what is worrying is that CET set the highlights on the situation improving (slightly) however this clearly isn't the case as liabilities are increasing by some significant margins

Maybe it is an improvement, from where they thought it would be.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Thats the point though - why should a football club or any sports club think that basic financial principles do not apply or be allowed to operate in that way. There is for any club bar a select few in the Premier just as much chance of a bad year. You really shouldn't operate a multi million pound business, any business, on a maybe

Why are we so bad?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Thats the point though - why should a football club or any sports club think that basic financial principles do not apply or be allowed to operate in that way. There is for any club bar a select few in the Premier just as much chance of a bad year. You really shouldn't operate a multi million pound business, any business, on a maybe

Indeed. The logical implication of skybluesam's post is that you would never do business with football clubs as they're basically run at a loss and might fall over at any minute.

 

[Covstu]

Maybe it is an improvement, from where they thought it would be.

maybe or more convenient fact reporting...

 

[oldskyblue58]

Why are we so bad?

I do not think as a club we are worse than anyone else. Owners that's a different question.

Never have been advocate of football being somehow a special case. I understand the link and effect on communities but by allowing owners and football authorities to operate as they do then that puts those links and communities at risk.

 

[lifeskyblue]

I do not think as a club we are worse than anyone else. Owners that's a different question.

Ok...so bottom line does this make it more or less likely that the owners sell up?





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[oldskyblue58]

changes nothing

 

[skybluesam66]

Indeed. The logical implication of skybluesam's post is that you would never do business with football clubs as they're basically run at a loss and might fall over at any minute.

technically you are correct
Brighton / Bournemouth are 2 examples of clubs who gambled and it paid off
if they hadnt got into the premier league, we would have 2 more failed businesses

historically football clubs have been run at a loss, albeit with much smaller numbers, and the owner - usually a local businessman has underwritten that loss
Nothing has changed, except that local businessman is now a billionaire (or in our case a bunch of clueless buffoons)

 

[lifeskyblue]

changes nothing

Damn....I was hoping for ‘they will be packing their bags as we speak’ or ‘they see that investment brings great returns and will be here for the long haul’



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fernandopartridge]

technically you are correct
Brighton / Bournemouth are 2 examples of clubs who gambled and it paid off
if they hadnt got into the premier league, we would have 2 more failed businesses

historically football clubs have been run at a loss, albeit with much smaller numbers, and the owner - usually a local businessman has underwritten that loss
Nothing has changed, except that local businessman is now a billionaire (or in our case a bunch of clueless buffoons)

Maybe you're right. I don't think the losses were to the same extent mind. Interestingly, having looked at the club's accounts from 1982 (turnover of £1,340,103) its turnover has actually gone up in real terms by 40%+ despite not owning a ground, a Sky Blue connection or being a top flight club. In 1982 it made a loss of £161k after adding back transfer income received (showing that the way things are under SISU is the same as it ever was)!

Edit, the first published accounts are from 1981. They're written in a far less formal and clearer (this is a football club) way. Not like the clinical business accounts produced these days. In 1980 and 1981 including transfer income the club was profitable, despite a half million write down on Jimmy Hill's investment in the American Soccer League.

 

[oucho]

So we're in the 4th division leaking a million quid a year. I wonder whether Joy wishes she'd never got involved in all this "Coventry football club" business all those years ago....

 

[singers_pore]

Depends when that is paid. If it’s end of the season (30th June) it will be in the next set. If it’s not long after the final they’ll be included in the figures above.

No it won’t. Revenue is recnized when it is earned, not when the cash is received.

 

[wingy]

So the £500K input, would that have been January ?
If so when we allegedly knocked back offers on Stevenson ,Lameries and Haynes .
Was that good stuff?

 

[oldskyblue58]

The club website says this about the wages

"Staff costs to 31 May 2017 decreased from the previous year, from £4,306,746 to £4,172,030"

the Otium accounts say



Turns out they have forgotten on the website to add in the wages paid out as direct costs (I would guess the stewards etc)

 

[oldskyblue58]

So the £500K input, would that have been January ?
If so when we allegedly knocked back offers on Stevenson ,Lameries and Haynes .
Was that good stuff?

Could have been it doesn't give the timings but even with the loan the club had negative cash flow of £481k. So without the loan it would not have had the money in the bank to pay the bills.

did they knock back the bids or simply ask too much ? Who knows

 

[oldskyblue58]

Edit, the first published accounts are from 1981. They're written in a far less formal and clearer (this is a football club) way. Not like the clinical business accounts produced these days. In 1980 and 1981 including transfer income the club was profitable, despite a half million write down on Jimmy Hill's investment in the American Soccer League.

The accounting rules and presentation requirements have changed an awful lot since 1981 fp. There was more leeway in presentation back then

 

[oldfiver]

If it wasn't to Directors it wouldn't be in that section would it? Pretty much every line of expenditure will be a mixture of paid and accrued, so I'm just assuming they have expressly made that point as they are embarrassed about the amount.

So I think its agreed the cost is mainly for Fisher, do you think he's worth it?

I haven't agreed that so why do you think I have?

 

[oldfiver]

No it won’t. Revenue is recnized when it is earned, not when the cash is received.

In the case of performance and similar add ons they can only be reflected as "earned" when the targets are achieved. So earned and received tend to be close together

 

[fernandopartridge]

The accounting rules and presentation requirements have changed an awful lot since 1981 fp. There was more leeway in presentation back then

Fair enough, though the chairman's statement part even makes you as a reader and interested party feel part of a club. Amazing how much income the club gained from the Pool and Lottery, wonder why that stopped? Supposed the National Lottery hasn't helped with that kind of thing

 

[stupot07]

Would be interesting to compare wage bills with the rest of the league, I would doubt very much we were anywhere near the 4th lowest wage bills in the league.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[italiahorse]

Would be interesting to compare wage bills with the rest of the league, I would doubt very much we were anywhere near the 4th lowest wage bills in the league.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

We can't see the player wages split though so we can't compare the figure that counts,

 

[Rusty Trombone]

I haven't agreed that so why do you think I have?

Because you said 'some' might be Anderson, I think he was there for around 4 months of that year, and you intimated that Deering wouldn't have much if any. Wouldn't you agree the Directors have been a failure, are they worth £175k, especially if Fisher was part time?

 

[Nick]

Wasn't Venus a director for part of that?

I'd say 175p is overpayment for all of them!

 

[Nick]

Would be interesting to compare wage bills with the rest of the league, I would doubt very much we were anywhere near the 4th lowest wage bills in the league.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Nick]

Surely the bloke who the media use for football finance would notice that?

 

[Londonccfcfan]

There is a chance this years ends figures (2018) will improve compared to last years (2017) results as revealed today.

2018 -
1) Will Probably show an increase in Matchday revenue as our average gate will probably exceed last years from league 1 prices having remained unchanged.
(if we get into play offs) banking on some big gates. Slight positive that no one really expected.
Gates of 4/5/6 k havnt really materialised (albeit our average will have been inflated somewhat by Accrington att.)

2) As some have pointed out there have been player sales: Stevenson, Thomas, Harries, and the youth kid who went to man utd for a little fee will show in 2018.

3) Our profits from this year from FA cup wont be far short/or similar to what we earned from Winning Checkatrade! possible exclusion will be TV money. We earned proabably more in prize money from FA cup than we did from Checkatrade.

4)Possibly trigger payments for Maddison goals/Appearances/England U21/, Wilson possible England Call up. before May 31st.

The other thing is there arnt many clubs who make a profit as such in the EFL, the clubs cut their cloth accordingly but are still in debt, thus are financed.

Debt is an essential part of any Business or arganisation or even Governement for that matter. (all about your credit ratings) and how you finance your debt. Sisu being a hedge fund will be ok in this front.
Unless you are apple that has no debt and is totally Cash Rich they are the exception.

Going forward nothing other than the normal concerns stand out/stadium/matchday revenue/Academy location.

 

[Londonccfcfan]

Surely the bloke who the media use for football finance would notice that?

Club quickly jumps on this!

 

[Nick]

Wasnt really that quick, it took a good few hours.

Strangely I asked him straight away if that's right and he ignored me but then repeated it.

Can see why they need to, people will be thinking 76p of every £1 the fans spend goes to SISU. Dangerous.

 

[Londonccfcfan]

Sacking/Recruiting 2/3 managers isn't cheap. Even though Mowbray walked without taking a penny.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Wasn't Venus a director for part of that?

I'd say 175p is overpayment for all of them!

Venus and Fisher are listed as the Directors of Otium, Venus for most but not all of the year, that amounts to £75k. Another £100k for Sky Blue Sports and Leisure, the Directors listed as Fisher and Deering. No mention of Anderson at all in the Directors list, not sure why.

 

[Captain Dart]

Surely the bloke who the media use for football finance would notice that?

Surely he is correct until and unless that debt is written off. You can't just ignore it because it has not been paid.

 

[Nick]

Surely he is correct until and unless that debt is written off. You can't just ignore it because it has not been paid.

You can when he uses the words "paid out" and "payments".

 

[Captain Dart]

You can when he uses the words "paid out" and "payments".

It is still a debt though isn't it, do you think a fairy godmother is going to pay it off?

 

[Nick]

It is still a debt though isn't it, do you think a fairy godmother is going to pay it off?

No, I think it's misleading and factually incorrect and as a Football Finance expert he would surely know that?

Can you phone up about my mortgage people to tell them there's no difference between paid or not?

 

[oldfiver]

Venus and Fisher are listed as the Directors of Otium, Venus for most but not all of the year, that amounts to £75k. Another £100k for Sky Blue Sports and Leisure, the Directors listed as Fisher and Deering. No mention of Anderson at all in the Directors list, not sure why.

On his Linkedin :

Executive Vice Chairman and Managing Director
Coventry City Football Club
2015 – 2016 (1 year)