HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
Can’t wait to see how this is spun to be our fault
"They wouldn't have to sack people if sisu had dropped the legals and city were playing there. When will sisu stop damaging our city #nopm"Can’t wait to see how this is spun to be our fault
They wouldn't have to suck people
I’ve tried reasoning on that forum... came off it
Hoffman taking over?Yeah, and the end result of the NOPM campaign that people like him advocate is....
There really is no hope for some people.
I'd wager he got the info from ACL staff members FPI don't know, possibly feeling a bit sensitive but it's the idea of using that story as another dig at Wasps
I don't know, possibly feeling a bit sensitive but it's the idea of using that story as another dig at Wasps
But we've had months, if not years, of people telling us CCFC are insignificant and not playing at the Ricoh wouldn't impact on ACL.I think that once CCFC were no longer there this was going to be the logical conclusion
Very good analysis as always OSBI think that once CCFC were no longer there this was going to be the logical conclusion...... some people would lose their jobs. Looking at it very coldly i am surprised it hasn't happened sooner, turnover was decreasing, there appears to be a certain amount of overlap of functions, the need to cost cut etc. It shouldn't be a surprise really. Let alone because CCFC are not there any more.
But on a more personal level you have to feel for the people affected for no fault of their own. What the article didn't need was cut and pasting yet again the version of history, I think it carries more weight focusing on the human element, just my opinion
I am pretty certain that the loss of CCFC is the driver but it could be that they are also looking to do things differently. eg run everything through wasps, or through Delaware or out sourcing the marketing function for example.
Also would be pretty certain the source of the internet chatter and therefore article would be disgruntled employees.
You dont make people redundant unless it is a fundamental change in something for the foreseeable future. I think we can assume that wasps are planning ahead with no CCFC, and i dont mean till this time next year. If they have just made say 40% of their staff redundant that could be quite a saving ...... 2018 there were 57 staff at a cost of £1.9m.
I know CCFC executives said CCFC would cost wasps £2m and went on to provide all sorts of turnover figures to prove it. That is turnover (is it before or after VAT?), what about the costs of generating that turnover, those are saved at the same time. Looking at the accounts suggests to me that is a substantial figure, but depends on where that income is derived to be able to calculate it. (was it in IEC which is responsible for stadium hospitality & events <run through Delaware> or was it all in ACL) .
Yes the rent is lost £100k, The matchday recharge is lost but so too the costs to wasps, car parking revenue is lost, the discounts or retros on food & beverage purchases perhaps, maybe an element of rent from the Casino but that's not a given, perhaps an effect on stadium sponsorship etc etc. Yes lost turnover but the lost net profit is not £2m and profitability is a key issue especially for the bond covenant. The bigger worry for wasps than turnover is cashflow and always has been.
This latest news doesn't actually make me think wasps are about to go bust though (or even in the next two years), it also doesn't make me think there is an easy way back for CCFC . They (wasps) are going to have a few months where they will get a good battering certainly. Come 31st October it will be interesting to see their financials.
But we've had months, if not years, of people telling us CCFC are insignificant and not playing at the Ricoh wouldn't impact on ACL.
I suspect when the council, wasps etc say CCFC aren't needed and will make no difference to the business most people don't assume that means people will lose their jobs. At best its misleading and given their track record I doubt that was accidental.All guess work, same as anyone else making claims on this forum, but that is pretty close to being no worse off without us but just a for instance and it could be way out.
It's the perfect excuse.Can’t wait to see how this is spun to be our fault
Heard they’ve got rid of marketing team, good news
When they can afford to pay someone to take it down!How long before the club crest is removed from the ricoh ?
Don't they belong to the football club ?When they can afford to pay someone to take it down!
Going to have to store them at Ryton until the new stadium is built.
I thought the Telegraph was Wasp's marketing team?
If that's the case then maybe the telegraqph could start reporting some facts.Maybe they ran out of money to pay for sponsored articles and website adverts
I see from your username your a CCFC finance Director. Am i right in assuming this is a self propelled title. Good detailed analysis either way and looking forward to your views when they file their next set of accounts.I think that once CCFC were no longer there this was going to be the logical conclusion...... some people would lose their jobs. Looking at it very coldly i am surprised it hasn't happened sooner, turnover was decreasing, there appears to be a certain amount of overlap of functions, the need to cost cut etc. It shouldn't be a surprise really. Let alone because CCFC are not there any more.
But on a more personal level you have to feel for the people affected for no fault of their own. What the article didn't need was cut and pasting yet again the version of history, I think it carries more weight focusing on the human element, just my opinion
I am pretty certain that the loss of CCFC is the driver but it could be that they are also looking to do things differently. eg run everything through wasps, or through Delaware or out sourcing the marketing function for example.
Also would be pretty certain the source of the internet chatter and therefore article would be disgruntled employees.
You dont make people redundant unless it is a fundamental change in something for the foreseeable future. I think we can assume that wasps are planning ahead with no CCFC, and i dont mean till this time next year. If they have just made say 40% of their staff redundant that could be quite a saving ...... 2018 there were 57 staff at a cost of £1.9m.
I know CCFC executives said CCFC would cost wasps £2m and went on to provide all sorts of turnover figures to prove it. That is turnover (is it before or after VAT?), what about the costs of generating that turnover, those are saved at the same time. Looking at the accounts suggests to me that is a substantial figure, but depends on where that income is derived to be able to calculate it. (was it in IEC which is responsible for stadium hospitality & events <run through Delaware> or was it all in ACL) .
Yes the rent is lost £100k, The matchday recharge is lost but so too the costs to wasps, car parking revenue is lost, the discounts or retros on food & beverage purchases perhaps, maybe an element of rent from the Casino but that's not a given, perhaps an effect on stadium sponsorship etc etc. Yes lost turnover but the lost net profit is not £2m and profitability is a key issue especially for the bond covenant. The bigger worry for wasps than turnover is cashflow and always has been.
This latest news doesn't actually make me think wasps are about to go bust though (or even in the next two years), it also doesn't make me think there is an easy way back for CCFC . They (wasps) are going to have a few months where they will get a good battering certainly. Come 31st October it will be interesting to see their financials.
I see from your username your a CCFC finance Director. Am i right in assuming this is a self propelled title. Good detailed analysis either way and looking forward to your views when they file their next set of accounts.
The title isn't self appointed Nick gave it to me years ago just for this forum as a jokey title because of all the comments i make regarding finance & accounts
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?