and 9 years later it is still all his fault is it ? Its that simple is it ? :facepalm:
yes I can .... its called actually living within the means of the club........... year to 31/05/10 we paid 111% of turnover as wages year before was 118% and thats before any other overheads! ...... that is unsustainable and has nothing at all to do with Richardson. Check out the new proposed rules for financial control, they go to the real heart of the matter.
Yes i understand what that might mean for the quality of player we might get and our league prospects.......... but whats more important a season or two of half chance (most likely 18th position) or a secure and long term future ?
Could we have stayed at HR, yes but I doubt the current position would have been any different because we would have mortgaged it to the hilt to just keep going (with crippling finance costs), maybe even had to sell and rent back. Was the Ricoh a good idea i think so, because it has great potential if they get it right, you would not have got the other income sources it develops at HR. No we dont own it, but we have the possibility of doing so in the future, and without the sale of HR we would have been in the nightmare financial meltdown long ago
I also doubt if you check , that the £60m debt was all attributable to Richardsons tenure, we have been losing money for decades. Had we not sold the ground we would have been bust 10 years ago. At the time I reckon there were not many fans complaining about the money being spent on players, we were still living beyond our means though werent we. Plus there were others on the Board who could and should have done better..... its called joint and several liability. Also the current debt of the club doesnt actually cost the club anything because SISU &co own most of it and charge no interest ... it doesnt look good on the balance sheet but it is not what is making the situation worse it doesnt increase the annual losses.
Think you will also find that a big chunk of those £60m debts were written off when SISU took over or deferred with little prospect of ever being paid.
The criticism I might have is that as a Board we didnt have the balls back then to do what our M69 neighbours did and go into administration whilst we actually had some assets.... rise from the ashes at a time it was easier to do so ..... but then do/did i really want the club in administration ? Oh and from memory Festers administration caused delays and added millions to our new stadium, even added millions to our annual losses due to finance costs, pity we didnt get in first.
I am no fan of Richardson but I am at least more realistic than some. So before folk go blaming one particular member of a board of directors for all our woes lets have some facts supported by real evidence, not just expressions of opinion that are asserted as fact. If those proper facts prove the case then I will accept it is all Richardsons fault but somehow I think people are being naiive in their financial assessment. You cannot write off the last 9 years or the many and various contributions of others.
Not one Board of Directors (maybe SISU & co do) and very few fans have embraced the fact that we live beyond the means of the club and its unsustainable!
When Alan Sugar was asked while he was Chairman of Spurs why the likes of Coventry are able to spend millions on players yet Spurs weren't, his reply was "teams like Coventry will go bust, that's why".
First off it was my point that it wasnt just down to one man. Secondly if people are going to make the accusations then it should be supported by evidence which is sadly lacking by those who cry it was all Richardsons fault, it wasnt but there isnt any doubt he shoulders some blame (as do previous and subsequent boards of directors). As for for fairness I suggest you take a look at that yourself after reading the next paragraph
Just for info the facts are the current CCFC Limited was formed in 1995. In 1996 Turnover was £6.4m and losses of £15m due to transfer fees, net liabilities were £15m. By 2002 it had accumulated losses/debts of £13.9m. Turnover was up to £13.7m in 2002 and £20.4m in 2001(excluding player sales). It made a loss of £1.1m in 2002 and a profit of £0.7m in 2001 including Transfer dealings. So the majority of debts/accumulated losses by 2002 were made in 1996 (ie the other years of Richardson about broke even - some were in profit). The latest accounts to 2010 show accumulated losses/debts of £48.2m and turnover at £9.2m, losses of £3m and £7m the previous year (and thats without paying interest on the debt). Richardson was removed by the club 30th January 2002.
You do the maths as to when the majority of the losses/debts were accumulated and when most of the liabilities were incurred. Not a fan of Richardson but I think you should get the facts first - they are available at Company House. Hardly points to our present situation being all Richardsons fault now does it? I wont be doing further research just because you and others cant be bothered.
So perhaps you can tell us why Richardson spent millions decontaminating an area we don't own ~ or who Tesco paid to buy their site on the ground we decontaminated ?
There are awful lot of black holes in accounts. What wa in the non-disclosure agreement signed by both parties when BR sold out for £1 ?
If you've ever been to a football match then you'll notice that there's a section of supporters who couldn't care less about your "research"
They are looking for quite simply - a hero and a zero - someones name to sing and someone to swear at, it's been a depressing week at work and there is not much the future holds, the club is the identity and the game (aswell as the day on the piss) is the one thing to look forward too.
If we have a car crash - we look for someone to blame.
The recession - everyone's got an opinion on who's to blame.
CCFC are in a mess - someones to blame, and no matter how much you campaign to defend him, Richardson will be held responsible by a section of the support.
The thief who stole our biggest asset but no one is allowed to tell the truth as he sold all his shares for a quid to avoid a court case
Chubby Brown!
Having run businesses for many years accounts tell us not a true picture of any company. losses on accounts make less tax payable etc and usually means directors or owners taking out bigger saleries so the company does not make a profit . On the matter of facts BR was the 2nd highest paid chairman/ ceo in the country when in charge the year we went down. Top paid man was martin edwards man u, champions i think that year, does that speak volumes about BRFirst off it was my point that it wasnt just down to one man. Secondly if people are going to make the accusations then it should be supported by evidence which is sadly lacking by those who cry it was all Richardsons fault, it wasnt but there isnt any doubt he shoulders some blame (as do previous and subsequent boards of directors). As for for fairness I suggest you take a look at that yourself after reading the next paragraph
Just for info the facts are the current CCFC Limited was formed in 1995. In 1996 Turnover was £6.4m and losses of £15m due to transfer fees, net liabilities were £15m. By 2002 it had accumulated losses/debts of £13.9m. Turnover was up to £13.7m in 2002 and £20.4m in 2001(excluding player sales). It made a loss of £1.1m in 2002 and a profit of £0.7m in 2001 including Transfer dealings. So the majority of debts/accumulated losses by 2002 were made in 1996 (ie the other years of Richardson about broke even - some were in profit). The latest accounts to 2010 show accumulated losses/debts of £48.2m and turnover at £9.2m, losses of £3m and £7m the previous year (and thats without paying interest on the debt). Richardson was removed by the club 30th January 2002.
You do the maths as to when the majority of the losses/debts were accumulated and when most of the liabilities were incurred. Not a fan of Richardson but I think you should get the facts first - they are available at Company House. Hardly points to our present situation being all Richardsons fault now does it? I wont be doing further research just because you and others cant be bothered.
Agreed!Guys in a very real sense I dont give a damn who is to blame..... if it works for you to blame Richardson then blame him, but it is now 9 years later and I am far more interested in how CCFC becomes profitable than the blame game. None of us can change history and obviously view it differently.
BUT, our position gets worse by the day not because of history, and in financial terms 9 years is a lifetime, it gets worse because we pay out more than we bring in. Which ever way you look at it that is the one inescapeable truth. The club wont go forward until that truth becomes we receive more than we spend
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?