AGM Report

[barrowaberdeen]

The real conversation about where we go from here is yet to be had frankly. Fair enough, maybe it wasn't the time and should be at the next AGM.

1) Do we stay full time or not?

2) Do we stay as a members club or switch to gain investment? (and pay some of the board back hopefully too, some of these guys are far from minted themselves)

3) What can we do whilst we hope/work for a Public/Private investment to re-develop the ground?

We need to look realistically at the consequences of these decisions. Everything else flows from there IMO.

Nobody should be abusing anyone on the board, that's just ridiculous and offensive- it's not a Vaughan/George Rolls/Michael Knighton situation.

For those who say 'well why don't people do it then' well I would imagine the criteria being 'if you come in be prepared to stick 8k in for a bill in an emergency, with little prospect of getting it back, and people calling you a tosser' would put folk off. A shame because I do thnk the B.O.D need fresh ideas.

[Hadrian]

The assumption of ThreeLieIns that gate income is equivalent to an attendance of 800 over 23 games appears incorrect. If one was to imagine that the average paid admission after VAT is deducted is £10 (and I guess it might be less than that) then an average attendance of c970 would be needed to bring in £223000 over 23 games.

Ignoring the two Cup/Trophy 'bonus seasons', football income has in recent years provided just over half of total income, stressing how important the initiatives to bring in sponsorship and non-football income are.

I don't think we should try to second-guess the financial support directors have given. If they have lent money then they are creditors and entitled to receive their money back. I hope they will ultimately be able to receive it. We should certainly not assume this support to be a donation.

Thanks, nevertheless, are certainly due to those individuals and companies that may have loaned money.

[rytham is a dancer]

if da chair man is skin flint we need to sign a new one. luk at cardiff for example. if we can get someone minted maybe singapore george? he might put some funds in and we can do what fleetwood do and win into league one one day. we cat challenge for a title if daz and dave keep getting told 2 sign shit players.

[Reg]

Hard to believe that it hasn't been mentioned yet that TK said I was 'brilliant'.

At least people at the club know my worth.

First it was Matt Henney confirming that 'Reg knows his stuff' and now TK has confirmed my brilliance.

That should silence the doubters

It WAS at the end of the night & he had been knocking them Stiegals back!!!

Spoilsport

[Room with a view]

if da chair man is skin flint we need to sign a new one. luk at cardiff for example. if we can get someone minted maybe singapore george? he might put some funds in and we can do what fleetwood do and win into league one one day. we cat challenge for a title if daz and dave keep getting told 2 sign [SwearFilter] players.

I hope this is meant to be a joke?

[Three Lie Ins]

The assumption of ThreeLieIns that gate income is equivalent to an attendance of 800 over 23 games appears incorrect. If one was to imagine that the average paid admission after VAT is deducted is £10 (and I guess it might be less than that) then an average attendance of c970 would be needed to bring in £223000 over 23 games.

Ignoring the two Cup/Trophy 'bonus seasons', football income has in recent years provided just over half of total income, stressing how important the initiatives to bring in sponsorship and non-football income are.

I don't think we should try to second-guess the financial support directors have given. If they have lent money then they are creditors and entitled to receive their money back. I hope they will ultimately be able to receive it. We should certainly not assume this support to be a donation.

Thanks, nevertheless, are certainly due to those individuals and companies that may have loaned money.

You're right, I forgot about VAT, which makes the situation worse, as there's less potential for gate money beating the £223K target.

[Three Lie Ins]

Manageable? I find those figures alarming. Assume a total cost base circa £500M, (£360K wages, £140K other costs - travel, training facilities, ground maintenance, rates, police, debt interest, etc). Gates at £223K are less than 50% of required income to break even, leaving a deficit of £277k. Having said that the gate estimate is conservative being equivalent to attendance of 800 for 23 home league matches, but even allowing for over prudence there is still a hell of a deficit to make up and we are highly reliant on unpredictable cup runs. To break even or make a profit we have to throw sixes every time, something that is impossible.

Again not true, if you'd actually bothered to read my earlier post you'd have seen about the other non-football income. This totalled 291K 2 seasons ago

John I've checked your posts and cannot find a reference to the £291K, however if I missed it sorry, and thanks for providing info. However knowing about the £291K makes the figures even worse

Two Seasons Ago: Loss 172k; Walker Fee £45K; Gate Income £297K (calculated as £223K/900*1200); Other Income £291K. Total Costs circa £800K
Wage Bill £485K; Other costs £315K; Total £800K

Now: Gate Income £223K; Other Income ????
Wages £359K; Other costs (estimated as 75% of two seasons ago in proportion to fall in wages) £236K; Total circa £600K

So let's look at the numbers. It looks like we need an income of circa £600k to cover costs (depending on amount of non wage costs). League gate receipts down 25% from two years ago amount to less than 40% of the required income. We need income of £377K in addition to our league gate receipts, which is more than two seasons ago and anyone who visits HS regularly will have noticed there seems to be less corporate and fund raising this season than in past seasons. It is really desperate, and our survival seems to be completely dependent on unpredictable cup runs.

The club should publish its budget because anyone looking at the published accounts will only come to one conclusion. TK says everything is manageable, I want to believe him, but the available evidence suggests otherwise. Publish the budget.

[phud]

I find it disappointing that some people on here continue to TWINE about them.

Is it because they STRING us along?

That should help Spirit of 1990 to read my post in the right spirit.

[spirit of 1990]

Is it because they STRING us along?

That should help Spirit of 1990 to read my post in the right spirit.

Don't geddit.

[John Very Little]

John I've checked your posts and cannot find a reference to the £291K, however if I missed it sorry, and thanks for providing info. However knowing about the £291K makes the figures even worse
Two Seasons Ago: Loss 172k; Walker Fee £45K; Gate Income £297K (calculated as £223K/900*1200); Other Income £291K. Total Costs circa £800K Wage Bill £485K; Other costs £315K; Total £800K
Now:Gate Income £223K; Other Income ????Wages £359K; Other costs (estimated as 75% of two seasons ago in proportion to fall in wages) £236K; Total circa £600K
So let's look at the numbers. It looks like we need an income of circa £600k to cover costs (depending on amount of non wage costs). League gate receipts down 25% from two years ago amount to less than 40% of the required income. We need income of £377K in addition to our league gate receipts, which is more than two seasons ago and anyone who visits HS regularly will have noticed there seems to be less corporate and fund raising this season than in past seasons. It is really desperate, and our survival seems to be completely dependent on unpredictable cup runs.
The club should publish its budget because anyone looking at the published accounts will only come to one conclusion. TK says everything is manageable, I want to believe him, but the available evidence suggests otherwise. Publish the budget.

As already mentioned TK said that although there may have been less corporate this season they are more strict and aren't offering the deals they were so the overall corporate income isn't changed much. The wage bill is down 126K and other costs have also been reduced eg staffing costs. I can't remember where else savings have been made, posssibly on transport and accommodation costs for away trips. Compared to 2 seasons ago the corporate rooms are also generating more cash now, there was a meeting downstairs on Thursday night when the AGM was going on upstairs.

I don't think the club can produce an exact budget figure only a rough one as things change as the season goes on and they certainly won't publish a figure to the world for commercial confidentiality reasons. The club won't want creditors seeing this information and come chasing after them and risk them putting them into administration. TK did say things were easier now than they were but I don't know how much of this season has been factored in. Its possible things have got better but may have slipped again due to the lower gates, but this has been made up for with extra income from the Cup/Trophy matches this season. I think it would have been difficult to determine a figure to base a budget on at the start of the season?

[HenneysKnee]

Is there any properly part time teams left in the conference?

[Konaldo]

If the director loans are in fact loans. What is the interest on these loans then?

[audigex]

As far as I'm aware they're "loans" in the sense that they're not gifts - the directors could potentially ask for the money back - but are not charging interest on them.

I could be wrong, and either way I'd be interested to see what the terms of such loans are.

[Stephen Leonard]

As far as I'm aware they're "loans" in the sense that they're not gifts - the directors could potentially ask for the money back - but are not charging interest on them.

I could be wrong, and either way I'd be interested to see what the terms of such loans are.

No interest has being charged on the loans.

[PRR]

As far as I'm aware they're "loans" in the sense that they're not gifts - the directors could potentially ask for the money back - but are not charging interest on them.

I could be wrong, and either way I'd be interested to see what the terms of such loans are.

No interest has being charged on the loans.

I was thought that the very first loan was secured on the ground and was at an above interest rate level of interest? I seem to recall it being discussed on the old forum. Anyone else recall? Not sure about any of the subsequent loans