Accounts to the Year Ended May 2018

[faraway saint]

Just now, oaksoft said:

You are absolutely the very last person to be picking up anyone on here for repeating themselves.

You think?

Proof, apart from pointing and laughing at PRicky?

 

[oaksoft]

5 hours ago, Yflab said:

I hope that Baz and Oaky are going to the AGM. 

I hope popcorn will be on sale.

Off. No chance. I have way better things to do with my time.

I've taken issue with Baz's comments (as has pretty much everyone else TBH), given a brief analysis of the accounts to show one or two very worrying numbers hidden behind what looks like a good profit, shown where I think the problem is with the current strategy and given a view on how to devise a better one.

People can now make their own minds up about how they feel.

Unless I see something else of interest I'm done on this discussion I think.

[oaksoft]

2 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

You think?

Proof, apart from pointing and laughing at PRicky?

 

You were sin-binned for a while for being repetitive and boring.

Not even Ricky managed that.

[faraway saint]

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

You were sin-binned for a while for being repetitive and boring.

Not even Ricky managed that.

Really? 

I think you'll find that was someone else. 

All subjective right enough, you're well up there for being interesting. 

[oaksoft]

19 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Really? 

I think you'll find that was someone else. 

All subjective right enough, you're well up there for being interesting. 

Yes I am.

Now stop coming onto a thread about finance and complaining about people discussing accounts.

It's weird.

[oaksoft]

For those who are interested in Accounts but find it a bit baffling I can recommend the following books which have been mainstays on my bookshelf for years.

1) Accounts Demystified by Anthony Rice. This book is about £3 on Amazon right now and is exceptionally good. It takes you through the entire process of Balance Sheets and Profit and Loss Accounts in a dumbed down manner as though you were a complete beginner. All you need to be able to do is add and subtract. It's brilliant. After reading this you'll have no problem understanding the accounts of Saints and any other Limited company. Most importantly it shows you how to perform financial analysis on a sample company which is recording record profits and turnover but actually is on course for disaster. It shows you how to spot that.

2) Book-keeping and Accounts by Frank Wood and Sheila Robinson. This is a great book which takes you through all the day to day accounting needed to create the Balance sheet and Profit and Loss accounts. For those who want a more in depth look, thsi is a great book.

[bazil85]

7 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Off. No chance. I have way better things to do with my time.

I've taken issue with Baz's comments (as has pretty much everyone else TBH), given a brief analysis of the accounts to show one or two very worrying numbers hidden behind what looks like a good profit, shown where I think the problem is with the current strategy and given a view on how to devise a better one.

People can now make their own minds up about how they feel.

Unless I see something else of interest I'm done on this discussion I think.

Or about four people commenting on a post. Sums up your very one tracked view on certain subjects I’d say 

[Lord Pityme]

Just to put the profligacy of our board into context. I think we should be mounting a smisa drive to buy them out asap before the damage is irreversible 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46379337

[Soctty]

It should be noted that there is a lot more to accounting than the numbers, and looking at any number of simple, or even complex, examples in a book doesn't give you any degree of expertise, or give the depth of understanding required to do any sort of meaningful analysis on the accounts of a slightly more complex organisation.

[stlucifer]

41 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Just to put the profligacy of our board into context. I think we should be mounting a smisa drive to buy them out asap before the damage is irreversible 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46379337

Apples and oranges LPM.

They are at a completely different stage in their development. They are an established SPL team and have had relative cup success in the last year so come back in a few years and comment on this.

[FTOF]

07/08: £380,000

08/09: -£704,000

09/10: - £18.884

10/11: £541,863

11/12: -£600,000

12/13: -£184,500

13/14: -£184,854

14/15: -£1,150,000 (LOL)

15/16 - -£412,000

16/17 - -£104,000

 

The Motherwell losses and one profit in the last ten years. If you take away the 1 million transfer fee for kipre, they made around a 690k profit on the back of two cup finals and a 7th place premiership finish.

 

 

[Callum Gilhooley]

07/08: £380,000
08/09: -£704,000
09/10: - £18.884
10/11: £541,863
11/12: -£600,000
12/13: -£184,500
13/14: -£184,854
14/15: -£1,150,000 (LOL)
15/16 - -£412,000
16/17 - -£104,000
 
The Motherwell losses and one profit in the last ten years. If you take away the 1 million transfer fee for kipre, they made around a 690k profit on the back of two cup finals and a 7th place premiership finish.
 
 

Their prize money for Last season was £750000 more than we got for our league win also.

[Soctty]

49 minutes ago, FTOF said:

07/08: £380,000

08/09: -£704,000

09/10: - £18.884

10/11: £541,863

11/12: -£600,000

12/13: -£184,500

13/14: -£184,854

14/15: -£1,150,000 (LOL)

15/16 - -£412,000

16/17 - -£104,000

 

The Motherwell losses and one profit in the last ten years. If you take away the 1 million transfer fee for kipre, they made around a 690k profit on the back of two cup finals and a 7th place premiership finish.

 

 

Kudos to you for the research on this. You'll still find people trying to be amateur accountants on the back of a brief look at our accounts, and some light reading...

 

[Soctty]

11 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

 

Their prize money for Last season was £750000 more than we got for our league win also.

 

Ah, but how many exceptional items were there in those accounts... 

[waldorf34]

2 hours ago, Soctty said:

It should be noted that there is a lot more to accounting than the numbers, and looking at any number of simple, or even complex, examples in a book doesn't give you any degree of expertise, or give the depth of understanding required to do any sort of meaningful analysis on the accounts of a slightly more complex organisation.

Correct, need to do forensic auditing  to get detail.

[Sweeper07]

On ‎11‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 12:36 AM, oaksoft said:

Part two.

The problem with the current business model can be summarised quite easily.

Firstly, we spend whatever we bring in and aim to break even.

The problem is obvious.

During good times (i.e. selling a player) we spunk the money within a couple of months of getting it like a National Lottery winner who takes home £5m and is back on benefits within 6 months having blown the lot on hookers and coke. It's as though the money is burning a hole in the pocket of the board and the thought of actually keeping it causes sleepless nights and stress palpitations.

What that means is we have no rainy day fund for when we have no players left to sell and have to slash the playing budget to avoid a massive operating loss.

So we get boom and bust. We win a Cup and then within a year or two we are relegated. It happened in the 80's and it happened again this decade.

That is one of the reasons why IMO we are a yo-yo club and cannot establish any signficant period of sustained success.

Gordon and the previous board have done a great job keeping us afloat but they are making the same mistake.

Neither of them can separate the football results side of the club (which involves emotion) from the strategic running of the business itself (which requires cold numbers and good financial analysis). To compare with a "normal" company, Saints are being run for the benefits of their customers. This is a terrible way to run a business IMO because you make bad decision repeatedly which successful businessmen (like Scott and Gilmour before him) would never normally do with their other companies. One former BOD member re-mortgaged his house at one point. Insane! Absolutely insane!

A business should be run to make profit, not to win Cups and promotion. Of course we want to eventually see success on the pitch but it should not be the day to day driver for the board. They are in place to make a profit and keep the company afloat and financially stable during periods of great instability in the game in general. That is their legal duty and it's why we probably shouldn't have die-hard fans on the board. Of course net profit is great but not if the underlying operating profit shows a massive club-threatening loss which is only reversed due to one-off exceptional items. If you don't at the very least understand the difference highlighted here then IMO you have no business being anywhere near the boardroom.

So in summary, the current business model causes boom and bust financial performance for the club. This should not really cause debate. We have seen it and are experiencing it again and the root cause of that is a board who are making business decisions which focus way too much on the club's performance on the pitch rather than the boring mundane task of doing what is best for the company. They appear to frequently confuse the two by assuming that running a sound ship wil remove any chance of success on the pitch. That, IMO is the key message to come out from these accounts. We should enjoy another year of profit but it is correct to be concerned when a modicum of financial analysis is applied to the financial results.

Not having a pop at you - but Nigel Mansell re-mortgaged his house in order that he could stay in motor racing - I think you will agree that it paid off for him big style?

It is about RISK MANAGEMENT - and football as a business is very risky.. most successful entrepreneurs are prepared to take higher risks than the average person - sometimes they have several failures, but often at some point they end up doing well. What we need as a club is balance on the Board, not one extreme or the other, but a willingness not to be too inflexible.

I salute the BOD member who put his house on the line for our club - but I don't think he did it without having insight and influence to ensure that it did not end in tears... it proved to be a calculated risk which turned out fine.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

On 11/27/2018 at 1:27 PM, bazil85 said:

So you’d have been happy for us to be sitting mid-table in the championship and sitting on all this transfer money? Even though by doing that it would have cost us million+ in increased revenue being in the SP generates? Yeah that’s really safeguarding the clubs future. 

If another club had a cash flow issue and couldn’t pay us we’d sue them. Out of the uncountable number of transfers in world football, I can maybe think of a handful of cases where a club hasn’t received transfer money. In the unlikely chance that happened,  we should not take any risk at all and be happy being a mid-table (or below) championship club? Absolute madness 

i’ll put it to you. 

- what’s we’re the chances of Celtic not being able to pay for Morgan?

-Derby or Barnsley paying what’s realistically a pretty small sum?  

Id say low to zero, so there isn’t really a great deal of risk. But let’s say one of those deals fell through. What would we have done? How about not sign any players in January/ less in the summer and ride out the difference. Do you think we’d of recorded a bank breaking loss? 

Im sorry but some of these points are beyond laughable. 

Can you stop lecturing people taking a different view to yourself and suggesting we don't know how football works or understand business or that we'd rather be sitting mid-table in the Championship with a higher profit in the accounts.

People are perfectly entitled to take the view that Jack Ross did a good job in turning the club around and getting us promoted and still say at the same time that as well as making 4 or 5 great signings in 2 years at the club he frittered away all the money from selling Naismith, McAllister, Mallan and Morgan on signing a big squad and on lots of players who were always bizarre signings to begin with (Donatti and Hill were both signed as cover for McGinn were they not, Flynn was signed to replace McShane a few months after JR signed McShane)

If Alan Stubbs had signed Danny Mullen and Ryan Flynn on two and a half year deals do you think people would be wondering if they were premiership quality or happy with the length of those deals?

 

[bazil85]

4 minutes ago, Dibbles old paperboy said:

Can you stop lecturing people taking a different view to yourself and suggesting we don't know how football works or understand business or that we'd rather be sitting mid-table in the Championship with a higher profit in the accounts.

People are perfectly entitled to take the view that Jack Ross did a good job in turning the club around and getting us promoted and still say at the same time that as well as making 4 or 5 great signings in 2 years at the club he frittered away all the money from selling Naismith, McAllister, Mallan and Morgan on signing a big squad and on lots of players who were always bizarre signings to begin with (Donatti and Hill were both signed as cover for McGinn were they not, Flynn was signed to replace McShane a few months after JR signed McShane)

If Alan Stubbs had signed Danny Mullen and Ryan Flynn on two and a half year deals do you think people would be wondering if they were premiership quality or happy with the length of those deals?

 

Not lecturing at all, like I've said many times. I've asked a very simple question, that has so far not been answered without the implication being we'd likely still be in the Championship. 

The point I have made about JR signings, did you know for a fact Donatti and Hill wouldn't be needed? They were both signed for midfield cover yes but they were signed as safeguard measures and we have to imagine on relatively small financial costs.  Wold you have been happy if the profit was maybe £15k, £20k higher which I imagine would be the maximum financial cost for both? Look at Hearts, an injury crisis can happen at anytime, this is actually a great example of risk mitigation and not so much risk taking.

As for Danny Mullen and Ryan Flynn, they both have contributed to the title run in/ this season so not sure where the issue is. I will ask yet again though, who has the crystal ball and knew the destiny of all these players?

The simple matter is we could not have cut the budget without not signing players. Say GLS told JR 'you can only sign five less players.' Those five less players might have been Kirkpatrick, Hilson, Buchanan and the two Stewart's. Could very easily have been C Smith, Reilly, Davis, L Smith and Mcshane though. If someone wants to present to me a strategy that would have gotten us promotion, the SP income that goes along with that and increased our profit margins for last financial year, please go ahead. 

[oaksoft]

6 hours ago, Soctty said:

It should be noted that there is a lot more to accounting than the numbers, and looking at any number of simple, or even complex, examples in a book doesn't give you any degree of expertise, or give the depth of understanding required to do any sort of meaningful analysis on the accounts of a slightly more complex organisation.

Now that just isn't true.

Accounting is pretty basic arithmetic which has been deliberately wrapped up in impenetrable jargon to hide that simplicity.

Those books I named will give a beginner a very good grasp of the basics and will introduce them to enough financial anaylsis to be able to make good and meaningful judgments about simple accounts like Saints.

You are making this seem a far more complex task than it really is.

You don't need to be an accounting expert to do this. You shouldn't discourage people like that.

Edited November 29, 2018 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

4 hours ago, Soctty said:

Kudos to you for the research on this. You'll still find people trying to be amateur accountants on the back of a brief look at our accounts, and some light reading...

 

You are making a lot of noise without actually showing any original thought yourself.

I am no amateur accountant.

 

Edited November 29, 2018 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

4 hours ago, Sweeper07 said:

Not having a pop at you - but Nigel Mansell re-mortgaged his house in order that he could stay in motor racing - I think you will agree that it paid off for him big style?

It is about RISK MANAGEMENT - and football as a business is very risky.. most successful entrepreneurs are prepared to take higher risks than the average person - sometimes they have several failures, but often at some point they end up doing well. What we need as a club is balance on the Board, not one extreme or the other, but a willingness not to be too inflexible.

I salute the BOD member who put his house on the line for our club - but I don't think he did it without having insight and influence to ensure that it did not end in tears... it proved to be a calculated risk which turned out fine.

We are extremely lucky he was prepared to do that.

Over the last 20 years we have lost our ground and been EXTREMELY fortunate to tie up such a good deal for the new stadium before the financial crash dug in, repeatedly been saved by one or more directors putting their hands in their pockets with handouts and loans and now we have migrated to relying on big transfers to keep us on an even keel.

All of this is easily worked out from our accounts without need for decades of accountancy expertise.

We have suffered 2 promotions, 1 relegation, 2 Cup wins, 2 losing appearances at finals and a long list of seasons where we have flirted with relegation in the last 12 years alone both in the SPL and the Championship. That's the boom and bust for you.

Fans simply need to decide whether they think this is a picture of good financial management or not.

Personally, this concerns me because it cannot go on forever. We could easily have ended up in administration on several occasions over the years. It is not negative to point this out.

[FTOF]

7 hours ago, Soctty said:

Kudos to you for the research on this. You'll still find people trying to be amateur accountants on the back of a brief look at our accounts, and some light reading...
 

Research? Pfffft. I copied it from the Motherwell thread on P&B.

Edited November 29, 2018 by FTOF

[Sweeper07]

34 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

We are extremely lucky he was prepared to do that.

Over the last 20 years we have lost our ground and been EXTREMELY fortunate to tie up such a good deal for the new stadium before the financial crash dug in, repeatedly been saved by one or more directors putting their hands in their pockets with handouts and loans and now we have migrated to relying on big transfers to keep us on an even keel.

All of this is easily worked out from our accounts without need for decades of accountancy expertise.

We have suffered 2 promotions, 1 relegation, 2 Cup wins, 2 losing appearances at finals and a long list of seasons where we have flirted with relegation in the last 12 years alone both in the SPL and the Championship. That's the boom and bust for you.

Fans simply need to decide whether they think this is a picture of good financial management or not.

Personally, this concerns me because it cannot go on forever. We could easily have ended up in administration on several occasions over the years. It is not negative to point this out.

I do not really disagree with anything you say here... the reality is though some of the management we have had has been  in general pretty decent... tying up good deals when the opportunities arose..selling players for something, rather than letting them go for free, letting managers sign new players which pushed the boat out a bit and brought a fair bit of  success etc. (OK some cheapskate manager decisions had the opposite effect too)

We have been a club who really ought to have been more consistent and managed to stay in the top league, but so many factors affected our effectiveness as a football club. Other clubs have been similar to us. One club that has risen greatly in the last few decades is the Fakes. I remember them down a couple of leagues when we were playing in Europe - they passed us on the way up and have been top 8 mainly ever since.

Fans can have their opinions, but unless there is fan ownership, the directors will be making the decisions.

It is not negative to highlight your concerns... it is fine... another team not too far away though did go into Administration… it continues to live beyond its means, but I suspect they had no real choice of staying in league 2,1 and championship for multiple more seasons and pi**ing off their fan base which would negatively affect their ongoing revenues...they are still speculating to improve results and are back in the top 3 in Scotland once more. Who knows what their longer term plans are for finance, but they must have them. (They have had some seriously bad BOD hassles too)

We don't have the potential income they have, but we must find a way of not being the team that has one of the 2 or 3 lowest budgets in the Premiership - otherwise we will remain a boom and buster outfit in the years ahead.

Last years success brought in more revenue from season tickets sales I believe. Many fans will stick it through the thick and thin, but more will attend to see good football where we are competing at the highest level (which in Scotland is not that high) More fan income, top tier placing money, higher tv and other revenue streams and some player sales - are all needed to allow us to have a budget that can attract players who are good enough to keep us top 8 or there abouts...

Progress is learning from the past, and performing on and off the field at a higher level...

[Dibbles old paperboy]

4 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Not lecturing at all, like I've said many times. I've asked a very simple question, that has so far not been answered without the implication being we'd likely still be in the Championship. 

The point I have made about JR signings, did you know for a fact Donatti and Hill wouldn't be needed? They were both signed for midfield cover yes but they were signed as safeguard measures and we have to imagine on relatively small financial costs.  Wold you have been happy if the profit was maybe £15k, £20k higher which I imagine would be the maximum financial cost for both? Look at Hearts, an injury crisis can happen at anytime, this is actually a great example of risk mitigation and not so much risk taking.

As for Danny Mullen and Ryan Flynn, they both have contributed to the title run in/ this season so not sure where the issue is. I will ask yet again though, who has the crystal ball and knew the destiny of all these players?

The simple matter is we could not have cut the budget without not signing players. Say GLS told JR 'you can only sign five less players.' Those five less players might have been Kirkpatrick, Hilson, Buchanan and the two Stewart's. Could very easily have been C Smith, Reilly, Davis, L Smith and Mcshane though. If someone wants to present to me a strategy that would have gotten us promotion, the SP income that goes along with that and increased our profit margins for last financial year, please go ahead. 

If we hadn't bought anyone in the January window I have no doubt that we would still be in the premiership today, we didn't get injuries to McGinn or Morgan and didn't use Hill, Donatti, or Hippolyte much. Mullen and Flynn did replace Reilly and McShane in the starting XI but it is questionable whether either was an improvement.

Why do you assume that players were signed on relatively small financial outlays when the wage bill has gone up 46% and we've burned through £700k in transfer fees subsidising the higher wage bill.

[oaksoft]

55 minutes ago, Sweeper07 said:

I do not really disagree with anything you say here... the reality is though some of the management we have had has been  in general pretty decent... tying up good deals when the opportunities arose..selling players for something, rather than letting them go for free, letting managers sign new players which pushed the boat out a bit and brought a fair bit of  success etc. (OK some cheapskate manager decisions had the opposite effect too)

We have been a club who really ought to have been more consistent and managed to stay in the top league, but so many factors affected our effectiveness as a football club. Other clubs have been similar to us. One club that has risen greatly in the last few decades is the Fakes. I remember them down a couple of leagues when we were playing in Europe - they passed us on the way up and have been top 8 mainly ever since.

Fans can have their opinions, but unless there is fan ownership, the directors will be making the decisions.

It is not negative to highlight your concerns... it is fine... another team not too far away though did go into Administration… it continues to live beyond its means, but I suspect they had no real choice of staying in league 2,1 and championship for multiple more seasons and pi**ing off their fan base which would negatively affect their ongoing revenues...they are still speculating to improve results and are back in the top 3 in Scotland once more. Who knows what their longer term plans are for finance, but they must have them. (They have had some seriously bad BOD hassles too)

We don't have the potential income they have, but we must find a way of not being the team that has one of the 2 or 3 lowest budgets in the Premiership - otherwise we will remain a boom and buster outfit in the years ahead.

Last years success brought in more revenue from season tickets sales I believe. Many fans will stick it through the thick and thin, but more will attend to see good football where we are competing at the highest level (which in Scotland is not that high) More fan income, top tier placing money, higher tv and other revenue streams and some player sales - are all needed to allow us to have a budget that can attract players who are good enough to keep us top 8 or there abouts...

Progress is learning from the past, and performing on and off the field at a higher level...

Oh the last few boards have definitely done some very good things for the club. I wouldn't dispute that at all.

When we get fan ownership I'd like to see a different strategy.

I have no idea who amongst us is going to be involved though and I'm very uneasy about that.