Jump to content

div

Accounts to the Year Ended May 2018

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Soctty said:

The season we don't sell someone, we have less to spend. Result - we spend less money. Simple. 

I'd understand your panic if we were in huge debt, or had players on 5 year contracts without any get out clauses, but since that's not the case I'm not concerned. 

Simple indeed.

We just had to get rid of a manager and assistant on 3 year contracts, and we have quite a few shit players on 2 or 3 year contracts. These problems don't just go away with some happy clapping. I am assuming you are way too young to remember how we got in to your last financial mess, but the current approach to spending money and gambling on staying in the Premier League is exactly how it started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, oaksoft said:

You are attempting to use a relative measure to prove that an absolute measure is too high. :lol:

There is an easier way to win this argument Josh.

Go and find another competent board of directors who would do that job for less money or for free and report back to us and we'll take it from there.

We have only made £77k of profit because we have substantial outgoings which we would not have been able to support without having sold a couple of players.

£35k is nothing in comparison.

Ccomplaining about a £35k expense when we would have lost £600k without selling two players is not the action of someone who understands finance.

Of course we both know why you are attempting to attack the board over this.

Behave yourself.

I’m pretty sure we wouldn’t of had such outgoings if we didn’t already have the income from other places. 

should be £0 taken out from the directors just the same as what the previous board did. 

But no I’m stupid for having that opinion.

Nice cars and meals to pay for though needs to come from somewhere (most likely already an expense hidden away from the £35k taken out by the directors) 

Oh shit we don’t have any footballs... better ask SMISA

LOL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Suggestion said:

should be £0 taken out from the directors just the same as what the previous board did. 

But no I’m stupid for having that opinion.

 

OK then let's ask the obvious question.

Would you work for free?

I don't mean running Saints. Just a general question. Would you work for free?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As this is the internet it seems every point of debate needs to become very tribal! Immediately we have a "pro board" and "anti board" faction.

I am not saying the board are doing a bad job at all. I'm just saying those numbers are concerning, and I believe it is time for a better explanation of how we will be managing our finances in the future. I'd have hoped the McGinn money could have been used to allow us to diversify revenue streams, but it looks like it will just be used to allow us to break even. That's not good enough in my opinion and requires an explanation - I'm still very happy with the overall job Gordon Scott has done thus far though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kemp said:

As this is the internet it seems every point of debate needs to become very tribal! Immediately we have a "pro board" and "anti board" faction.

I am not saying the board are doing a bad job at all. I'm just saying those numbers are concerning, and I believe it is time for a better explanation of how we will be managing our finances in the future. I'd have hoped the McGinn money could have been used to allow us to diversify revenue streams, but it looks like it will just be used to allow us to break even. That's not good enough in my opinion and requires an explanation - I'm still very happy with the overall job Gordon Scott has done thus far though.

How can you say the McGinn money will only allow us to break even, without knowing the increases of revenue that will come with being in the top league?

It’s a fairly wild assumption to make, no? As I said earlier, without being able to interrogate the numbers it’s hard to make a call on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aldo_j said:

How can you say the McGinn money will only allow us to break even, without knowing the increases of revenue that will come with being in the top league?

It’s a fairly wild assumption to make, no? As I said earlier, without being able to interrogate the numbers it’s hard to make a call on it.

I could be wrong, but looking at the running costs and estimating how much the Stubbs debacle will cost I'd imagine a fair chunk of it has gone on the day to day.

Similarly, the McAllister, Mallan, Morgan money went on day to day running and Josh Heaton!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, smcc said:

"Chris(Stewart) is a leading litigation partner and solicitor advocate with a major Scottish law practice, holding extended rights of audience in the country’s highest courts; Court of Session, Supreme Court and Privy Council.  "  I don't think he is a full time employee.

Fair enough, was just a stab in the dark. I didn’t know there were two that had it as FT jobs. Can’t think who else he’s referring to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Suggestion said:

I’m pretty sure we wouldn’t of had such outgoings if we didn’t already have the income from other places. 

should be £0 taken out from the directors just the same as what the previous board did. 

But no I’m stupid for having that opinion.

Nice cars and meals to pay for though needs to come from somewhere (most likely already an expense hidden away from the £35k taken out by the directors) 

Oh shit we don’t have any footballs... better ask SMISA

LOL 

The old directors came in as a labour of love and saved our club. Was the £1 million selling fee just to recoup what they put in, or did that represent a profit? Did they not claim a single business expense? 

Regardless, to expect the same from everyone after is not appropriate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kemp said:

I could be wrong, but looking at the running costs and estimating how much the Stubbs debacle will cost I'd imagine a fair chunk of it has gone on the day to day.

Similarly, the McAllister, Mallan, Morgan money went on day to day running and Josh Heaton!

But then you need to factor in increased crowds, ticket prices, sponsorship, etc, etc.

Maybe it’s a question for SMISA...how much detail will members get on the running of the club when the takeover is complete?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kemp said:

Simple indeed.

We just had to get rid of a manager and assistant on 3 year contracts, and we have quite a few shit players on 2 or 3 year contracts. These problems don't just go away with some happy clapping. I am assuming you are way too young to remember how we got in to your last financial mess, but the current approach to spending money and gambling on staying in the Premier League is exactly how it started.

Lovely assumptions. Wrong, of course.

We got into our last financial mess for a variety of reasons. Overspending in transfer fees for players who weren't very good, in an attempt to reach the next level. Added to that were stupid wages to guys like Archibald and Victor, which were among the highest wages paid in the league. In addition, we were forced to convert our stadium into an all seater stadium due to ridiculous regulations set out by those in charge of our game.

If you can show us spending 3 or 4 hundred grand on a number of players, paying 3 or 4 grand a week in wages to players, or spending hundreds of thousands on the stadium when it really shouldn't have been needed, I'll see the reason for the panic in all your posts.

As it is we spent £75k on one player, and I'd be very surprised if any of our players - 30 years later - are on  3 or 4 grand a week.

In short, I believe you're wetting your pants and jerking your knees simultaneously with little reason, over a set of accounts which show our turnover having risen markedly, and leaving us still with a small profit, which is surely the aim for any football club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, oaksoft said:

OK then let's ask the obvious question.

Would you work for free?

I don't mean running Saints. Just a general question. Would you work for free?

Obvcourse I would work for free like I have in the past? 

 

Work for saints for free? 100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The players should play for free and have full time jobs outwith the beautiful game. 

In fact, maybe the players should pay to play just to cover minor expenses. 

Farcical that lots of Scottish players make lots of money when they are shite at their chosen trade. 

Part time for all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, shull said:

The players should play for free and have full time jobs outwith the beautiful game. 

In fact, maybe the players should pay to play just to cover minor expenses. 

Farcical that lots of Scottish players make lots of money when they are shite at their chosen trade. 

Part time for all. 

FFS gie it a rest. :byebye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, this is exactly what we need to give the Forum a major boost.

Pissed up Buddies rampaging through the Forum over the weekend and taking no prisoners.

Thrown in a 5-0 defeat from Hearts and it will be fecking carnage.

I think I'll refrain from being teetotal for a couple of days.

Anyway,  where's Kendo ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Eric Arthur Blair said:

So (and f**k all you cunts who hate that, and yes, i am just in from the pub)...

The club made a profit during the last trading year.

Where's the beef?

I'm kinda in that camp too, what's more important for a football club, money in the bank or success on the park (promotion) - easy answer.

What's worrying is the Stubbsy fiasco and that we seem to be top heavy in staff plus looking like relegation prospects - we should be asking questions at the AGM or we could end up frittering the McGinn windfall away.

PS - Keep drinking the proper booze - not the girly stuff I do! :guinness

PPS - Where's the beef? Finally accepting its a Murrikan century?

Edited by Bud the Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, shull said:

So, this is exactly what we need to give the Forum a major boost.

Pissed up Buddies rampaging through the Forum over the weekend and taking no prisoners.

Thrown in a 5-0 defeat from Hearts and it will be fecking carnage.

I think I'll refrain from being teetotal for a couple of days.

Anyway,  where's Kendo ? 

Morning Sir. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

I'm kinda in that camp too, what's more important for a football club, money in the bank or success on the park (promotion) - easy answer.

What's worrying is the Stubbsy fiasco and that we seem to be top heavy in staff plus looking like relegation prospects - we should be asking questions at the AGM or we could end up frittering the McGinn windfall away.

PS - Keep drinking the proper booze - not the girly stuff I do! :guinness

PPS - Where's the beef? Finally accepting its a Murrikan century?

We only really have one extra background staff member from when Stubbs was here and it’s someone who’s main task is to sort out what was potentially the worst transfer window in our clubs history. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

We only really have one extra background staff member from when Stubbs was here and it’s someone who’s main task is to sort out what was potentially the worst transfer window in our clubs history. 

Doesn't change my opinion that we were already top heavy in background staff, then there’s Jimmy Nicholl lurking…………...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

We only really have one extra background staff member from when Stubbs was here and it’s someone who’s main task is to sort out what was potentially the worst transfer window in our clubs history. 

Is that not only true if and when Jimmy Nicholl actually joins up...…..Stubbs, Jackson and Sports Scientist left and Kearney, McPherson and Mendes have joined us so in actual number terms to date it is one in and one out. I may of course be mistaken and missed somebody out, have to admit to a liquid lunch today and maybe my memory is somewhat distorted!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Doesn't change my opinion that we were already top heavy in background staff, then there’s Jimmy Nicholl lurking…………...

To compare ourselves with the likes of Hamilton - a club we should be looking to compete with - they have a similar number of coaching/support staff than we do. They have two sports scientists, two physios and a strikers coach to name a few of their extravagances. Livingston also have a similar number.  In fact most clubs have managers, assistants, and then first team coach and or goalkeeping coach. A good number have strikers coaches. Clubs employ whatever they think they need.

We are nothing out of the ordinary in my opinion. I'd actually be pretty disappointed if we were to scrimp on the support the manager gets by getting rid of staff he relies on. Appreciate you think differently, but I'm happy we're giving ourselves a chance, in terms of coaching at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Doesn't change my opinion that we were already top heavy in background staff, then there’s Jimmy Nicholl lurking…………...

Did you think we were top heavy when JR was in charge? Because again it's pretty much like for like with the exception of Gus.

I'd think a team going from Championship level to SP level could be forgiven for having 1 or 2 extra staff but that's just me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, WeeBud said:

Is that not only true if and when Jimmy Nicholl actually joins up...…..Stubbs, Jackson and Sports Scientist left and Kearney, McPherson and Mendes have joined us so in actual number terms to date it is one in and one out. I may of course be mistaken and missed somebody out, have to admit to a liquid lunch today and maybe my memory is somewhat distorted!!

Yeah it's only if Nicholl comes in. Going back an extra step (like I just mentioned) Stubbs, Jackson and Rice coming in was three in and two out regarding JR but I think it's harsh to say that's really all that bad going from CH to SP level. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bazil85 said:

Did you think we were top heavy when JR was in charge? Because again it's pretty much like for like with the exception of Gus.

I'd think a team going from Championship level to SP level could be forgiven for having 1 or 2 extra staff but that's just me. 

I've said before that I don't see why we need extra coaching staff just because were in the top flight - so yes. 

As a matter of principal I think the BoD  should be challenged on all aspects of running the club at the AGM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...