Jump to content

div

Accounts to the Year Ended May 2018

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Dibbles old paperboy said:

I think it was shown that Massimo Donati, Dale Hilson, Darryl Duffy, Jamie McCart,  Ross Stewart (forward),  Gregor Buchanan, Jordan Kirkpatrick, Mark Hill, Josh Todd, Myles Hippolyte and John Sutton were all pretty much surplus to requirements last season and barely featured as substitutes!

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Without the help of a fortune teller how do you suggest they trimmed specifically those players wages? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

Had it not been for the money SMISA proffered for various expenses, the club would have run at a loss.  You can argue that if SMISA had not wedged the club in then that money would not have been spent, but they did and it was.

Jack Ross spent, by our standards, a lot of money on players who barely got a look in and the off-field operation has swelled in numbers.  The chairman took a roll of the dice last season, appears to have done the same this year on and has had his (our) fingers burned by the grand folly of the Stubbs experiment.  Had it not been for the McGinn money then we would be looking at a bleak outlook this year.  That can only be explained by the board being either foolhardy and risk-friendly or very naive.

One thing the board did that I agree with, there was a clear deficit of in-depth knowldege of football and footbalers in our boardroom and McPherson might well be able to fill that void.

It wouldn't be an argument at all, SMFC were very clear on a number of occasions that without SMISA support they would fund from the budget. That could of been at the expense of a Darryl Duffy or Dale Hilson. It could equally be at the expense of a Harry Davis or Cammy Smith. 

SMFC spent what they predicted they could spend based on budget and transfer revenue. It paid off and we got promoted. Football is a risk business, the risk paid off. If it hadn't paid off and we hadn't gotten promotion we might of recorded a loss, I doubt it would have been even close to money that put the club at risk. Probably a majority of Scottish clubs run at loss some seasons. How people can be negative about the club using the money available to them to push for promotion (and achieving it) is beyond me. 

You say risk-friendly but along with others, you seem to preach very risk-adverse. The McGinn money came in mid-August, it is there to be used. Had it not come in we might not have been in a position to get rid of Stubbs and sign players like Ferdinand when we did but that does NOT mean the board took unnecessary risks. Where is your evidence for that?  

The bottom-line is there are a number of fans on here that will moan regardless of situation. The club recording a profit yet again, winning promotion and being in a position to record yet another profit next season proves that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dibbles old paperboy said:

Scouting? JR inherited Sutton and signed the rest.

Would scouting have prevented Hilson's injury?

Would we have not signed KirkPatrrick and the two Stewart's who were on lightning form the season before at a slightly lower level?

Would we have signed the injury prone Davis who was one of our most important players?

What about Buchanan and McCourt? One on form for a title winning team and one a Scotland U21 international held in high regard by Celtic..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:
14 hours ago, bazil85 said:

We’ve spent what has come in and it’s paid off. We’ve been promoted to the top league and still turned a profit yet again for the year. 

Keep the moaning for the day we spend what we don’t have... I wouldn’t hold your breath for it though, there is zero indication that’s what the club will do. 

Had it not been for the money SMISA proffered for various expenses, the club would have run at a loss.  You can argue that if SMISA had not wedged the club in then that money would not have been spent, but they did and it was.

Jack Ross spent, by our standards, a lot of money on players who barely got a look in and the off-field operation has swelled in numbers.  The chairman took a roll of the dice last season, appears to have done the same this year on and has had his (our) fingers burned by the grand folly of the Stubbs experiment.  Had it not been for the McGinn money then we would be looking at a bleak outlook this year.  That can only be explained by the board being either foolhardy and risk-friendly or very naive.

One thing the board did that I agree with, there was a clear deficit of in-depth knowldege of football and footbalers in our boardroom and McPherson might well be able to fill that void.

Isn't hindsight such a wonderful tool to reminisce upon?  B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Tv money is going to take a massive jump next season fingers crossed we will still be in the premiership. 

What difference will it make if each Club is getting the same money ? 

And, what if money received is calculated on where a Club finishes in League. 

Either way, only players and agents will get richer. 

Clubs directors  are generally thick and very wasteful with money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, renfrew bud said:

I’m a shareholder and I haven’t received accounts and neither have friends. Notice there’s no mention of when AGM is. 

Policy is to make accounts available on-line only, presumably to save money, but you’re correct the club doesn't seem to attempt to send the results out despite me making enough of a fuss to get a copy  posted one year and leaving my email address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, bazil85 said:

It is splitting hairs, I was clearly talking about the difference in profit year on year. You’ve jumped on the wording similar to how a child might act. 

You misused the phrase "operating profit'" during a post where you were having a go at other posters.

Operating profit/loss is the worrying number in the accounts, not pre-tax profit.

The fact that you dont appear to understand why, reveals that you fundamentally dont understand accounting.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

The club spent £2 million more on wages than last year. Just let that sink in... £2 million more!

The club had the money to spend, they spent it and it got us promoted. 

Wonder who would be the first person to complain if we had finished 7th in the Championship again but recorded seven figure profits. I can just see it now 'Why didn't they spend the money?'

Share this post


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

You misused the phrase "operating profit'" during a post where you were having a go at other posters.

Operating profit/loss is the worrying number in the accounts, not pre-tax profit.

The fact that you dont appear to understand why is because you fundamentally dont understand accounting.

I happen to understand accounting to a relatively high level actually. I used the wrong expression, oh gosh! Where do I stand to get tarred and feathered?

You twisting things and splitting hairs does not change facts that we recorded a much improved profit for the last FY on top of getting promoted.  

In what way is it 'worrying' we spent money that had come in and it paid off? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, bazil85 said:

We’ve spent what has come in and it’s paid off. We’ve been promoted to the top league and still turned a profit yet again for the year. 

Keep the moaning for the day we spend what we don’t have... I wouldn’t hold your breath for it though, there is zero indication that’s what the club will do. 

It's really disappointing that you cant accept where you are lacking in understanding over these accounts.

Please tell me tou have no ambition to be part of the BOD when fans take over the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Tv money is going to take a massive jump next season fingers crossed we will still be in the premiership. 

Agree with you. The place to be is in the Premiership and we need to be in it for 2 to 3 seasons to build a team capable of challenging for the top six. Simply put..money enables us to upgrade the playing staff. Harsh but true. 

Share this post


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

It's really disappointing that you cant accept where you are lacking in understanding over these accounts.

Please tell me tou have no ambition to be part of the BOD when fans take over the club.

I think most three year old's could interpret that increased profit is a good thing.

Projecting your incapability to realise making money - good, Promotion- good, onto me, doesn't really help your case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

It's really disappointing that you cant accept where you are lacking in understanding over these accounts.

Please tell me tou have no ambition to be part of the BOD when fans take over the club.

To be fair to bazil, the way operating profit  is disclosed has changed from last year's accounts to this year's. Changes in accounting standards and policies in recent years have changed the formats, disclosure and wording. 

Share this post


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

To be fair to bazil, the way operating profit  is disclosed has changed from last year's accounts to this year's. Changes in accounting standards and policies in recent years have changed the formats, disclosure and wording. 

Hence the splitting hairs comment. Cheers Soctty, never thought I'd say that :lol:

Share this post


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

I happen to understand accounting to a relatively high level actually. I used the wrong expression, oh gosh! Where do I stand to get tarred and feathered?

You twisting things and splitting hairs does not change facts that we recorded a much improved profit for the last FY on top of getting promoted.  

In what way is it 'worrying' we spent money that had come in and it paid off? 

No need for tarring and feathering but when you accuse someone who does understand accounting of splitting hairs and use the same post to have a go at other posters for being negative you have a duty to acknowledge your mistake instead of having it wrung out of you over 3 pages of the thread.

That last sentence of yours, you can kick that into the sea. Literally not a single poster has made that claim except you. Dont put words in my mouth if you want a decent conversstion.

If you want to discuss WHY it is more important to consider operating profits/loss rather than pretax profits then I will be happy to do so but you need to shelve any pretence that you have any accounting background first. Your posts are giving you away. Anyone with a shred of accountancy understanding will know exactly why our operating profit result is spine chilling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Soctty said:

To be fair to bazil, the way operating profit  is disclosed has changed from last year's accounts to this year's. Changes in accounting standards and policies in recent years have changed the formats, disclosure and wording. 

The only reason we made a profit at all was down to one-off exceptional iteams (which player sales clearly are).

That hasnt changed.

I am prepared to acknowledge that Bazil is attemtping to spin these results. The alternative is that he genuinely doesnt have a clue about accounts.

Maybe if he just acknowledged that an operating loss of £640k IS a cause for concern rather than trying to bullshit people, we could have saved ourselves a couple of pages here.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dibbles old paperboy said:

I think it was shown that Massimo Donati, Dale Hilson, Darryl Duffy, Jamie McCart,  Ross Stewart (forward),  Gregor Buchanan, Jordan Kirkpatrick, Mark Hill, Josh Todd, Myles Hippolyte and John Sutton were all pretty much surplus to requirements last season and barely featured as substitutes!

Yep, a lot of these were utterly bizarre signings at the time and were clearly going to be a waste of money. (Buchanan could be a calculated gamble, but Donati and Duffy is just spending money for the sake of it). This has continued in to this season with the Heaton transfer fee and a squad so big that Kearney has had to split in two just to make it manageable at training! A lot of these guys on 2 to 3 year contracts.

Add in Stubbs, Jackson etc we are looking at 500k to 1m pound in complete waste. Not educated gambles, just waste. This money should be used to safeguard the future of the club, not pished away.

Edited by Kemp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

No need for tarring and feathering but when you accuse someone who does understand accounting of splitting hairs and use the same post to have a go at other posters for being negative you have a duty to acknowledge your mistake instead of having it wrung out of you over 3 pages of the thread.

That last sentence of yours, you can kick that into the sea. Literally not a single poster has made that claim except you. Dont put words in my mouth if you want a decent conversstion.

If you want to discuss WHY it is more important to consider operating profits/loss rather than pretax profits then I will be happy to do so but you need to shelve any pretence that you have any accounting background first. Your posts are giving you away. Anyone with a shred of accountancy understanding will know exactly why our operating profit result is spine chilling.

Yep mistake acknowledged, oft it was massive wasn't it?  it was clearly splitting hairs though. You tried to use that to discredit my point and question my knowledge of reading accounts, which failed miserably and just made you look petty. 

You literally used the word 'worrying' in your post.  But I'm glad we agree, the accounts are anything but 'worrying' 

I am fully aware of the different context of the accounts. My point is we spent the money because we had it. We didn't spend the money and sit back hoping we'd sell a couple of players. You seem to be looking at areas of the accounts in isolation, which in my opinion would be a 'worrying' approach to the reading of any set of accounts. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it was shown that Massimo Donati, Dale Hilson, Darryl Duffy, Jamie McCart,  Ross Stewart (forward),  Gregor Buchanan, Jordan Kirkpatrick, Mark Hill, Josh Todd, Myles Hippolyte and John Sutton were all pretty much surplus to requirements last season and barely featured as substitutes!
Although I agree with the overall post, I think that's a bit harsh on Sutton. Also a couple of others were calculated gambles when signed but never worked out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Would scouting have prevented Hilson's injury?

Would we have not signed KirkPatrrick and the two Stewart's who were on lightning form the season before at a slightly lower level?

Would we have signed the injury prone Davis who was one of our most important players?

What about Buchanan and McCourt? One on form for a title winning team and one a Scotland U21 international held in high regard by Celtic..

So you think it's smart business by the club that in the 25 months since Jack Ross was appointed manager we have made 60 signings?

Jack Ross made 45 signings in under 2 years - including contract extensions to Magennis (x2), Jack Baird (x2), Josh Todd, Jamie Langfield, Gary MacKenzie (x2), Gary Irvine, Adam Eckersley, Stelious Demetriou, Craig Samson. A decent amount of Jack Ross' punts on players making the step up resulted in players being benched or loaned back out at a lower level from where we were playing and where we were going to be promoted to (Craig Storie, Pal Fjelde, Josh Todd, Ross Stewart, Ross Stewart, Jordan Kirkpatrick, Gregor Buchanan, Darryl Duffy, Mark Hill, Myles Hippolyte, Donati, Kellerman).

Of Jack Ross's 45 signings how many would you say are of premiership quality? Ryan Flynn was signed when we were running away with the Championship (as were Danny Mullen, Myles Hippolyte and Massimo Donati) on a 2 and a half year deal (as was Mullen). 

Stubbs made 11 signings in 11 weeks in charge and Kyle Magennis signed a 3rd contract extension

Kearney has made 3 signings since he came.

Players we sold in the last 25 months: Jason Naismith, Kyle McAllister, Stevie Mallan, Lewis Morgan, and we have had almost £1m in a sell on fee from John McGinn's sale from Hibs to Aston Villa, we have probably brought in over £1.5m in player sales and compensation in the last 2 years and it is very clear that a huge amount of that has been wasted on signing players we did not use more than a handful of times. At the same time as Jack Ross was sending in applications (rather than waiting to be headhunted) he was resigning guys like Gary MacKenzie for the premiership.

Our wage bill was cut around £1.3m a season for many of Danny Lennon's seasons in charge (where we finished 8th twice in the premiership, won a League Cup and were at several other cup quarter finals) in the days when we were being run on a break even budget, for our wage bill to exceed £2m while in the championship is madness.

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...