dido
Predictions League
Peter Aitken
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by dido on Jul 15, 2021 9:01:57 GMT
What will all the supercilious know-it-alls on here do for their facile fun then?
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,502
|
Post by eppinggas on Jul 15, 2021 9:08:39 GMT
What will all the supercilious know-it-alls on here do for their facile fun then? Watch ?
|
|
bloogas
Joined: July 2016
Posts: 1,108
|
Post by bloogas on Jul 15, 2021 9:10:39 GMT
I've said some mean things about Wael in the past. However I think he is a decent man who wants to do the best for our Club. I presume the size of the debt now outweighs the equity in the Memorial Stadium (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). If this is true then the Al-Qadi family (mostly Wael) must personally be losing £50,000 per week to keep the Club afloat. Sami and Hani must also be suffering smaller losses. Year on year accounts show that the weekly losses are slowly coming down. What credible plan is there for Wael to ever get this money back? What is the medium/long term strategy for the business to ever return a profit? There would not appear to be one. I just don't get it. Wael is throwing money into a big pit. On the one hand, if he didn't do this, we would be out of business. So I can understand people saying "well done Wael". On the other hand the annual losses Dwane Sports are racking up are a direct result of senior (mis) management. I don't see competence at the top level to get Wael Al-Qadi out of this financial nightmare. He needs better help and advice at Board level. I don't want to see him fail. He fails, Bristol Rovers ultimately fails. Hey ho. Not my problem. And the band played on. [/quote] Just possibly he's a very committed football fan with a burning desire to own an EFL club. You never know.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 12:06:08 GMT
Oh, that's fine then, we'll ignore that big icebergy thing, pop the deck chairs over here, get comfy and listen to that nice band. I've said some mean things about Wael in the past. However I think he is a decent man who wants to do the best for our Club. I presume the size of the debt now outweighs the equity in the Memorial Stadium (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). If this is true then the Al-Qadi family (mostly Wael) must personally be losing £50,000 per week to keep the Club afloat. Sami and Hani must also be suffering smaller losses. Year on year accounts show that the weekly losses are slowly coming down. What credible plan is there for Wael to ever get this money back? What is the medium/long term strategy for the business to ever return a profit? There would not appear to be one. I just don't get it. Wael is throwing money into a big pit. On the one hand, if he didn't do this, we would be out of business. So I can understand people saying "well done Wael". On the other hand the annual losses Dwane Sports are racking up are a direct result of senior (mis) management. I don't see competence at the top level to get Wael Al-Qadi out of this financial nightmare. He needs better help and advice at Board level. I don't want to see him fail. He fails, Bristol Rovers ultimately fails. Hey ho. Not my problem. And the band played on. Epping A large chunk of the debt has gone, that's what the capitalisation does, it converts the it to shares. It has gone, it has ceased to be. However much anyone wants to use the 'debt' figure against Wael they can no longer do so (not saying you are doing that but some will). We are no longer £23m in debt and this will show in the next accounts (as per the note in the accounts just published) You could call it a 'reset'. or perhaps 'Year Zero'. Debt will 'commence' being run up again from that point though (it already has and you can work it out based on 50k a week loss) as we know that the club is operating at a loss as are 99% of other clubs. Some people seem to think we re a 'basket case' for losing 50k per week but if thats true then nearly all other clubs are too. For example- MK Dons lost £63k per week, Charlton 100k per week. The list is endless. And practically all of them have better grounds than Rovers with better income generating opportunities. Basket cases, all of them, obviously. (we know some really are) The model of funding clubs is broken. Its madness, no other business does this, but football is not any old business. Its exists for the Lee Brown moment (or equivilent) which all clubs are trying to get to. It doesn't actually exist to make a profit as its primary aim. There is no pitch invasion from the fans for breaking even. We know the club were trying to become more sustainable before Covid, with some limited success, but remember that if Rovers really did try and operate in a break even way in the current circumstances of operating a ground that is hardly fit for purpose it would likely need : Huge reduction in wages, a non competitive team, a squad of say 18 being paid peanuts (remember it must be " what we can afford") No development squad, no academy (no future?) Limited support staff (forget scouting the opposition, unless Joey does that as well as training etc, as he wouldn't have any coaches) Limited scouting for recruitment Even worse facilities at the Mem for the supporters (maintenance costs at the Mem are very high due to its age, high expenditure is necessary to get annual health & safety licence) And thats only part of it, you get the picture. But we may break even if we did the above, few would bother to attend though as we finished mid table in Conference South (at which point one or two people could carry WAQ down Glos Road for breaking even) This is the reality that owners of football clubs have to deal with and we as fans need to appreciate more. Until the model changes clubs are reliant on the owners to fund losses, as the alternative is the bleak picture above. WAQ has to balance the above with the need for a competitive team which requires giving a manager the best chance to do so, and the expectation of fans (rightly so) to do well and aim high. What the club is clearly trying to do is control costs through better value contracts and increasing income where it can (ticketing, retail outsourcing, bars development but it has very limited options whilst at the Mem) and try and get a competitive team, which will ensure crowds are decent, with some players sold on at a profit and aid sustainability. Not a lot more can be done unless/until a new stadium Wael would only ever get his money back on selling the club, if a potential buyer was prepared to pay the value he put on it. One challenge for the accountants on here could be to try to create a pretend break even budget for the club and see what they were up against
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 13:15:57 GMT
I've said some mean things about Wael in the past. However I think he is a decent man who wants to do the best for our Club. I presume the size of the debt now outweighs the equity in the Memorial Stadium (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). If this is true then the Al-Qadi family (mostly Wael) must personally be losing £50,000 per week to keep the Club afloat. Sami and Hani must also be suffering smaller losses. Year on year accounts show that the weekly losses are slowly coming down. What credible plan is there for Wael to ever get this money back? What is the medium/long term strategy for the business to ever return a profit? There would not appear to be one. I just don't get it. Wael is throwing money into a big pit. On the one hand, if he didn't do this, we would be out of business. So I can understand people saying "well done Wael". On the other hand the annual losses Dwane Sports are racking up are a direct result of senior (mis) management. I don't see competence at the top level to get Wael Al-Qadi out of this financial nightmare. He needs better help and advice at Board level. I don't want to see him fail. He fails, Bristol Rovers ultimately fails. Hey ho. Not my problem. And the band played on. Epping A large chunk of the debt has gone, that's what the capitalisation does, it converts the it to shares. It has gone, it has ceased to be. However much anyone wants to use the 'debt' figure against Wael they can no longer do so (not saying you are doing that but some will). We are no longer £23m in debt and this will show in the next accounts (as per the note in the accounts just published) You could call it a 'reset'. or perhaps 'Year Zero'. Debt will 'commence' being run up again from that point though (it already has and you can work it out based on 50k a week loss) as we know that the club is operating at a loss as are 99% of other clubs. Some people seem to think we re a 'basket case' for losing 50k per week but if thats true then nearly all other clubs are too. For example- MK Dons lost £63k per week, Charlton 100k per week. The list is endless. And practically all of them have better grounds than Rovers with better income generating opportunities. Basket cases, all of them, obviously. (we know some really are) The model of funding clubs is broken. Its madness, no other business does this, but football is not any old business. Its exists for the Lee Brown moment (or equivilent) which all clubs are trying to get to. It doesn't actually exist to make a profit as its primary aim. There is no pitch invasion from the fans for breaking even. We know the club were trying to become more sustainable before Covid, with some limited success, but remember that if Rovers really did try and operate in a break even way in the current circumstances of operating a ground that is hardly fit for purpose it would likely need : Huge reduction in wages, a non competitive team, a squad of say 18 being paid peanuts (remember it must be " what we can afford") No development squad, no academy (no future?) Limited support staff (forget scouting the opposition, unless Joey does that as well as training etc, as he wouldn't have any coaches) Limited scouting for recruitment Even worse facilities at the Mem for the supporters (maintenance costs at the Mem are very high due to its age, high expenditure is necessary to get annual health & safety licence) And thats only part of it, you get the picture. But we may break even if we did the above, few would bother to attend though as we finished mid table in Conference South (at which point one or two people could carry WAQ down Glos Road for breaking even) This is the reality that owners of football clubs have to deal with and we as fans need to appreciate more. Until the model changes clubs are reliant on the owners to fund losses, as the alternative is the bleak picture above. WAQ has to balance the above with the need for a competitive team which requires giving a manager the best chance to do so, and the expectation of fans (rightly so) to do well and aim high. What the club is clearly trying to do is control costs through better value contracts and increasing income where it can (ticketing, retail outsourcing, bars development but it has very limited options whilst at the Mem) and try and get a competitive team, which will ensure crowds are decent, with some players sold on at a profit and aid sustainability. Not a lot more can be done unless/until a new stadium Wael would only ever get his money back on selling the club, if a potential buyer was prepared to pay the value he put on it. One challenge for the accountants on here could be to try to create a pretend break even budget for the club and see what they were up against Oh that's good, so if someone came along and offered Wael the (circa) £7m that Higgs was paid to hand the keys over then he would pretend that the massive losses he's run up over the last 5 years didn't count, because a paper exercise has been carried out to convert the debt into equity, stick the £7m in his back pocket and he would have lost nothing. Glad that's been cleared up. As for the ongoing losses, I don't know how many times this has to be explained to you or asked of you. If Wael had Lansdown's income and had built a 'fit for purpose' stadium, then nobody would care too much about the accounts showing a loss of £3m a year, the issue is that he has no income that anybody has been able to demonstrate that comes anywhere near being able to support that level of financial burden, and our new stand is a tent. Oh, and we are in L2 with a yob for a manager. Apart from that, it's all going very well.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 13:40:47 GMT
Epping A large chunk of the debt has gone, that's what the capitalisation does, it converts the it to shares. It has gone, it has ceased to be. However much anyone wants to use the 'debt' figure against Wael they can no longer do so (not saying you are doing that but some will). We are no longer £23m in debt and this will show in the next accounts (as per the note in the accounts just published) You could call it a 'reset'. or perhaps 'Year Zero'. Debt will 'commence' being run up again from that point though (it already has and you can work it out based on 50k a week loss) as we know that the club is operating at a loss as are 99% of other clubs. Some people seem to think we re a 'basket case' for losing 50k per week but if thats true then nearly all other clubs are too. For example- MK Dons lost £63k per week, Charlton 100k per week. The list is endless. And practically all of them have better grounds than Rovers with better income generating opportunities. Basket cases, all of them, obviously. (we know some really are) The model of funding clubs is broken. Its madness, no other business does this, but football is not any old business. Its exists for the Lee Brown moment (or equivilent) which all clubs are trying to get to. It doesn't actually exist to make a profit as its primary aim. There is no pitch invasion from the fans for breaking even. We know the club were trying to become more sustainable before Covid, with some limited success, but remember that if Rovers really did try and operate in a break even way in the current circumstances of operating a ground that is hardly fit for purpose it would likely need : Huge reduction in wages, a non competitive team, a squad of say 18 being paid peanuts (remember it must be " what we can afford") No development squad, no academy (no future?) Limited support staff (forget scouting the opposition, unless Joey does that as well as training etc, as he wouldn't have any coaches) Limited scouting for recruitment Even worse facilities at the Mem for the supporters (maintenance costs at the Mem are very high due to its age, high expenditure is necessary to get annual health & safety licence) And thats only part of it, you get the picture. But we may break even if we did the above, few would bother to attend though as we finished mid table in Conference South (at which point one or two people could carry WAQ down Glos Road for breaking even) This is the reality that owners of football clubs have to deal with and we as fans need to appreciate more. Until the model changes clubs are reliant on the owners to fund losses, as the alternative is the bleak picture above. WAQ has to balance the above with the need for a competitive team which requires giving a manager the best chance to do so, and the expectation of fans (rightly so) to do well and aim high. What the club is clearly trying to do is control costs through better value contracts and increasing income where it can (ticketing, retail outsourcing, bars development but it has very limited options whilst at the Mem) and try and get a competitive team, which will ensure crowds are decent, with some players sold on at a profit and aid sustainability. Not a lot more can be done unless/until a new stadium Wael would only ever get his money back on selling the club, if a potential buyer was prepared to pay the value he put on it. One challenge for the accountants on here could be to try to create a pretend break even budget for the club and see what they were up against Oh that's good, so if someone came along and offered Wael the (circa) £7m that Higgs was paid to hand the keys over then he would pretend that the massive losses he's run up over the last 5 years didn't count, because a paper exercise has been carried out to convert the debt into equity, stick the £7m in his back pocket and he would have lost nothing. Glad that's been cleared up. As for the ongoing losses, I don't know how many times this has to be explained to you or asked of you. If Wael had Lansdown's income and had built a 'fit for purpose' stadium, then nobody would care too much about the accounts showing a loss of £3m a year, the issue is that he has no income that anybody has been able to demonstrate that comes anywhere near being able to support that level of financial burden, and our new stand is a tent. Oh, and we are in L2 with a yob for a manager. Apart from that, it's all going very well. Well you've offered nothing to the debate there have you, nothing at all. Just the standard negative rhetoric as usual. Probably because you know what I state is correct. Otherwise you would have a go and at stating something constructive, even it was something small. So no change there. And for one more time: I have no idea how much wealth Wael has. Neither do you or anyone else, even if they pretend that they do. Not sure how many times that has to be spelt out
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 14:01:16 GMT
Oh that's good, so if someone came along and offered Wael the (circa) £7m that Higgs was paid to hand the keys over then he would pretend that the massive losses he's run up over the last 5 years didn't count, because a paper exercise has been carried out to convert the debt into equity, stick the £7m in his back pocket and he would have lost nothing. Glad that's been cleared up. As for the ongoing losses, I don't know how many times this has to be explained to you or asked of you. If Wael had Lansdown's income and had built a 'fit for purpose' stadium, then nobody would care too much about the accounts showing a loss of £3m a year, the issue is that he has no income that anybody has been able to demonstrate that comes anywhere near being able to support that level of financial burden, and our new stand is a tent. Oh, and we are in L2 with a yob for a manager. Apart from that, it's all going very well. Well you've offered nothing to the debate there have you, nothing at all. Just the standard negative rhetoric as usual. Probably because you know what I state is correct. Otherwise you would have a go and at stating something constructive, even it was something small. So no change there. And for one more time: I have no idea how much wealth Wael has. Neither do you or anyone else, even if they pretend that they do. Not sure how many times that has to be spelt out Got it, so only information that you regard as 'constructive' is correct. At least we've got down to understanding why you are stuck fast in your position.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,353
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jul 15, 2021 14:06:24 GMT
Oh, that's fine then, we'll ignore that big icebergy thing, pop the deck chairs over here, get comfy and listen to that nice band. I've said some mean things about Wael in the past. However I think he is a decent man who wants to do the best for our Club. I presume the size of the debt now outweighs the equity in the Memorial Stadium (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). If this is true then the Al-Qadi family (mostly Wael) must personally be losing £50,000 per week to keep the Club afloat. Sami and Hani must also be suffering smaller losses. Year on year accounts show that the weekly losses are slowly coming down. What credible plan is there for Wael to ever get this money back? What is the medium/long term strategy for the business to ever return a profit? There would not appear to be one. I just don't get it. Wael is throwing money into a big pit. On the one hand, if he didn't do this, we would be out of business. So I can understand people saying "well done Wael". On the other hand the annual losses Dwane Sports are racking up are a direct result of senior (mis) management. I don't see competence at the top level to get Wael Al-Qadi out of this financial nightmare. He needs better help and advice at Board level. I don't want to see him fail. He fails, Bristol Rovers ultimately fails. Hey ho. Not my problem. And the band played on. Truly wealthy people don’t buy clubs to make a profit but for the kudos of owning it, I see no kudos in owning a tier 3-4 yo-yo club but I do see trouble ahead BUT while there music and moon and romance Let’s face the music and dance
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,353
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jul 15, 2021 14:10:12 GMT
What will all the supercilious know-it-alls on here do for their facile fun then? No need for know it all after supercilious but I can think of many other things to do. If the club want crowds to return, they would make tickets available for the occasional fan but the new ticketing means no one can come unless booked. If that’s not daft then I don’t know what is
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 16:38:33 GMT
Well you've offered nothing to the debate there have you, nothing at all. Just the standard negative rhetoric as usual. Probably because you know what I state is correct. Otherwise you would have a go and at stating something constructive, even it was something small. So no change there. And for one more time: I have no idea how much wealth Wael has. Neither do you or anyone else, even if they pretend that they do. Not sure how many times that has to be spelt out Got it, so only information that you regard as 'constructive' is correct.
At least we've got down to understanding why you are stuck fast in your position. Come on, do this properly. You have made your position very clear, you say there is an iceberg approaching - so what would you suggest WAQ and the board do? To remind you, we need to cut £50k per week off our costs, £2.5m a year - year on year (That's the equivilant of 25 players earning £2k a week by the way.) Tell us what you want to happen and what the board should be doing to avoid the iceberg you mention. (Swiss may help you I'm sure - we had a similar discussion on new stadium once before and when I asked what we should do he said "bring in some consultants to tell us") I've given you a few pointers in the post above, but surely you can come up with something. You must have some ideas, as otherwise you would not have mentioned the approaching iceberg and we don't want people thinking you are arguing the point for the sake of it, perish the thought. Maybe others can help you if you are struggling.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Jul 15, 2021 16:38:46 GMT
What will all the supercilious know-it-alls on here do for their facile fun then? No need for know it all after supercilious but I can think of many other things to do. If the club want crowds to return, they would make tickets available for the occasional fan but the new ticketing means no one can come unless booked. If that’s not daft then I don’t know what is Assuming the rumoured COVID passports become a requirement to attend games then Rovers are probably right to insist on tickets being pre-booked.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Jul 15, 2021 16:43:28 GMT
"That the club is clearly trying to do is control costs through better value contracts and increasing income where it can (ticketing, retail outsourcing, bars development but it has very limited options whilst at the Mem) and try and get a competitive team, which will ensure crowds are decent, with some players sold on at a profit and aid sustainability."
Can you see any evidence in the latest accounts the club are trying to control costs, as it look to me there's been little change, next year's accounts will show the costs of recruiting 2 new managers and it's looking like Wael's given JB an open cheque book this summer.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jul 15, 2021 17:41:32 GMT
I've said some mean things about Wael in the past. However I think he is a decent man who wants to do the best for our Club. I presume the size of the debt now outweighs the equity in the Memorial Stadium (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). If this is true then the Al-Qadi family (mostly Wael) must personally be losing £50,000 per week to keep the Club afloat. Sami and Hani must also be suffering smaller losses. Year on year accounts show that the weekly losses are slowly coming down. What credible plan is there for Wael to ever get this money back? What is the medium/long term strategy for the business to ever return a profit? There would not appear to be one. I just don't get it. Wael is throwing money into a big pit. On the one hand, if he didn't do this, we would be out of business. So I can understand people saying "well done Wael". On the other hand the annual losses Dwane Sports are racking up are a direct result of senior (mis) management. I don't see competence at the top level to get Wael Al-Qadi out of this financial nightmare. He needs better help and advice at Board level. I don't want to see him fail. He fails, Bristol Rovers ultimately fails. Hey ho. Not my problem. And the band played on. Epping A large chunk of the debt has gone, that's what the capitalisation does, it converts the it to shares. It has gone, it has ceased to be. However much anyone wants to use the 'debt' figure against Wael they can no longer do so (not saying you are doing that but some will). We are no longer £23m in debt and this will show in the next accounts (as per the note in the accounts just published) You could call it a 'reset'. or perhaps 'Year Zero'. Debt will 'commence' being run up again from that point though (it already has and you can work it out based on 50k a week loss) as we know that the club is operating at a loss as are 99% of other clubs. Some people seem to think we re a 'basket case' for losing 50k per week but if thats true then nearly all other clubs are too. For example- MK Dons lost £63k per week, Charlton 100k per week. The list is endless. And practically all of them have better grounds than Rovers with better income generating opportunities. Basket cases, all of them, obviously. (we know some really are) The model of funding clubs is broken. Its madness, no other business does this, but football is not any old business. Its exists for the Lee Brown moment (or equivilent) which all clubs are trying to get to. It doesn't actually exist to make a profit as its primary aim. There is no pitch invasion from the fans for breaking even. We know the club were trying to become more sustainable before Covid, with some limited success, but remember that if Rovers really did try and operate in a break even way in the current circumstances of operating a ground that is hardly fit for purpose it would likely need : Huge reduction in wages, a non competitive team, a squad of say 18 being paid peanuts (remember it must be " what we can afford") No development squad, no academy (no future?) Limited support staff (forget scouting the opposition, unless Joey does that as well as training etc, as he wouldn't have any coaches) Limited scouting for recruitment Even worse facilities at the Mem for the supporters (maintenance costs at the Mem are very high due to its age, high expenditure is necessary to get annual health & safety licence) And thats only part of it, you get the picture. But we may break even if we did the above, few would bother to attend though as we finished mid table in Conference South (at which point one or two people could carry WAQ down Glos Road for breaking even) This is the reality that owners of football clubs have to deal with and we as fans need to appreciate more. Until the model changes clubs are reliant on the owners to fund losses, as the alternative is the bleak picture above. WAQ has to balance the above with the need for a competitive team which requires giving a manager the best chance to do so, and the expectation of fans (rightly so) to do well and aim high. What the club is clearly trying to do is control costs through better value contracts and increasing income where it can (ticketing, retail outsourcing, bars development but it has very limited options whilst at the Mem) and try and get a competitive team, which will ensure crowds are decent, with some players sold on at a profit and aid sustainability. Not a lot more can be done unless/until a new stadium Wael would only ever get his money back on selling the club, if a potential buyer was prepared to pay the value he put on it. One challenge for the accountants on here could be to try to create a pretend break even budget for the club and see what they were up against These are average figures for the three years to June 2020 Income Profit (Loss) AFC Wimbledon £ 5.177 million (£ 0.966 million) Crewe Alexandra £ 3.951 million (£ 0.774 million) Lincoln City £ 5.740 million (£ 1.385 million) Shrewsbury Town £ 5.799 million £ 0.619 million (profit) Bristol Rovers FC £ 6.056 million (£ 2.759 million) Why do we under perform on and off the pitch compared to these other clubs ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 18:07:50 GMT
Got it, so only information that you regard as 'constructive' is correct.
At least we've got down to understanding why you are stuck fast in your position. Come on, do this properly. You have made your position very clear, you say there is an iceberg approaching - so what would you suggest WAQ and the board do? To remind you, we need to cut £50k per week off our costs, £2.5m a year - year on year (That's the equivilant of 25 players earning £2k a week by the way.) Tell us what you want to happen and what the board should be doing to avoid the iceberg you mention. (Swiss may help you I'm sure - we had a similar discussion on new stadium once before and when I asked what we should do he said "bring in some consultants to tell us") I've given you a few pointers in the post above, but surely you can come up with something. You must have some ideas, as otherwise you would not have mentioned the approaching iceberg and we don't want people thinking you are arguing the point for the sake of it, perish the thought. Maybe others can help you if you are struggling. You want me to 'do this properly' when it's you who absolutely refuses to deal with the actual problem. The iceberg are the losses, the vessel is Wael's traceable income. Ask Swiss what Rovers' income streams are and where the costs are, he's extracted what he can from the latest accounts and compared the data to at least 1 other comparable club. The reason that the 'point is being argued' is that stood in front of me is someone in total denial of what the actual problem is. I'm not 'making' a point, the point exists, I'm just waving it in front of your face, but you keep looking away.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 18:18:58 GMT
Come on, do this properly. You have made your position very clear, you say there is an iceberg approaching - so what would you suggest WAQ and the board do? To remind you, we need to cut £50k per week off our costs, £2.5m a year - year on year (That's the equivilant of 25 players earning £2k a week by the way.) Tell us what you want to happen and what the board should be doing to avoid the iceberg you mention. (Swiss may help you I'm sure - we had a similar discussion on new stadium once before and when I asked what we should do he said "bring in some consultants to tell us") I've given you a few pointers in the post above, but surely you can come up with something. You must have some ideas, as otherwise you would not have mentioned the approaching iceberg and we don't want people thinking you are arguing the point for the sake of it, perish the thought. Maybe others can help you if you are struggling. You want me to 'do this properly' when it's you who absolutely refuses to deal with the actual problem. The iceberg are the losses, the vessel is Wael's traceable income. Ask Swiss what Rovers' income streams are and where the costs are, he's extracted what he can from the latest accounts and compared the data to at least 1 other comparable club. The reason that the 'point is being argued' is that stood in front of me is someone in total denial of what the actual problem is. I'm not 'making' a point, the point exists, I'm just waving it in front of your face, but you keep looking away. Not the case at all, I am not comfortable with losing 50k a week, but I am a tad more realistic than you it seems.
You seem to be struggling with how to approach the problem that our expenditure is exceeding income.
Try it another way, imagine Wael is gone and you are in charge so now its your problem.
Surely you have at least some idea as to how to to approach it?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 18:22:16 GMT
Epping A large chunk of the debt has gone, that's what the capitalisation does, it converts the it to shares. It has gone, it has ceased to be. However much anyone wants to use the 'debt' figure against Wael they can no longer do so (not saying you are doing that but some will). We are no longer £23m in debt and this will show in the next accounts (as per the note in the accounts just published) You could call it a 'reset'. or perhaps 'Year Zero'. Debt will 'commence' being run up again from that point though (it already has and you can work it out based on 50k a week loss) as we know that the club is operating at a loss as are 99% of other clubs. Some people seem to think we re a 'basket case' for losing 50k per week but if thats true then nearly all other clubs are too. For example- MK Dons lost £63k per week, Charlton 100k per week. The list is endless. And practically all of them have better grounds than Rovers with better income generating opportunities. Basket cases, all of them, obviously. (we know some really are) The model of funding clubs is broken. Its madness, no other business does this, but football is not any old business. Its exists for the Lee Brown moment (or equivilent) which all clubs are trying to get to. It doesn't actually exist to make a profit as its primary aim. There is no pitch invasion from the fans for breaking even. We know the club were trying to become more sustainable before Covid, with some limited success, but remember that if Rovers really did try and operate in a break even way in the current circumstances of operating a ground that is hardly fit for purpose it would likely need : Huge reduction in wages, a non competitive team, a squad of say 18 being paid peanuts (remember it must be " what we can afford") No development squad, no academy (no future?) Limited support staff (forget scouting the opposition, unless Joey does that as well as training etc, as he wouldn't have any coaches) Limited scouting for recruitment Even worse facilities at the Mem for the supporters (maintenance costs at the Mem are very high due to its age, high expenditure is necessary to get annual health & safety licence) And thats only part of it, you get the picture. But we may break even if we did the above, few would bother to attend though as we finished mid table in Conference South (at which point one or two people could carry WAQ down Glos Road for breaking even) This is the reality that owners of football clubs have to deal with and we as fans need to appreciate more. Until the model changes clubs are reliant on the owners to fund losses, as the alternative is the bleak picture above. WAQ has to balance the above with the need for a competitive team which requires giving a manager the best chance to do so, and the expectation of fans (rightly so) to do well and aim high. What the club is clearly trying to do is control costs through better value contracts and increasing income where it can (ticketing, retail outsourcing, bars development but it has very limited options whilst at the Mem) and try and get a competitive team, which will ensure crowds are decent, with some players sold on at a profit and aid sustainability. Not a lot more can be done unless/until a new stadium Wael would only ever get his money back on selling the club, if a potential buyer was prepared to pay the value he put on it. One challenge for the accountants on here could be to try to create a pretend break even budget for the club and see what they were up against These are average figures for the three years to June 2020 Income Profit (Loss) AFC Wimbledon £ 5.177 million (£ 0.966 million) Crewe Alexandra £ 3.951 million (£ 0.774 million) Lincoln City £ 5.740 million (£ 1.385 million) Shrewsbury Town £ 5.799 million £ 0.619 million (profit) Bristol Rovers FC £ 6.056 million (£ 2.759 million) Why do we under perform on and off the pitch compared to these other clubs ? Any reason for these 6 ?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jul 15, 2021 18:39:46 GMT
These are average figures for the three years to June 2020 Income Profit (Loss) AFC Wimbledon £ 5.177 million (£ 0.966 million) Crewe Alexandra £ 3.951 million (£ 0.774 million) Lincoln City £ 5.740 million (£ 1.385 million) Shrewsbury Town £ 5.799 million £ 0.619 million (profit) Bristol Rovers FC £ 6.056 million (£ 2.759 million) Why do we under perform on and off the pitch compared to these other clubs ? Any reason for these 6 ? There are 5, you're not in Rovers accounts department are you ? I looked at League 1 clubs with a similar turnover level to Rovers but couldn't include Gillingham because their accounts are still overdue, Burton Albion's figures are skewed because they were in the Championship during the period, Plymouth changed their accounting dates in 2019, and Oxford didn't publish a P & L in 2018.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2021 18:59:58 GMT
You want me to 'do this properly' when it's you who absolutely refuses to deal with the actual problem. The iceberg are the losses, the vessel is Wael's traceable income. Ask Swiss what Rovers' income streams are and where the costs are, he's extracted what he can from the latest accounts and compared the data to at least 1 other comparable club. The reason that the 'point is being argued' is that stood in front of me is someone in total denial of what the actual problem is. I'm not 'making' a point, the point exists, I'm just waving it in front of your face, but you keep looking away. Not the case at all, I am not comfortable with losing 50k a week, but I am a tad more realistic than you it seems.
You seem to be struggling with how to approach the problem that our expenditure is exceeding income.
Try it another way, imagine Wael is gone and you are in charge so now its your problem.
Surely you have at least some idea as to how to to approach it?
I would start by getting in touch with some accountants that I've worked with in the past and ask them to try to work out what the heck has been going on over the last 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jul 15, 2021 19:03:44 GMT
Got it, so only information that you regard as 'constructive' is correct.
At least we've got down to understanding why you are stuck fast in your position. Come on, do this properly. You have made your position very clear, you say there is an iceberg approaching - so what would you suggest WAQ and the board do? To remind you, we need to cut £50k per week off our costs, £2.5m a year - year on year (That's the equivilant of 25 players earning £2k a week by the way.) Tell us what you want to happen and what the board should be doing to avoid the iceberg you mention. ( Swiss may help you I'm sure - we had a similar discussion on new stadium once before and when I asked what we should do he said "bring in some consultants to tell us") I've given you a few pointers in the post above, but surely you can come up with something. You must have some ideas, as otherwise you would not have mentioned the approaching iceberg and we don't want people thinking you are arguing the point for the sake of it, perish the thought. Maybe others can help you if you are struggling. What I said was that Wael needed help from someone like Deloitte to have a proper business plan formulated and then be willing to give up control of the club if it was the only way in which Rovers could get a new stadium. But the consensus of opinion was "It's Wael's club he can do what he likes" and "he is an investment banker so he is bound to know what he is doing". That was a couple of years ago and IMO we've probably gone beyond the point where a partnership of any sort would be possible. With the unexpected reappearance of Hani in the audited accounts we are now faced with even more uncertainty. If it isn't a mistake and the family as a whole really do still control Rovers it is a slap in the face for all the Gasheads who were glad to see the back of Hani and overjoyed to finally have a football man running things. But it makes the question of how long they will keep pouring money into the pit even more pertinent.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Jul 15, 2021 19:21:04 GMT
Come on, do this properly. You have made your position very clear, you say there is an iceberg approaching - so what would you suggest WAQ and the board do? To remind you, we need to cut £50k per week off our costs, £2.5m a year - year on year (That's the equivilant of 25 players earning £2k a week by the way.) Tell us what you want to happen and what the board should be doing to avoid the iceberg you mention. ( Swiss may help you I'm sure - we had a similar discussion on new stadium once before and when I asked what we should do he said "bring in some consultants to tell us") I've given you a few pointers in the post above, but surely you can come up with something. You must have some ideas, as otherwise you would not have mentioned the approaching iceberg and we don't want people thinking you are arguing the point for the sake of it, perish the thought. Maybe others can help you if you are struggling. What I said was that Wael needed help from someone like Deloitte to have a proper business plan formulated and then be willing to give up control of the club if it was the only way in which Rovers could get a new stadium. But the consensus of opinion was "It's Wael's club he can do what he likes" and "he is an investment banker so he is bound to know what he is doing". That was a couple of years ago and IMO we've probably gone beyond the point where a partnership of any sort would be possible. With the unexpected reappearance of Hani in the audited accounts we are now faced with even more uncertainty. If it isn't a mistake and the family as a whole really do still control Rovers it is a slap in the face for all the Gasheads who were glad to see the back of Hani and overjoyed to finally have a football man running things. But it makes the question of how long they will keep pouring money into the pit even more pertinent. Fans were glad to see the back of Hani after the ITK gang claimed he had no interet in football and was looking to sell the club, if he's prepared to write off the loans you sense most fans would sooner have the whole family supporting Rovers (financially) than just Wael on his own. Although given Wael suggested ownership was going to be split 90/10 with Sammi then it seems likely it was a mistake to include Hani, that was one issue you'd hope Sam Frost would get an explanation from the club.
|
|