Courtesy of Airman:
- #cafc debt topped £50m by June 30 2014 official figures confirm - up £9m in a year
- #cafc generated £890,964 in player sales 2013/14 - Kermorgant, Stephens, Button, Smith
- #cafc spent £4.36m - principally on Vetokeke, Parzyszek, Nego and Reza
- #cafc accounts show £1.2m increase in contingent assets - presumably linked to Diego Poyet's performance although deal not done at year end
- #cafc disclose additional liabilities of £382,500 if current players hit milestones
- RD's Staprix making loans to #cafc at 3% interest - Murray still guaranteeing overdraft. North stand loan due to be paid off end of 2015
- #cafc disclose "staff restructuring" cost of £324k - likely to include major pay-off to Paul Hart. Pitch cover costs of £89k
- #cafc matchday income up £682k but would have been "marginally down" if not for FA Cup run. Price increases offset by 13% fall in gates.
- #cafc says "retained loss' reduced by £700k to £5.3m once exceptional items taken out - intends to "move towards break-even position"
0
Comments
UPDATE: The £890,964 is in respect of player sales and loan fees since the year end. I misread the report because I was in a hurry. More work being done on the fees received for the four named players.
The increase in contingent assets is unlikely to be Poyet because of the timing. It may be, as New York Addick has suggested, there are add-ons in the player deals listed, for example around appearances and promotion. Sell-ons might be difficult to quantify.
No debt paid off on takeover but presumably new creditor is Staprix at a low interest rate. But debt still on club.
50% of increase in debt player purchases. Of which only 1 major one still at club for now. So debt on club partly for players being used elsewhere. Bad judgement or plan?
Only 6 months though and may have changed from June 14
Worth noting this is only disclosed, rather than recognised in the accounts.
I presume this is linked to a fee for a certain number of appearances/goals etc, or a sell-on clause etc. It will only become recognised in the accounts when the receipt of payment is virtually certain - i.e it may come to nothing.
3% doesn't sound unreasonable but if I was one of the former directors with an outstanding loan not charging interest when, IIRC, they were entitled to I might query that. Perhaps they are already aware.
spent £4.36m - principally on Vetokeke, Parzyszek, Nego and Reza! One success there and he had played for Peeters before. The others we haven't sold so may recoup some of that but it seems unlikely at the moment we'll get back what we paid especially as we seem so generous with long term loans to other clubs. Ditto Tuchedean.
Half of that accounting period was under the Spivs and over 80% of the debt pre-dates M. Duchatelet but still as depressing picture.
On a slightly different point I'm still struggling to understand how the £4m build at Sparrows Lane became £10m I know M. Duchatelet wanted to add another floor and a swimming pool but another £6m when he builders are already on site? And how is it to be funded.
Good news is the mortgage from the Covered End is nearly paid up freeing up approx £1m a year.
The interesting thing is that the amount owed to the parent company has shot up by £13m in a year - in part this is the bank loan being paid down and therefore moving from one column to another. Bank loans and overdrafts have been reduced by over £2m. The "other loans" are also down by £670,000.
I have more work to do on these numbers and there are people out there with a much better understanding that me, so I stand to be corrected.
http://newyorkaddick.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/accountability.html#comments
From a cashflow perspective things are worse (if you are worried by debt/cash outflows) and better if (if you are excited by outlay on new signings).
It's perhaps with hindsight not that surprising since they had only six months left on their contract and the club (or player) had decided a new contract would not be offered/signed.
1) Disposal of player registrations is stated at £950k and specifically attributed to Stephens, Kermorgant, Smith and Button only. I may be misunderstanding what this means, because I guess you can only subtract from the asset value what you'd previously declared them as worth (i.e. the non-amortised cost of acquiring them?), but I don't know where you are getting your figure of £194k? Also that makes little sense of the (in my view spurious, but nevertheless official and recent) claim that Kermorgant was sold to pay for the pitch. The saving on his salary would not have been more than about £200k.
2) Interesting point about the contingent fees potentially being associated with AFCB or Brighton getting promoted. I hadn't considered that. These could be fixed and therefore disclosed, whereas you'd expect any associated to Smith to be a sell-on clause, which can't be quantified.
3) I am confident there was no fee for Michael Morrison, but the club will have received a possibly significant loan fee for Reza and potentially one for Nego and Polish Pete (from within the network) within the £891k. The bulk of it will be Poyet, however - rumoured to be £600k, which makes sense. WHU had to settle a compensation fee because of his age, regardless of him being out of contract.
4) By comparing this year's accounts to last year's, it appears that RM is now owed £670,000 less - or conceivably that this sum has been repaid to (written off by?) another former director, but there is no obvious reason to have done the latter since they are only repayable / attract interest on promotion to the PL.
2. I think this note is misleading - disposals can also include the free transfers/release of players for whom we previously paid a fee (and thus appear on the balance sheet). This may for example also include Wright-Philips, Hollands, Green, Dervite, Hamer etc. The £194k is clearly shown in the more detailed Baton accounts.
3. Yes, agree.
4. Maybe - hadn't considered loan fees.
Could Katrien be paid her director fees by the ultimate parent company or the holdinh company (Baton) and therefore be shown in the consolidated group accounts (if produced -I'm not sure?)
Cheers.
The Baton accounts clearly show only £194k in cash was received for the sale of intangible assets.
However I was struggling to reconcile this with the fact that the 'profit on disposal of players' was £1,718k (NB: this will also include some cash for the Shelvey sell-on clause).
If one assumes the unamortised portion of the value of Stephens, Button, and Smith was approx £500k (bear in mind Button had only just signed) then the total fees received for all transfers must have been approx £2,218k not £194k, a difference of approx £2m.
Curiously the repayment of the bank loan and overdraft totalled just over £2m so could the transfer fees have been paid directly to the bank for loan repayment (perhaps under some pressure)?
Clearly, £194k must be the difference between the benefit of disposals (£950k) and the amortisation write-down of £756k. Too big a coincidence to be otherwise.
It's quite credible that much or all of the difference between £950k and £1.718m is Shelvey sell-on, given he was transferred to Swansea on July 3rd, 2013.