Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Charlton publish 23/24 Accounts

12346»

Comments

  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    Off_it said:
    SELR_addicks said:
    sam3110 said:
    The management pay in 2021/22 who was that to? 

    And did we make as much of a fuss over it as we are now?
    Sandgaard season. 

    We had Gallen in a Director role but not sure of the make-up of the board at the time other than Sandgaard and his wife (illegally).
    She wasn't on the board anyway, but even if she was why would that have been "illegal"?
    It was illegal for her to work in the UK as she did not have a work permit.
  • Off_it
    Off_it Posts: 28,901
    Airman Brown said:
    Off_it said:
    SELR_addicks said:
    sam3110 said:
    The management pay in 2021/22 who was that to? 

    And did we make as much of a fuss over it as we are now?
    Sandgaard season. 

    We had Gallen in a Director role but not sure of the make-up of the board at the time other than Sandgaard and his wife (illegally).
    She wasn't on the board anyway, but even if she was why would that have been "illegal"?
    It was illegal for her to work in the UK as she did not have a work permit.
    But not "illegal" to be on the board. Or even illegal to be a director, which is not necessarily the same thing.
  • bobmunro
    bobmunro Posts: 20,861
    Off_it said:
    Airman Brown said:
    Off_it said:
    SELR_addicks said:
    sam3110 said:
    The management pay in 2021/22 who was that to? 

    And did we make as much of a fuss over it as we are now?
    Sandgaard season. 

    We had Gallen in a Director role but not sure of the make-up of the board at the time other than Sandgaard and his wife (illegally).
    She wasn't on the board anyway, but even if she was why would that have been "illegal"?
    It was illegal for her to work in the UK as she did not have a work permit.
    But not "illegal" to be on the board. Or even illegal to be a director, which is not necessarily the same thing.

    Not illegal for a US citizen to be a director of a UK company - but illegal to work in the UK unless on a work permit, which she wasn't.
  • JohnnyH2
    JohnnyH2 Posts: 5,345
    Airman Brown said:
    SELR_addicks said:
    sam3110 said:
    The management pay in 2021/22 who was that to? 

    And did we make as much of a fuss over it as we are now?
    Sandgaard season. 

    We had Gallen in a Director role but not sure of the make-up of the board at the time other than Sandgaard and his wife (illegally).
    She wasn’t on the board and the money doesn’t relate directly to that anyway. I don’t have an obvious explanation for that number but Nigel Adkins might be a factor. 
    Roddy and Mumford?
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    JohnnyH2 said:
    Airman Brown said:
    SELR_addicks said:
    sam3110 said:
    The management pay in 2021/22 who was that to? 

    And did we make as much of a fuss over it as we are now?
    Sandgaard season. 

    We had Gallen in a Director role but not sure of the make-up of the board at the time other than Sandgaard and his wife (illegally).
    She wasn’t on the board and the money doesn’t relate directly to that anyway. I don’t have an obvious explanation for that number but Nigel Adkins might be a factor. 
    Roddy and Mumford?
    Included but not the explanation.
  • JustFloydRoad
    JustFloydRoad Posts: 1,649
    edited April 12
    Apparently there was a cyber attack back in August.

    The accounts filed at Companies House carried a disclaimer to say the report had been impacted by a ransomware cyber attack on the club last year.
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    JustFloydRoad said:
    Apparently there was a cyber attack back in August.

    The accounts filed at Companies House carried a disclaimer to say the report had been impacted by a ransomware cyber attack on the club last year.
    Given the accounts describe August to October as a four month period I’m not terribly persuaded by the auditors.
  • Off_it
    Off_it Posts: 28,901
    bobmunro said:
    Off_it said:
    Airman Brown said:
    Off_it said:
    SELR_addicks said:
    sam3110 said:
    The management pay in 2021/22 who was that to? 

    And did we make as much of a fuss over it as we are now?
    Sandgaard season. 

    We had Gallen in a Director role but not sure of the make-up of the board at the time other than Sandgaard and his wife (illegally).
    She wasn't on the board anyway, but even if she was why would that have been "illegal"?
    It was illegal for her to work in the UK as she did not have a work permit.
    But not "illegal" to be on the board. Or even illegal to be a director, which is not necessarily the same thing.

    Not illegal for a US citizen to be a director of a UK company - but illegal to work in the UK unless on a work permit, which she wasn't.
    So it was said at the time. But still not "illegal" to be on the board, as we are agreeing, which was what had been said and was the point I was responding to (even though she wasn't on the board). 
  • Off_it
    Off_it Posts: 28,901
    Airman Brown said:
    JustFloydRoad said:
    Apparently there was a cyber attack back in August.

    The accounts filed at Companies House carried a disclaimer to say the report had been impacted by a ransomware cyber attack on the club last year.
    Given the accounts describe August to October as a four month period I’m not terribly persuaded by the auditors.
    Are you referring to this?

  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    Off_it said:
    Airman Brown said:
    JustFloydRoad said:
    Apparently there was a cyber attack back in August.

    The accounts filed at Companies House carried a disclaimer to say the report had been impacted by a ransomware cyber attack on the club last year.
    Given the accounts describe August to October as a four month period I’m not terribly persuaded by the auditors.
    Are you referring to this?

    Yes.

  • Sponsored links:



  • Off_it
    Off_it Posts: 28,901
    Airman Brown said:
    Off_it said:
    Airman Brown said:
    JustFloydRoad said:
    Apparently there was a cyber attack back in August.

    The accounts filed at Companies House carried a disclaimer to say the report had been impacted by a ransomware cyber attack on the club last year.
    Given the accounts describe August to October as a four month period I’m not terribly persuaded by the auditors.
    Are you referring to this?

    Yes.
    You might want to double check the dates again then. It says the attack was in August 2024 which prevented them accessing the system for the four months to 31 October 2023.
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    Fair enough. I misread that. It makes more sense and presumably just a coincidence it covers the first four months of this ownership.
  • tallboy
    tallboy Posts: 115
    Kap10 said:
    Asking the IT guys on here, wouldn't you have expected old records to have been backed up?
    Yes, but if the thing your are aiming to backup is compromised with a Virus you will be surprised at how easy just to be backing up the bad data.
    However, any IT person with much knowledge knows that is an issue and should have a system in place to deal with it and recover.  
  • Henry Irving
    Henry Irving Posts: 85,266
    Re: the cyber attack I remember it happening as the club reported an issue with online sales on the OS and they took away the museum's router (no, it wasn't our fault and yes we now have our own wifi).

    ITRM we're in the process of putting better protection in place when the attack happened. A few weeks later and the attack would have failed.
  • Alwaysneil
    Alwaysneil Posts: 13,819
    Bet the attack added a few bob to the final fee from the IT company implementing the defence 🤔
  • msomerton
    msomerton Posts: 2,988
    golfaddick said:
    Henry Irving said:
    golfaddick said:
    AFKABartram said:
    So in summary, in this groups first year of operating turnover was down and annual losses rose £9.5m to £13.9m 

    Excellent work Charlie & co. Strange how none of the PowerPoint slides ever suggested that. 
    Hence why the January transfer window was all about "slimming" down the squad. 

    Next will be player sales in the summer.

    Different financial year.
    Yes I know, but the books have to be balanced somewhere along the line. You dont just write off a growing debt just because you've gone into a new fiscal year. Just ask Rachel.Reeves 😀.
    no they do not.
  • msomerton
    msomerton Posts: 2,988
    some of the increased costs, I assume will include the fact that the women`s team went fully professional last season I think.
  • fenaddick
    fenaddick Posts: 11,352
    msomerton said:
    some of the increased costs, I assume will include the fact that the women`s team went fully professional last season I think.
    Women’s team went fully pro under TS in 2021
  • msomerton
    msomerton Posts: 2,988
    valleynick66 said:
    Henry Irving said:
    valleynick66 said:
    There aren’t any surprises for the owners in these figures. They have regular up to date management accounts after all. 

    Still shows we were not on a net basis spending much on the squad. 

    They have spent money on the pitch and other things subsequently so that is a sign of continued interest albeit I’m sceptical on how much cash. 

    The worry will always be what if we fail to get promotion as the figures show no chance of cutting losses in this league and still maintaining  an interest. 
    How does it show that?
    I thought @airmanBrown broke it down earlier on the thread unless I’m getting confused ?

    EDIT

    I realise now it was in the tweet  from Maguire:

    Player purchases £1.9m
    ⚽️Player sales £1.3m
    The spending on the players that looks out of hand is the salary bill , so we have to pay players way above the league average by the looks. It would ne interesting to see if Orient have to do that as a London based club.
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    edited April 14
    fenaddick said:
    msomerton said:
    some of the increased costs, I assume will include the fact that the women`s team went fully professional last season I think.
    Women’s team went fully pro under TS in 2021
    The women’s team is operated by a separate company.

  • Sponsored links:



  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    edited April 14
    msomerton said:
    valleynick66 said:
    Henry Irving said:
    valleynick66 said:
    There aren’t any surprises for the owners in these figures. They have regular up to date management accounts after all. 

    Still shows we were not on a net basis spending much on the squad. 

    They have spent money on the pitch and other things subsequently so that is a sign of continued interest albeit I’m sceptical on how much cash. 

    The worry will always be what if we fail to get promotion as the figures show no chance of cutting losses in this league and still maintaining  an interest. 
    How does it show that?
    I thought @airmanBrown broke it down earlier on the thread unless I’m getting confused ?

    EDIT

    I realise now it was in the tweet  from Maguire:

    Player purchases £1.9m
    ⚽️Player sales £1.3m
    The spending on the players that looks out of hand is the salary bill , so we have to pay players way above the league average by the looks. It would ne interesting to see if Orient have to do that as a London based club.
    Charlton’s academy costs are included and will be higher than clubs without a category two academy (most of them). The average in L1 is misleading because there is a large cohort of small clubs competing with a bunch in the middle and a few outliers (Birmingham, Wrexham, etc). You can’t really compare Charlton with Cambridge. 

    This of course is why our previous underperformance has been so spectacularly hopeless.
  • guinnessaddick
    guinnessaddick Posts: 28,708
    Airman Brown said:
    fenaddick said:
    msomerton said:
    some of the increased costs, I assume will include the fact that the women`s team went fully professional last season I think.
    Women’s team went fully pro under TS in 2021
    The women’s team is operated by a separate company.
    So, can the club sell the women’s team as per Chelsea?
  • Pedro45
    Pedro45 Posts: 5,833
    guinnessaddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    fenaddick said:
    msomerton said:
    some of the increased costs, I assume will include the fact that the women`s team went fully professional last season I think.
    Women’s team went fully pro under TS in 2021
    The women’s team is operated by a separate company.
    So, can the club sell the women’s team as per Chelsea?
    You mean to themselves?
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,749
    edited April 14
    guinnessaddick said:
    Airman Brown said:
    fenaddick said:
    msomerton said:
    some of the increased costs, I assume will include the fact that the women`s team went fully professional last season I think.
    Women’s team went fully pro under TS in 2021
    The women’s team is operated by a separate company.
    So, can the club sell the women’s team as per Chelsea?
    The company which operates the women’s team is a subsidiary of SE7 Partners (directors Rodwell and Warrick), and controlled by GFP, like CAFC Ltd. My point above is that its trading isn’t included within CAFC Ltd and therefore its costs won’t be a factor in that company’s losses.

    GFP could well sell Charlton Athletic Women’s FC Ltd while licensing use of the brand and The Valley. That wouldn’t surprise me at all.
  • fenlandaddick
    fenlandaddick Posts: 1,772
    Braziliance said:
    AFKABartram said:
    On the missing records, this is the auditors comment…


    So let's be honest, there's a chance it's worse than what's actually been shown? Cause it's unlikely it would be any better. 

    I've never known a company to be folded by a single cyber attack. Do big companies not also keep things in writing, have back up files/fail-safes. I understand systems going down for a period of time, happens to massive companies, but to lose records completely?

    Without getting the tin hat out, it almost sounds deliberate.
    I have, happens all the time. NHS was throttled by one attack only a few years ago.
    Most info is now digital, very few work with just paper and even then paper is digitised as soon as it is received.
    Redundancy to an attack costs alot of money, and most companies are not willing to pay that cost

  • fenaddick
    fenaddick Posts: 11,352


    Different to accounts but here is how much we have paid in agents fees this season.
  • Alwaysneil
    Alwaysneil Posts: 13,819
    5th in the table? Where do those numbers come from for the 2024/25 season?
  • fenaddick
    fenaddick Posts: 11,352
    edited April 14
    Alwaysneil said:
    5th in the table? Where do those numbers come from for the 2024/25 season?
    The agent fees data comes directly from the FA
  • Chris_from_Sidcup
    Chris_from_Sidcup Posts: 36,075
    I'd imagine the bulk of that has to have been paid as part of the Ahadme, Docherty and Godden deals.

    I can't imagine the agents of Edwards, Mitchell and Mannion charged a lot, and you'd expect Berry was always coming to us because of the connection with Jones.
  • SidewaysInOz
    SidewaysInOz Posts: 1,340
    Wow, this is a poor set of results having looked through it. Hopefully the American owners can get things back on track. Promotion, I would suggest, is even more important now.

Categories

“Marketplace”