New Owner

[Norgethistle]

5 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Yes two years ago I agree .... our average salary in the premiership was £52 so some more than £50k and some less but since then it’s been coming down 

you bring someone in January on say £70k but it’s for six months so it’s annualised to £35k a year and the squad now is probably costing us around £1m 

i have no doubt that Beattie invested at least part of the parachute payment in the squad before he left 

Our total wage bill may not be top 3 in league but basic single player salary is for quite a few players.

What we were paying last year (all season) and this season in basic (take home) wage is high. Trust me on this one, players and agents talk very freely about what they are on, what they think they are worth and what others are on. ( Assuming they aren’t actually BS and trying to over sell themselves).

[javeajag]

2 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

Our total wage bill may not be top 3 in league but basic single player salary is for quite a few players.

What we were paying last year (all season) and this season in basic (take home) wage is high. Trust me on this one, players and agents talk very freely about what they are on, what they think they are worth and what others are on. ( Assuming they aren’t actually BS and trying to over sell themselves).

Sure but I stand by the £1m total cost 

[Norgethistle]

17 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Niall keown would definitely be on a decent wage

Bell

McDonald

Harkins

Miller

Coulibally

Would / Will all be on decent money

[Dark Passenger]

1 hour ago, Norgethistle said:

Which is standard speak from a new owner / board member after the previous owner / board has been removed. They will not (on record) leave themselves open for litigation 

The statement would have to be false for it to result in litigation.

Norman Springford categorically stated that he had no issues with the way the previous board ran the club, the changes were made to facilitate the sale and he wasn't aware of the line re. shareholders expressing concern about the direction the club was heading in. He explicitly said that he wouldn't have signed it off *had* he been made aware of it.

Edited August 20, 2019 by Dark Passenger

[Norgethistle]

22 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Sure but I stand by the £1m total cost 

24 players we’d need to pay full season (stayed or released in January) 10 coming on board in January (count as 5 wages for full season). One sold in January (half a wage)  So 29.5 players, no way the average was £630 a week to make it £1 million 

[javeajag]

2 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

24 players we’d need to pay full season (stayed or released in January) 10 coming on board in January (count as 5 wages for full season). One sold in January (half a wage)  So 29.5 players, no way the average was £630 a week to make it £1 million 

I’m referring to this season .... I agree it was higher last season 

[Lenziejag]

2 hours ago, javeajag said:

What chairman of a company issues a statement on behalf of the board only for a board member to say he didn’t know about it and doesn’t agree with it ? 

Loads. 

[javeajag]

2 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Loads. 

Great ..,,please provide some examples 

[Lenziejag]

1 hour ago, Norgethistle said:

2 years ago several of our squad were on way more than that.

Last year a lot were there or more, including a few who came in at January, one on massively more (which fortunately kept us up). Plus the plan was to go straight back up, so speculation to accumulate seems to have happened.

The story in the herald stated from the insider that Caldwell wanted to sign 4 players and had been promised £200k for that which Beattie was now withholding. 200k over 4 players is 50k a player a year or £1000 a week. Come on Java an ex bank man like yourself should be able to calculate that.

 

Although you don’t know whether that £200K includes NI/Pensions/bonuses 

[Lenziejag]

11 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Great ..,,please provide some examples 

I have worked in a few companies where the chairman’s word goes. Not naming any.

[javeajag]

1 minute ago, Lenziejag said:

I have worked in a few companies where the chairman’s word goes. Not naming any.

Any thistle examples then 

[jlsarmy]

1 hour ago, Norgethistle said:

Bell

McDonald

Harkins

Miller

Coulibally

Would / Will all be on decent money

Norge , the prize money alone from our last season in the Premier would probably cover the Wages for last season, think there is creative accounting going on somewhere.

[jaf]

4 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

Norge , the prize money alone from our last season in the Premier would probably cover the Wages for last season, think there is creative accounting going on somewhere.

The prize money would be in the 2018 accounts as it relates to that year. 

And it would have been in the 2018 season budget as well - it’s jot an unknown so can be prudently  budgeted with an assumption of finishing bottom. 

Asi have said before, if you think the auditors are doing to sign off on accounts which will be relied on as part of a sales transaction with notoriously litigious American buyers that are subject to creative accounting that substantively alter the true and fair view of the numbers, you really have drink the kool aid and need a reality check. 

[jaf]

5 hours ago, javeajag said:

Yes two years ago I agree .... our average salary in the premiership was £52 so some more than £50k and some less but since then it’s been coming down 

you bring someone in January on say £70k but it’s for six months so it’s annualised to £35k a year and the squad now is probably costing us around £1m 

i have no doubt that Beattie invested at least part of the parachute payment in the squad before he left 

Or on 150k but it’s for 6 months so 75k 

[jlsarmy]

23 minutes ago, jaf said:

The prize money would be in the 2018 accounts as it relates to that year. 

And it would have been in the 2018 season budget as well - it’s jot an unknown so can be prudently  budgeted with an assumption of finishing bottom. 

Asi have said before, if you think the auditors are doing to sign off on accounts which will be relied on as part of a sales transaction with notoriously litigious American buyers that are subject to creative accounting that substantively alter the true and fair view of the numbers, you really have drink the kool aid and need a reality check. 

Probably worded it wrong , as regards cash flow , money in hand etc , with the prize money from the 2018 season , parachute payments  , transfer money from Liam and Fitzy etc , it beggars belief if you think that adds up .

I don’t even think the Wage bill would reach £1 million , how would we have survived without the transfer money , cup run money, parachute payments etc , instead of decrying what my opinion is , tell me how the money was spent?

 

 

 

 

 

[Lenziejag]

5 hours ago, jaf said:

The prize money would be in the 2018 accounts as it relates to that year. 

And it would have been in the 2018 season budget as well - it’s jot an unknown so can be prudently  budgeted with an assumption of finishing bottom. 

Asi have said before, if you think the auditors are doing to sign off on accounts which will be relied on as part of a sales transaction with notoriously litigious American buyers that are subject to creative accounting that substantively alter the true and fair view of the numbers, you really have drink the kool aid and need a reality check. 

Do we read from your comments that all American buyers are litigious or just these ones ? 

And are we supposed to believe that  highly qualified accountants can’t spot creative accounting ? 

[jagfox]

We also seemed to have relaid the pitch again in the summer. That’s doesnt come cheap.

[jaf]

5 hours ago, Lenziejag said:

Do we read from your comments that all American buyers are litigious or just these ones ? 

And are we supposed to believe that  highly qualified accountants can’t spot creative accounting ? 

In my experience, Americans are quicker to go to law than we are here.

As for your second point, that was exactly my point. The audited accounts are relied on as part of purchase process, and the auditors wont be missing something or permitting something that puts their necks on the chopping block.  The idea that those accounts wont provide a true and fair view of our finances is fanciful.

 

[jaf]

10 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

Probably worded it wrong , as regards cash flow , money in hand etc , with the prize money from the 2018 season , parachute payments  , transfer money from Liam and Fitzy etc , it beggars belief if you think that adds up .

I don’t even think the Wage bill would reach £1 million , how would we have survived without the transfer money , cup run money, parachute payments etc , instead of decrying what my opinion is , tell me how the money was spent?

 

 

 

 

 

I am not decrying your opinion, I am decrying your suggestion that creative accounting will be present in our audited accounts.

In terms of telling you how the money was spent, I cannot, because the accounts are not yet published. However I can try to help a little.

I think though that some  people are firstly mixing up aspects of three different accounting periods, namely May 2018, May 2019 and budgets for May 2020. So prize money from 2018 season was in net cash in the 2018 accounts so you are double counting if you are adding that to the cash in hand for example. The transfer fees for Liam and Fitzy are in the current year and have allowed for the budget deficit to be narrowed.

I think secondly some people are overly simplifying the numbers. Cash is what matters. Cash is only one component of working capital. By way of an example, in the year to May 2018 we made a profit of £342k. By your simple analysis, I am guessing you would expect cash to increase by £342k?  Cash decreased by £122k in that year. That is a £450k differential to simple expectation. This is because of movements in the other components in the Balance Sheet - expenditure on fixed assets, decreasing creditor balances, increasing debtor balances.

The audited accounts will show the financial position and answer your question, It is impossible to guesstimate the position from your knowledge, my knowledge, or anyone's half-knowledge.

 

 

 

 

[javeajag]

56 minutes ago, jaf said:

I am not decrying your opinion, I am decrying your suggestion that creative accounting will be present in our audited accounts.

In terms of telling you how the money was spent, I cannot, because the accounts are not yet published. However I can try to help a little.

I think though that some  people are firstly mixing up aspects of three different accounting periods, namely May 2018, May 2019 and budgets for May 2020. So prize money from 2018 season was in net cash in the 2018 accounts so you are double counting if you are adding that to the cash in hand for example. The transfer fees for Liam and Fitzy are in the current year and have allowed for the budget deficit to be narrowed.

I think secondly some people are overly simplifying the numbers. Cash is what matters. Cash is only one component of working capital. By way of an example, in the year to May 2018 we made a profit of £342k. By your simple analysis, I am guessing you would expect cash to increase by £342k?  Cash decreased by £122k in that year. That is a £450k differential to simple expectation. This is because of movements in the other components in the Balance Sheet - expenditure on fixed assets, decreasing creditor balances, increasing debtor balances.

The audited accounts will show the financial position and answer your question, It is impossible to guesstimate the position from your knowledge, my knowledge, or anyone's half-knowledge.

 

 

 

 

But we have no debt so clearly living within our income 

[Dick Dastardly]

9 minutes ago, javeajag said:

But we have no debt so clearly living within our income 

Or dipping into our cash reserves, or delaying other outgoings (like stadium maintenance)

We just don't know

Edited August 21, 2019 by Dick Dastardly

[jaf]

21 minutes ago, javeajag said:

But we have no debt so clearly living within our income 

Depends how you define debt. 

Mate creditors debt? Are hmrc debt?  

We reduced exposure to ordinary creditors in 2018 by 300k. If that goes back up, we are in a worse position but don’t technically have debt from a finance house. 

Again your point is a total over simplification. 

I tried to explain working capital movements in the message you are responding to   I will desist from trying to explain further if it’s either too complex for you or you prefer to keep banging on with the same old speculative musings.   

 

[ARu-Strathbungo]

Or there simply could be 'forum fatigue' of all of these if's, but's and maybe's. We simply don't know, and that ignorance leads some to speculate on multiple conspiracy theories? Perhaps this is why we are at 126 pages on this subject?

[Dick Dastardly]

I think what we can say is that we have 2 boards with different ideas on how the finances should be structured. Probably neither is right or wrong (in terms of mismanagement or creative accounting), just different. 

[Semi Nurainen]

3 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Or dipping into our cash reserves, or delaying other outgoings (like stadium maintenance)

We just don't know

Probably sums up these 126 pages.