The Black Hole

[Yellowfuture 71]

City''s finances laid bare
Find out where the Carrow Road cash has been spent. Why big attendances fail to put Norwich ahead of Championship rivals like Burnley and Swansea. The full impact of spiralling player wages on the club.

 

Tomorrows EDP. I wonder if the truth will out, probably not, more like the begining of the summmers softening up process

[blahblahblah 2]

Nah, they''re just trying to sell an EDP to Mr. Carrow and his merry band of half-brother accountants...

[William Darby 0]

''I wonder if the truth will out''We''re talking Archant here, not Infowars.

[Joanna Grey 0]

Oh well the Chartered Guild of Fag Packet Accountants will keep themselves busy over this. Funny that the "role model" club Burnley should be mentioned again.....

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Nah, they''re just trying to sell an EDP to Mr. Carrow and his merry band of half-brother accountants...[/quote]I think the phrase ''The full impact of spiralling player wages on the club.'' tells us all we need to know about tomorrows little expose.Any spiralling of player wages at this club has been in a  downwards direction and has been for the last three years but it appears contrary to the evidence freely available on the official website here:- - ''A £1.6million reduction in player wage

costs. Overall the player wage ratio (ie the ratio of player wages to

income) decreased from 36% to 31%'' (2007 accounts) here :- ''Operating expenditure was down from £28.3million to £26.9million, primarily due to a reduction in wages across the Club of £1.5m'' (2006 accounts)and  here: ''player and staff wage costs reduced from £14.4million to £13.6million''. (2008 accounts).that there are still people who will be reading the Pink ''Un article, nodding their heads and saying ''Aaaah spiralling player wages that explains it''.Can''t speak for MR. C. TFAA or any of the others on this board who express concern about our club finances but one thing is for sure: When we have solid (dare I say tangible ) proof in the accounts and in statements to the contrary on the official website from our Chairman and CEO I for one will reading tomorrows article with a very critical eye indeed.For three years the club have said player wages are going down, tomorrow in the EDP they are going to tell us they are spiralling and that''s where the moneys gone since relegation.Who to believe eh? The Club? or........ The Club?

 .

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Mange Tout"]Oh well the Chartered Guild of Fag Packet Accountants will keep themselves busy over this. Funny that the "role model" club Burnley should be mentioned again.....[/quote]See my above post Who is spinning here? The club tells us the wages are coming down year after year, tomorrow they tell us the wages have been spiralling.Mange Tout? I think the better translation is Avale tout....[:)]

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

May be we can get some transparency into the NCFC Accounts regarding the costs that are described as other costs in the Accounts, that amount to millions of pounds each season.

[spudgfsh 0]

Here''s Doomcasters piece from todays EDP...

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/sport/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx

and the supporting article...

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/sport/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=Sport&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=Sport&itemid=NOED18%20Mar%202009%2017%3A29%3A15%3A450

I''ve not read doncasters bit yet but the supporting article seems all much the usual line

[rjwc22 0]

Reading that it almost as if ND is placing the blame for not competing financially at Delia''s door.

What he does not address is the issue of why the club have allowed the wage bill to spiral and threaten the long term financial security of the club - thought it was the job of the Chief Exec to protect this at all costs.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

Two points: stating a £6.8m player for last season proves that player wages have NOT been spiralling at the club, but reducing- from £9m to £7.4m to £6.8m respectively since relegation.

Also, if we could only afford £1.9m on player wages out of £19m income this indicates a huge problem with the allocation of funds at the club.  In `02 we paid £5.2m in player wages, didn`t make a transfer profit, and the club still turned an overall profit of £500k.  The question needs to be asked, just what is eating up all the cash?

[spudgfsh 0]

[quote user="rjwc22"]

What he does not address is the issue of why the club have allowed the wage bill to spiral and threaten the long term financial security of the club

[/quote]

This he explains is because of wage inflation within all of the football leagues.  no-one within any walk of life is immune to inflation.  If we do not pay similar wages then players will not join us. 

Doncaster also says that when deals are done this summer players will not be able to demand as high wages as clubs have less to pay. This is more likely in the football league than the premier league but it is still going to be a fact of life.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="spudgfsh"]

I''ve not read doncasters bit yet but the supporting article seems all much the usual line

[/quote]In a nutshell, spudgfsh.[:|]Now if you click the three links in my above post you can see that year on year for the last three years the wages have gone down significantly at the club.Now apparently clubs like Preston and Burnley are competitive because they both have a sugar daddy so let''s check that out.Burnley : Sugar Daddy - Brendan flood. Amount loaned club as at last accounts £2.68mPreston: Sugar Daddy - Guild Ventures Ltd./the friends of PNE ltd. Amount loaned the club as at 12th March 2009= £9.98mNorwich City FC: Sugar Daddy - Central Trust loan £2m and Delia/MWJ - £11m (allegedly[:)] well according to Doomy, Mumby and Archant).So the article tells us that wages have spiralled and Preston and Burnley have wealthy benefactors who subsidise the 10,000 fans ticket money advantage we have.Hmmmmmm.

[BBFF 0]

Strange Mr Doncaster didn''t mention the money spent on setting up yellows or the £1mil borrowed for that road or the other £1mil borrowed for offices. Also strange not one word of the income from the corner infill hotel? But then only getting half the truth is normal from Carrow Rd.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[Mr.Carrow 394]

[quote user="spudgfsh"][quote user="rjwc22"]

What he does not address is the issue of why the club have allowed the wage bill to spiral and threaten the long term financial security of the club

[/quote]

This he explains is because of wage inflation within all of the football leagues.  no-one within any walk of life is immune to inflation.  If we do not pay similar wages then players will not join us. 

Doncaster also says that when deals are done this summer players will not be able to demand as high wages as clubs have less to pay. This is more likely in the football league than the premier league but it is still going to be a fact of life.

[/quote]

Can you please explain to me how player wages going from £9m to £7.4m to £6.8m can be classed as "spiralling"? [:|]

[spudgfsh 0]

Having actually read it and the supporting PDF with the numbers in it all I can say is that there should be some kind of effort by the directors to reduce the interest payments impact on the balance sheet.  take that off the balance sheet and the club suddenly looks profitable.  Now I assume that the majority of that interest is from the refinancing done when the south stand was rebuilt.

[The Butler 0]

A figure of 1,680 for depreciation is a "book" figure I believe and does not reflect"actual" money spent/lost.

I am sure our pet accountants can clarify but would lessen the loss.

These seem as transparent as a none transparent thing Mr.D

[spudgfsh 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Can you please explain to me how player wages going from £9m to £7.4m to £6.8m can be classed as "spiralling"? [:|]

[/quote]

I did not intend to imply that the wage inflation was at NCFC but within the league as a whole.  as we are reducing the amount we are prepared to pay we get those players who cannot command higher wages (the cheap options)

[Mr.Carrow 394]

[quote user="BBFF"]

Strange Mr Doncaster didn''t mention the money spent on setting up yellows or the £1mil borrowed for that road or the other £1mil borrowed for offices. Also strange not one word of the income from the corner infill hotel? But then only getting half the truth is normal from Carrow Rd.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

What his own figures show is that out of £9m net profit directly attributable to the team on the pitch (ticket income and tv income), only £1.9m is available to be re-invested in the core product.  That does not suggest a prudently run club.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

Sorry spudgfsh, i see your point now [Y].

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

What his own figures show is that out of £9m net profit directly attributable to the team on the pitch (ticket income and tv income), only £1.9m is available to be re-invested in the core product.  That does not suggest a prudently run club.

[/quote]Come on - it doesn''t show anything like this at all!  How on earth can you justify these figures?

[The Fish Seller 0]

Wasn''t an income of something like £1.6m declared in respect of the hotel deal during this period? I can''t see it.

[mr carra 0]

What the figures show is what has been obvious for some time, despite the made up fantasies of the financially ignorant and conspiracy theorists, and that is that the much moaned-about off-field activiries generate money for the club and the problem is that we lose all that money on the footballing side i.e. we spend too much money on the footballing side compared to what it brings in.

 

Without the off-field activities we would have even less money to spend on player wages (which we are spending too much on anway).

 

Put simply, running a Championship level football is a loss generating money pit unless you can find a way to survive there while paying relative peanuts (certainly far less than we are spending now) on those oh-so-costly footballers.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]What his own figures show is that out of £9m net profit......[/quote]Surely you mean "gross income"? Easy mistake to make!

[The Butler 0]

But were is the 2.5 mil interest payment that wasn''t. TONY???

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="The Butler"]But were is the 2.5 mil interest payment that wasn''t. TONY???[/quote]I think they said it''s been rolled over Butts.

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"]Wasn''t an income of something like £1.6m declared in respect of the hotel deal during this period? I can''t see it.
[/quote]

I don''t think we have made a penny from the hotel since it opened.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[Badger 0]

[quote user="BBFF"]

I don''t think we have made a penny from the hotel since it opened.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]The figures were for 2007-2008. I thought the Hotel opened circa easter 2008? If this is the case it won''t be in the figures.

[GMF 1,010]

Whilst the total player''s wage bill has reduced, the average wage per player has probably risen, but this is offset by our squad getting smaller.

[GMF 1,010]

I beleive the hotel deal involved an upfront capital receipt followed by ongoing revenue streams based upon it''s profitablity. It''s probably included in the net property income? 

[Smeg 0]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"]I beleive the hotel deal involved an upfront capital receipt followed by ongoing revenue streams based upon it''s profitablity. It''s probably included in the net property income? [/quote]

 

net property income??? £36,000? thats cheap for the land!!!