People complainig about lack of money for signings

[Desert Fox 0]

T,

It is pointless having any debate with you becuase you duck any issue or question that you dont like.

1. You have not answered my question. Working on the assumptions that I have correctly extracted the information that is clearly laid out in the accounts, where do you diasgaree with my extraoplation - I will aso happily send you a PDF of the accounts if that would faciliate this debate. If so please get in touch.

2. If you have not seen this years audited accounts, why did youor post on thsi thread at 10.49 this morning state "300k is the interest on the property loan which you can calculate from the accounts". I am afraid that you cant have this both ways. One of your ststements is false, you either have clearly seen the accounts or you have no idea of what the interest on the property loan is.

3. Your post at 1.47pm today states that "The mgmt account analysis which ties into the audited accounts show a 700k contribution." To suggest that this statement should really mean "I said mgmt account format not the mgmt accounts" is disinegenuos. You have either seen the management accounts (which makes you a clun employee and something you have previously denied) or you are talking drivel because they are not published.

4. Your earlier statement about the restaurant business doing "ok business" was cleary meant to imply that they were not loss making in the context of the discussion. You are now trying to say that your observation was based upon acquaintences who have eaten there. So what you realy mean is that you have no idea of how well the business is doing.

If you want to have a credible debate please dont play games - I am

[Desert Fox 0]

T,

It is pointless having any debate with you becuase you duck any issue or question that you dont like.

1. You have not answered my question. Working on the assumptions that I have correctly extracted the information that is clearly laid out in the accounts, where do you diasgaree with my extraoplation - I will aso happily send you a PDF of the accounts if that would faciliate this debate. If so please get in touch.

2. If you have not seen this years audited accounts, why did youor post on thsi thread at 10.49 this morning state "300k is the interest on the property loan which you can calculate from the accounts". I am afraid that you cant have this both ways. One of your ststements is false, you either have clearly seen the accounts or you have no idea of what the interest on the property loan is.

3. Your post at 1.47pm today states that "The mgmt account analysis which ties into the audited accounts show a 700k contribution." To suggest that this statement should really mean "I said mgmt account format not the mgmt accounts" is disinegenuos. You have either seen the management accounts (which makes you a clun employee and something you have previously denied) or you are talking drivel because they are not published.

4. Your earlier statement about the restaurant business doing "ok business" was cleary meant to imply that they were not loss making in the context of the discussion. You are now trying to say that your observation was based upon acquaintences who have eaten there. So what you realy mean is that you have no idea of how well the business is doing.

If you want to have a credible debate please dont play games - I am happy

[Desert Fox 0]

T,

It is pointless having any debate with you becuase you duck any issue or question that you dont like.

1. You have not answered my question. Working on the assumptions that I have correctly extracted the information that is clearly laid out in the accounts, where do you diasgaree with my extraoplation - I will aso happily send you a PDF of the accounts if that would faciliate this debate. If so please get in touch.

2. If you have not seen this years audited accounts, why did youor post on thsi thread at 10.49 this morning state "300k is the interest on the property loan which you can calculate from the accounts". I am afraid that you cant have this both ways. One of your ststements is false, you either have clearly seen the accounts or you have no idea of what the interest on the property loan is.

3. Your post at 1.47pm today states that "The mgmt account analysis which ties into the audited accounts show a 700k contribution." To suggest that this statement should really mean "I said mgmt account format not the mgmt accounts" is disinegenuos. You have either seen the management accounts (which makes you a clun employee and something you have previously denied) or you are talking drivel because they are not published.

4. Your earlier statement about the restaurant business doing "ok business" was cleary meant to imply that they were not loss making in the context of the discussion. You are now trying to say that your observation was based upon acquaintences who have eaten there. So what you realy mean is that you have no idea of how well the business is doing.

If you want to have a credible debate please dont play games - I am happy to

[Desert Fox 0]

T,

It is pointless having any debate with you becuase you duck any issue or question that you dont like.

1. You have not answered my question. Working on the assumptions that I have correctly extracted the information that is clearly laid out in the accounts, where do you diasgaree with my extraoplation - I will aso happily send you a PDF of the accounts if that would faciliate this debate. If so please get in touch.

2. If you have not seen this years audited accounts, why did youor post on thsi thread at 10.49 this morning state "300k is the interest on the property loan which you can calculate from the accounts". I am afraid that you cant have this both ways. One of your ststements is false, you either have clearly seen the accounts or you have no idea of what the interest on the property loan is.

3. Your post at 1.47pm today states that "The mgmt account analysis which ties into the audited accounts show a 700k contribution." To suggest that this statement should really mean "I said mgmt account format not the mgmt accounts" is disinegenuos. You have either seen the management accounts (which makes you a clun employee and something you have previously denied) or you are talking drivel because they are not published.

4. Your earlier statement about the restaurant business doing "ok business" was cleary meant to imply that they were not loss making in the context of the discussion. You are now trying to say that your observation was based upon acquaintences who have eaten there. So what you realy mean is that you have no idea of how well the business is doing.

If you want to have a credible debate please dont play games - I am happy to agree

[Desert Fox 0]

Oops - my laptop has just gone mad. Sorry everyone for the uninteded multiple posts. Pete if you are reading this please can you delete tehm?

I did mean to say that "If you want to have a credible debate please dont play games - I am happy to agree to a difference of opinion"

[T 190]

DF

1. I would be grateful if you could PM (not sure how that works) me a PDF of the complete accounts - No offense to you at all but I always find that it is best in life to refer to the original documents/quotes.

2.  have not seen this year''s accounts but last years. The property situation has not changed so you can calculate the interest from there.

3. OK the analysis in mgmt account format - is that better

4. I don''t frequent Delia''s catering facility personally but it''s just commensense with any bar/restaurant/pub that if they are busy chances are it is doing ok financially and if it is empty all the time then it is not viable. I don''t know you tell me. In the meantime the published mgmt account format info showed that it is profitable so we only have your supposition that it is not profitbable.However, somehow I doubt that running a restaurant a couple of nights a week and a glorifed burger bar is the root cause of our problems. I just suspect that the club''s football position might have something to do with football managers and football players that is all I''m saying.

You are also allowed to answer my questions in a debate by the way.

 

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="7rew"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

The catering has a big impact simply because it is such a big, complicated operation and if returns are "marginal" then do you agree that it is fair to assume that the whole project has been a failure and we would make just as much money, and save an awful lot of time and effort, simply outsourcing it as better-run, more successful clubs like Preston do?

As for the initial costs, i have never seen evidence of sums given as a "gift" to the club, just loans converted to shares.

[/quote]

Would outsourcing it with the same return actually make us a better run club? 
[/quote]

If it means everyone at the club being able to focus more of their time and energy on the most important thing -the team- then IMO yes.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="T"]

Catering a big complicated operation? What are you suggesting...we were relegated because Roeder was distracted by having to knock up a particularly difficult souffle during the evenings? Come on the club was hardly entering the CDO derivative market. If you find the culinary arts so challenging then I hear there are some rather good how to cook books available on the market. Catering makes a 700k contribution less the cost of capital which on a million would be 80k Hardly going to have us competing in the champions league but better than nothing. In any case I thought the catering outfit was directly funded by DS/MWJ so it would not appear in the NCFC accounts.

And Preston, the club funded by a wealthy benefactor and player sales? Are you not the poster who recently disparaged others for generalising from one other club such as Southampton? Besides, I thought you would be congratulating DS/MWJ on appointing AB and the new chief exec with all their talk of focusing as much money on the field as possible and making redundancies which you have long since advocated or are you too "emotional" to have a rationale perspective on recent developments by any chance?

[/quote]

T, the catering operation is the one non-football venture you have consistantly stated is profitable and is contributing money for players.  You now seem to be accepting that any profits are at very best marginal and looking at DF`s informed posts even that is highly unlikely.  As you keep telling us that supporters don`t provide enough revenue for a competetive football team (whichever division we are in apparently), perhaps you could enlighten which part of the £35m spent on fixed assets since 2002 is providing extra money to be spent on the team?  Is it the land?  The spine roads?  The infill?  The new ticket office/pitch/scoreboard/offices/spaces for sport facility/Yellows refurb/Jarrold stand refurb/Colney conservatory/new gym equipment/new press facilities?  If these things are not providing income for players then what exactly was the point in them?

Preston, as you yourself admitted, could afford in 2008 to spend far more of their income on their team than we could.  Do you think it might be wise to try and pinpoint why that is and learn from it?  Or are you still attached to the "Charlton model"?

The new appointments look positive to me, but it remains to be seen whether a real change in approach will be forthcoming or whether we`ll see a "Turners mk2" situation where their expertise is ignored because certain peoples egos can`t take it.

[Desert Fox 0]

T,

Happy to PM you, but cant work out how to attach a file - can you set up a temporary hotmail account instead?

As for your questions, which I was in the process of addressing whilst my laptop went mad, my thoughts are as follows:

1. Given the Gaurdian recently reported that 15/20 premiership clubs were dependant on benefactor donations and Deloittes reported that nearly all football clubs are dependant on benefactors anrd players sales do you accept the reality that it is reasonable for football clubs to seek to raise additonal sources of revenue as you yourself has sugggested and most other football clubs seek to do?

This raises loads of issues.

Firstly, the football marke is out of equilibrum (and has been so for many years), but basic economics suggests that it will correct itself at some point (e.g. either formal wage caps or too many clubs going bust). The key is not to be in the bottom quartile of clubs who go through the pain of adminsitration whilst this porcess happens.

Secondly, our natural position is probably bottom quarter of the prem or top quarter of the CCC. We will never compete with the big boys apart from the odd good season which in todays criteria probably means occupying the position that Wigan and Fulham currently find themselves in. Worst case we ought to be slightlty the worng end of mid table CCC.

Thirdly, we should not attempt to spend our way out if this natural position unless this is part of a clear risk based stratgey with a fall back plan. However, given our current predicamemnt, I woudl spend to try to win promoton at the first attempt, because the league looks quite weak and the cumulative impact of spending too many seasons in L1 will threaten our viability to sustain our debt. This would be a calculated "backs to the wall"gamble as the risks of not gambling are to great.

Fourthly, should we bee seeking additional revenue - absolutely yes. In this respect, I completely agree with you. Where we differ is that I think the Board''s strategy was poorly thougght few and even more poorly executed, and that is not with the benefit of hindsight. Unfortunately, the road to recovery from where we are now will be long and hard and will involve gradua;lly building up the balance sheet of the team.

Fifthly, our most successful way of generating additional revenue in the past has been sorely neglected. This is a form of ''farming'' in that we have traditionally bought cheap, developed players and sold on at a profit. This cycle was dependent upon recirculating some of the profit back into purchases to repeat the process. However, under the current regime, we have neglected to reinvest and consequently have little of value to sell. This strategy needs to be changed, and for the avoidance of doubt, this means being more ambitious that Gunn''s freebies, few of whom will ever generate a fee.

2. Do you accept that given we had an average championship playing budget last year that is is unlikely that running a restaurant on a side with a very strong brand and utlising existing facilities is unlikely to be the major cause of our current league position?

I really dont know what our budget was last year. This is partly because the accounts have not been released yet and partly because the club does not provide additional volunatry information that provides for segmental analysis. Ditto for other clubs whom we would compare against.

However, even if our budget was average, I woudl argue that we wasted a huge amount on too many loanees when this could have been used to buy a decent striker. Apart from the quality of the loanees, we clearly had too many to play.

My beef with the catering is that this is soaking up capital and management time and not making any real contribution. Given that we were relegated by a slim margin, a £1M striker last year (e.g, the cost of someone like Steve Howard) would most probbaly have made the difference. Yet last year we spent £1.1M on the scoreboard, refurbishing the players gym and Yellows. How much of this could not have waited?

This comes back to managing risk. By flirting with relegation over the last three years and maintaining investment in non-esential projects, we have effectively contributed to being relegated which will cost significantly more than the cost of preventative investment in the team. This approach is maniftested in other areas particulalry the choice of managers, who appear to have been selected because they had insufficient leverage (in their careers) to challenge the Board.

To answer your question, no catering in itself is not the cause of our demise, but a contributory factor. However, such factors become magnified given the margins between success and failure that we experienced last year

The key issue for me is that the Board must learn from their failed approach (quickly) and reconnect with the fans. I am not seeing any sign of either at present.

 

[7rew 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="7rew"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

The catering has a big impact simply because it is such a big, complicated operation and if returns are "marginal" then do you agree that it is fair to assume that the whole project has been a failure and we would make just as much money, and save an awful lot of time and effort, simply outsourcing it as better-run, more successful clubs like Preston do?

As for the initial costs, i have never seen evidence of sums given as a "gift" to the club, just loans converted to shares.

[/quote]Would outsourcing it with the same return actually make us a better run club?  [/quote]

If it means everyone at the club being able to focus more of their time and energy on the most important thing -the team- then IMO yes.

[/quote]How?  Do problems just dissappear with the magic of outsourcing?  How is outsourcing any different from getting a head of catering and then leaving them to get on with it? Anything that gets to board level now will still get there with outsourcing - either the contractors would need the same permissions as are needed now or those permissions aren''t needed now and could be removed.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

Another thing that you fail to factor in T, when talking about an "average playing budget" for the Championship, is that a large proportion of this budget has been funded by flogging off our best players year-on-year.  If you can`t understand that working on an average budget whilst trying to replace 3-5 of your best players each year is likely to lead to the teams performance declining, then i really do suggest you stick to what you know- and that isn`t football.

[Ian 1,129]

[quote user="7rew"]How?  Do problems just dissappear with the magic of outsourcing?  How is outsourcing any different from getting a head of catering and then leaving them to get on with it? Anything that gets to board level now will still get there with outsourcing - either the contractors would need the same permissions as are needed now or those permissions aren''t needed now and could be removed.[/quote]Absolutely. There are upsides and downsides to both in-house and outsourcing, but both of them need considerable managerial input at some level surely?

[Mr.Carrow 376]

7rew, if you think outsourcing operations is the same as keeping them in-house, there`s really no point in arguing with you.

[7rew 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]7rew, if you think outsourcing operations is the same as keeping them in-house, there`s really no point in arguing with you.[/quote]I would actually like to know why outsourcing works.  I honestly can''t see why it works.  Please tell me!This is how I think. Maybe you can tell me wher I am wrong.In house our outsourced all the key staff* overheads are the same.  *This being HR, Accounting, and the people doing the actual work.  NO DIFFERNECE IN COSTS**With outsourcing there are two managers, one at the club to manage the outsourcing (part of the time, the CEO?) and one at the company to manage the operations.  In house we just have to employ the operations one and he is overseen in the same way. NO DIFFERNECE IN COSTS.The outsourcing company has senior management which aren''t there in house. MORE COST TO OUTSOURCING.The outsourcing company makes a profit. MORE COST TO OUTSOURCING.The actually costs of buying food. surely NO DIFFERNECE IN COSTS**. There can''t be much more bigger bulk buying than 20,000 piesSo surely the outsourcing is therefore more expensive than in house.  The ones marked ** could be trimmed I expect, but if they can be trimmed by someone else, why can''t they be trimmed in house?Or is outsourcing just a way of getting the costs of the balance sheets but keeping most of the profits on them.  Thats what it looks like to me.  Although, given that it is so popular, I must bne missing something.  As you advocate it you must be able to tell me what it is.

[Ian 1,129]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]7rew, if you think outsourcing operations is the same as keeping them in-house, there`s really no point in arguing with you.[/quote]I wouldn''t have thought that 7rew thinks that in-house and outsourced are the same, Mr. Carrow.I think his point is that you suggested that if we outsourced (for example) the matchday food/beverage areas then our top-level management wouldn''t have to spend time worrying about it, and instead could focus on the team?

[Desert Fox 0]

The whole issue of outsourcing is a red herring. If catering is not paying its way, its unlikley that outsourcing is the answer, more like a fundamental reassessment of the scale of the operation. It is widely believed that it was this factor that caused the falling out between the Wynn Jones and the Turners.

[7rew 0]

[quote user="7rew"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]7rew, if you think outsourcing operations is the same as keeping them in-house, there`s really no point in arguing with you.[/quote]I would actually like to know why outsourcing works.  I honestly can''t see why it works.  Please tell me!....As you advocate it you must be able to tell me what it is.[/quote]Ok on reading that back, It looks really garbbled and confused. Mostly because I am about the issue (in general rather than the specific case).I''ll try and clarify into two questions:1) Why would senior management have less to do with an outsourced catering division than an in house catering division?  (with thanks to I.S.)2) Given that a company you outsource to makes a profit, why couldn''t we make that profit by just running the in house division better?I think those will do (at least for starters).

[T 190]

[quote user="Desert Fox"]

T,

Happy to PM you, but cant work out how to attach a file - can you set up a temporary hotmail account instead? Just sent you a pm with a new address many thanks. Thanks for your detailed response

As for your questions, which I was in the process of addressing whilst my laptop went mad, my thoughts are as follows:

1. Given the Gaurdian recently reported that 15/20 premiership clubs were dependant on benefactor donations and Deloittes reported that nearly all football clubs are dependant on benefactors anrd players sales do you accept the reality that it is reasonable for football clubs to seek to raise additonal sources of revenue as you yourself has sugggested and most other football clubs seek to do?

This raises loads of issues.

Firstly, the football marke is out of equilibrum (and has been so for many years), but basic economics suggests that it will correct itself at some point (e.g. either formal wage caps or too many clubs going bust). The key is not to be in the bottom quartile of clubs who go through the pain of adminsitration whilst this porcess happens. I agree it is out of equilibrium but as long as there are wealthy individuals willing to spend ther money this way it may continue

Secondly, our natural position is probably bottom quarter of the prem or top quarter of the CCC. We will never compete with the big boys apart from the odd good season which in todays criteria probably means occupying the position that Wigan and Fulham currently find themselves in. Worst case we ought to be slightlty the worng end of mid table CCC. I''d say without a wealthier benefactor we our bottom quarter premier to mid-table league 1 being the extreme bottom end with mid-table CCC being the norm - can''t imagine us challenging for europe every again unless there is a fundamental change in football finance

Thirdly, we should not attempt to spend our way out if this natural position unless this is part of a clear risk based stratgey with a fall back plan. However, given our current predicamemnt, I woudl spend to try to win promoton at the first attempt, because the league looks quite weak and the cumulative impact of spending too many seasons in L1 will threaten our viability to sustain our debt. This would be a calculated "backs to the wall"gamble as the risks of not gambling are to great. I suspect that we we are not challenging for promotion then ticket sales could get to a stage where we have problems servicing the debt

Fourthly, should we bee seeking additional revenue - absolutely yes. In this respect, I completely agree with you. Where we differ is that I think the Board''s strategy was poorly thougght few and even more poorly executed, and that is not with the benefit of hindsight. Unfortunately, the road to recovery from where we are now will be long and hard and will involve gradua;lly building up the balance sheet of the team. I don''t think we have enough detail to know all the decisions - my view is the most critical decision is the football manager which given they had reasonable budgets based on the sheff utd assessment suggests the money was not well spent. I understand why they went with Gunn and the others given the failure of "mercenaries" but I''m not convinced. Hopefully as a mgmt team it will work.

Fifthly, our most successful way of generating additional revenue in the past has been sorely neglected. This is a form of ''farming'' in that we have traditionally bought cheap, developed players and sold on at a profit. This cycle was dependent upon recirculating some of the profit back into purchases to repeat the process. However, under the current regime, we have neglected to reinvest and consequently have little of value to sell. This strategy needs to be changed, and for the avoidance of doubt, this means being more ambitious that Gunn''s freebies, few of whom will ever generate a fee. I thought part of the problem here is only being able to take local kids now and then the premiership sweeping up anything with any potential at the earliest opportunity so I think it is harder to do than it was.

2. Do you accept that given we had an average championship playing budget last year that is is unlikely that running a restaurant on a side with a very strong brand and utlising existing facilities is unlikely to be the major cause of our current league position?

I really dont know what our budget was last year. This is partly because the accounts have not been released yet and partly because the club does not provide additional volunatry information that provides for segmental analysis. Ditto for other clubs whom we would compare against. a report by sheff utd put us mid-table which made sense

However, even if our budget was average, I woudl argue that we wasted a huge amount on too many loanees when this could have been used to buy a decent striker. Apart from the quality of the loanees, we clearly had too many to play. I don''t think you will find many that will disagree with you including the current mgmt team

My beef with the catering is that this is soaking up capital and management time and not making any real contribution. Given that we were relegated by a slim margin, a £1M striker last year (e.g, the cost of someone like Steve Howard) would most probbaly have made the difference. Yet last year we spent £1.1M on the scoreboard, refurbishing the players gym and Yellows. How much of this could not have waited? The catering is a side toy - I think MWJ/DS sore money going out the door on players every year without getting anywhere and wanted to try and increase the sustainable income each year. . The scoreboard is marginal and probably brings in some more advertisng revenue, I suspect we spend more money on player facilities to attract players than other clubs because of our geographical location which works against us for young players although is a benefit for older plyers like Hucks with kids. Yellows was about increasing long term sustainable revenue - could DS/MWJ have spent it on players - probaly yes but with DS earnings going down they probably thought they would rather spend the money on long term earnings given we had an average budget

This comes back to managing risk. By flirting with relegation over the last three years and maintaining investment in non-esential projects, we have effectively contributed to being relegated which will cost significantly more than the cost of preventative investment in the team. This approach is maniftested in other areas particulalry the choice of managers, who appear to have been selected because they had insufficient leverage (in their careers) to challenge the Board. No doubt the choice of managers has been wrong

To answer your question, no catering in itself is not the cause of our demise, but a contributory factor. However, such factors become magnified given the margins between success and failure that we experienced last year - I really don''t see catering has the problem per se - all clubs do it to a varying extent - I accept there may have been a lack of focus but get the exectutive mgmt team is more important in my view

The key issue for me is that the Board must learn from their failed approach (quickly) and reconnect with the fans. I am not seeing any sign of either at present. MWJ said clearly things are not right and must change. The changes in the Board do appear to an improvement which suggests that MWJ/DS recognise things had to change. I think they will provide the harder business background that the club needs. I understand the concern about Phillips but I think the club recognise with the old chairman and the new director the importance of communication with fans and to be honest it is more important that the club appoints the right people for the clubs sake not worry about Archant. If anything ND was too accessible for his own good.

As ever in life the truth on all these matters probably lies in between the extreme views but then that would make for a rather dull message board.

 

[/quote]

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="city-till-i-die"][quote user="Bexley"]

the same ones who took the rebate "to send a message".

Hope the message was worth it to you.

 

[/quote] ok...for all those who didnt claim the rebate are now thinking...WHERE THE FECK IS THE REBATE MONEY FOR TRANFERS???

i would say 8 out of 10 took the rebate money simpley because they didnt trust the board with it...and at this minute in time are being proved RIGHT!!!

[/quote]

Where is the £600k re Marshall and the £100k re Lewis money?

 

ENJOY THE JOE LEWIS DINER - COME IN AND GET FED UP!

 

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

I`ll try and keep this simple.  A well-run third division club with virtually guaranteed 22-24k gates SHOULD have a playing budget significantly and obviously bigger than its competitors who only average 5-10k.  Had we been buying young players with very obvious potential such as Dickinson it would look as though we were using our advantage in this league, punching our weight and there would be less moaning.

Perhaps the OP should ask himself WHY a club with such big support and tens of millions spent trying to generate "other revenue streams" cannot seem to behave like a big fish even in the third division?  The rebates shouldn`t even be an issue.

[/quote]

Agreed.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="T"]

300k was the property related interest

Our football budget last year was mid-table

[/quote]

Our player budget was reported as being the  8th biggest in The Championship.

We continue to pour money (from the playing side of the business) down a black hole called the ex LSE., ex City Council land behind the Jarrold stand.

[Norfolk Dumpling 14]

If there is money to spend I would not think it a good idea for the club to go about shouting it from the roof tops.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Desert Fox"]

I am waiting for evidence of any chnages in approach and have not detetced anything yet. The Board are perpetuating the behaviour that has increasingly distanced themselves from the fans - but I await with an open mind any signs of change.

[/quote]

Spot on D.F.  Will the board make changes? That is the question!

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Norfolk Dumpling"]If there is money to spend I would not think it a good idea for the club to go about shouting it from the roof tops.[/quote]

Quite alot is already in the public domain: season ticket rebate, Foulgers matching funds, the £1m, £100k payment re Lewis, Clingan may go etc...  It wouldn''t take long for another club to work out we have some money.

 

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Desert Fox"]

[quote user="T"]DF, if catering is not profitable then please explain why every sizable football club I can think of offers corporate entertaining facilites?[/quote]

It is virtually impossible to lose money on traditional matchday catering (e.g, bars etc). However, our club has invetsed a huge sum on catering infrastructure (£1M plus on kitches alone), and has diversified into a range of non-matchday catering operations which I doubt are marking any money.

By the way, please tell me how you know that catering made a £300K profit when this is not in the public domain?

[/quote]

Interesting how NCFC Plc doesnt show in its accounts the profit from match day bar operations seperate from the profit / loss from the other part of the catering operation.......the usual lack of transparency. 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="7rew"][quote user="7rew"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]7rew, if you think outsourcing operations is the same as keeping them in-house, there`s really no point in arguing with you.[/quote]

I would actually like to know why outsourcing works.  I honestly can''t see why it works.  Please tell me!
....

As you advocate it you must be able to tell me what it is.
[/quote]

Ok on reading that back, It looks really garbbled and confused. Mostly because I am about the issue (in general rather than the specific case).

I''ll try and clarify into two questions:
1) Why would senior management have less to do with an outsourced catering division than an in house catering division?  (with thanks to I.S.)
2) Given that a company you outsource to makes a profit, why couldn''t we make that profit by just running the in house division better?

I think those will do (at least for starters).
[/quote]

This really is a pointless diversion, but.....

I haven`t advocated outsourcing the catering, i have said that if as T has admitted, profits are "marginal" then we would likely make as much money outsourcing and letting another company worry about the running of the operation.  I have also said that, as again T has accepted, Preston could afford to spend far more of their income on their team in `08 than we could and it might be wise to try to locate the reasons why.  I believe that the most clubs contract out their catering and i think there`s probably a good reason for that.

[Yelverton Yella 0]

[quote user="7rew"][quote user="7rew"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]7rew, if you think outsourcing operations is the same as keeping them in-house, there`s really no point in arguing with you.[/quote]I would actually like to know why outsourcing works.  I honestly can''t see why it works.  Please tell me!....As you advocate it you must be able to tell me what it is.[/quote]Ok on reading that back, It looks really garbbled and confused. Mostly because I am about the issue (in general rather than the specific case).I''ll try and clarify into two questions:1) Why would senior management have less to do with an outsourced catering division than an in house catering division?  (with thanks to I.S.)2) Given that a company you outsource to makes a profit, why couldn''t we make that profit by just running the in house division better?I think those will do (at least for starters).[/quote]7rewIf I can dive into this post and attempt to answer your questions...You would usually outsource parts of your operation which were seen as ''non core'' and where the ''host'' organisation didn''t have specialist expertise. The advantage is that you normally establish clear service criteria and then leave the contractors to manage the operation using their specialist staff and knowledge while you get on with improving your core operation (football?). You would normally only then have to liaise with a dedicated ''account manager'' who would report back on a regular basis against your established criteria. Assuming the contractor is competent, you would therefore have to devote very little management time to that side of the operation. The staff would be employed, managed and paid by the contractor, all raw material purchasing and statutory obligations such as Food Hygiene compliance would also be undertaken by them.The theory is that a contractor would be able to secure, for instance, better purchasing deals for raw materials by virtue of their larger size in the market and would also be able to migrate best practice between different operations.There are various financial models that can be negotiated from a straight profit share or premises rental fee to a deal where the club would pay a service fee to have the operation run for them but keeps all the receipts.If you believe you have the expertise in house and (crucially) the operation is not diverting management time from more important tasks, then you should, apart perhaps from the leverage on ingredient costs, be able to make more money by doing it yourself.

[7rew 0]

Thank you Yelverton, that made sense.

[The Butler 0]

A question related to the match day catering and how it is shown.

When tickets are sold that include meals how is the money apportioned.

Does a sum get taken over to the catering side? What is the % "match" and % "food"

If not the balances shown would not be accurate.

 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="The Butler"]

A question related to the match day catering and how it is shown.

When tickets are sold that include meals how is the money apportioned.

Does a sum get taken over to the catering side? What is the % "match" and % "food"

If not the balances shown would not be accurate.

 

[/quote]

Bloomin'' ''eck Butler! Roll on when there''s some football to talk about...

[;)]