Chief Exec & PR

[If I had the wings of a sparrow 0]

I was never one to criticise Neil Doncaster but after listening to his comments on the Radio I have never listened to such aload of old drivel. Speaking about the write off of debt as underwritten by Mr Watling he says that it will make little difference to our debt & cash situation. Bo**ox it means that in 2 years time when the £1.5m liability was to be re-paid we will not have to find the £1.5m funds meaning we are £1.5m cash better off. I am sure that has had a massive impact on the long term cashflow forecast. If £1.5m is insignificant it makes the few thousand pounds me & my family spend on auctions, kit & just supporting the club totally meaningless, so when you are next auctioning a shirt off for academy funding or selling replica shirts & season tickets will you look at the money raised and say it is of no benefit to the club? the £1.5m written off in the clubs balance sheet far outweighs any of the sales I have mentioned.

[Splendid Rush 0]

In which case, can someone lend me £1.5m please?  Apparently, it will make no difference to me whether I have to pay it back or not...

[gazzathegreat 0]

[quote]I was never one to criticise Neil Doncaster but after listening to his comments on the Radio I have never listened to such aload of old drivel. Speaking about the write off of debt as underwritten by ...[/quote]

and what about the reported £1.4m season ticket holders have already stumped up before even knowing what sort of football we will be seeing next year?

sadly, good PR and NCFC cannot be said in the same sentence!

as has been reported before, and today on other message boards, the finances of our club are just a pure mystery, with figures banded about and all sorts of things said.  I doubt if Doomcaster will ever be satisfied with the money in - it''s a shame when Sir Geoffrey makes such a gesture and it isn''t given a more positive response

[Mello Yello 2,280]

Public Relations? Not wishing to be OTT, but I heard Mr Doncaster is an admirer of Alastair Campbell & Peter Mandelson......

Being PR at a footie club isn''t easy I''m sure, but one would think that a little diplomacy + tact wouldn''t go amiss in this situation... OTBC ;~)

[3pmkickoff 0]

Mr Doncaster is right. A 1.5M write off although great doesn''t make a huge difference in the debt. People have to understand that operating costs would have gone up this year from being in the premiership with wage rises etc.

With the season tickets, great that people have renewed as the securitisation loan taken out was against season ticket sales.

I''m glad that I support a club which does think of it''s fans. Paying £335 for a season ticket compared to other clubs is great value. When in Blackburn on Saturday we were taken to the ground by a cabbie who said that he used to have a season tickert until Blackburn hiked up the price out of his range.

[Tumbleweed 106]

£1.5m debt being written off DOES make a difference to the balance sheet by about........errr.....£1.5m coincidentally. However the  impact on the cash flow (ie the amount we have to spend out of operating income) will be small- about £75K at 5% interest rate. But it WILL make the balance sheet look healthier.

[Camberwick Green<IMG src="http:new.pinkun.comforumsimagesline.gif"><BR>Breathe the pressure, Come play my game Ill test ya !!!<BR><A class=authorlink href="http:" target=_blank><A><BR> 0]

Hurrah !!! more doom spin from the Chief Exec.

OK firstly the cynicism. I''m not belittling the gift that G.Watling left the club, but I would ask whether he was genuinely going to call the debt in when it became due anyway. I suspect that it wasn''t. which is why, a few months back myself and first Wizard (I believe) were asking why we couldn''t spend some cash on a forward, because the ability to finance such transfers was always there within the club.

Now the fun. Any debt write-off (whether realistically repayable or not) will enhance the balance sheet, no question. However, it''s entirely befitting of the kind of financial spin we get from the club that "no news is ever good news".

As for operating costs going up because of the premiership. well yes, but netting against that are increased gate recepits from a sell out season with 25% more capacity than last year. The premiership may not solve all the financial woes, but it IS a gravy train, and given the excessive prudence of our club, you can safely assume we''re coming out of it profitably. After the servicing of any debts.

Reading the accounts, as I have said previously, the club isn''t as perilously poised as the spin makes out. Yes we don''t want to go mad, but equally things are OK. Writing off the debt helps, would''ve been better if it were the debt to BArclays bank rather than G Watling though. 

 

 

 

 

[nycanary 1]

Doncaster is right. It doesn''t make a whole lot of difference. Basically, the true cost of the loan is whatever the interest payments are on an annual basis and that''s going to be something like 100,000 pounds a year.

When the loan comes up to be repaid, the club can choose to pay it back if it''s flush with cash OR, and this is more likely, they will refinance the debt and push it''s payout back another 10 years. Clubs, and for that matter, companies everywhere refinance their debt by continually pushing it back and servicing the debt by paying the interest per year.

Ultimately, you have to pay the piper but if you run your club well, you don''t have to for decades. What a club has to prove to a lender is that it can make the interest payments and still have money left over from the day to day operations of the club to avoid disaster situations.

Clubs that have gotten into trouble are those that took on too much debt, couldn''t pay the interest rates and when their loans came up to be repaid, no one would refinance it for them because their day-to-day operations wouldn''t generate enough money to pay off the interest, let alone the debt itself.

So, for Norwich, this generous gift results in 100,000 pounds of extra cash per year and no real impact on near-term funds available for things like transfers.

Sadly, Doncaster is right.

[blacko 0]

I heard that the debt was often up for payment and GW kept increasing the term. So on that basis the cash flow is improved, albeit not by much and the balance sheet looks much better.

If he did say it didn''t make much difference it was a tad insensitive IMO as he is therefore belittleing a very generous gesture by someone who loved the club.

How many other fans remember the club in their wills, I wonder and would this be a source of revenue the club should look at.

[KeelansGlove 0]

I agree that the king of spin is at it again, I dont think anyone is looking for the club to invest more in the squad currently (especially as the transfer window is shut!) and in general terms we are all aware that any new players would have to be financed by sales should we be relegated.

I do wish that Doomcaster would treat the gift with the respect it deserves rather than to dismiss it in this manner. £1.5 Million is a lot of money in any language and whilst it will not mean we can buy a new squad it would certainly take a long time for the club to raise these funds elsewhere. I was lucky enough to meet Mr Watling and I suspect it will be along time before we see his like again.

I really do think his comments are embarrasing and unneccesary.

[MadDan 0]

I think Doncasters comments should be looked at in the context of other statements and the position of the club.

It would be ridiculous to think that Geoffrey Watling had not made his family and the club aware of what was in the will. This knowledge would already be factored into future budgets.

Doncaster has merely set out to quell the flames of false expectation.I have every respect for him and the board. " We''ve only got £1.2m to lay out on January transfers " then bang in comes Ashton with no trumpets, boasts or promises. The new South Stand is up, the infill is almost complete and I dare say the corner of the Barclay and the South Stand has talks ongoing.

This is the board I want.

Not something like the upper class buffoon Sheepshanks. " I say we''re a little strapped what, help yourself to a player or two "

Of course every fan''s contributions count and in the grand scheme of things are an awful big part of our outgoings. Without out us all loans and borrowings would be pointless.

So let him say what he has to and let us pull together for the last heave to keep us where we belong.  If he''s delivering the goods then that''s fine. What we now need is for the players to deliver the goods.

Because if they could only half match what the likes of people on this board, on the club board and on the roll of honour board have put in then it would be Champions League for us next season.

[Robbo007 0]

The debt has been owed for a long time and so I would think that the board also half expected to never repay it. It was an interest free loan, and so on the scale of things, it will not reduce our debts as when the board made their calculations i''m sure they didn''t include having to back back the loan.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

In general if a 1.5m loan is written off, then all other things being equal it means that one can take out a new loan of 1.5m and be in the same net position barring differences in interest payments.

Maybe this was the approach taken to financing the Ashton deal (the bequest would have been known to the club at that time)? The 1.2m said to be available in the January transfer window plus 1.5m equals 2.7m  i.e. enough for the Ashton deal given the terms involved.

(If Mr. Watling''s generosity was not made use of in this way, then it stands to reason that we can take out a replacement loan and seek a dominant young centre half for ...........yes - 1.5m)

Or am I stupid??????????

Grateful you accountants out there advise me which !!!!!

Thanks.

OTBC.

[MadDan 0]

Sorry BlyBly Babes but I thought I had already explained that. The debt cancellation would have been known at the point of the will being drawn up.

Geoffrey Watling, as well as being a fairly generous chap, would have been savvy enough to know how that action would impact upon the club''s finances and future plans.

It''s highly doubtful that this would have been left to vagaries of sometimes untimely death.

If Neil Doncaster was being less that polite it may have been impatience to what must have seen to him and others a pretty straightforward case.

There is no extra money. It has already been factored in. The will was merely making public what was known for a long while. What should now be known for a far longer while is his name at the club.

Whilst I accept that sponsors want their pound of flesh and will demand their name plastered everywhere -  I also note that they are not always to be found prominantly when the going wasn''t so good.

Unlike them Geoffrey Watling was.

I''m sure the club recognises that as do most fans. It''s now time the club acknowledged it more tangibly.

We''ve got a fair old fight on our hands in the next few months. That we are in that fight is in no little measure thanks to Geoffrey Watling. In fact that there is a ring to fight in is doubtlessly due to him as well.

So lets get on with the fight and when the dust settles at the end of the season lets sort out a lasting tribute to a man who saved this club. More times than I suspect we will know.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

Surely MadDan your scenario is based upon the debt cancellation being known of (by the City Board  & finance people) at the time the will was drawn up. Even if the bequest was known from then, they could hardly take a copy of Geoffrey''s will with them to the bank when seeking financing whilst he was with us could they (or put it in last years accounts)? In any event it would not have been considered a bankable item by the bank or the auditors because the terms of his will could have been altered at any time prior to him leaving us.

The fact is that the debt was not cancelled until the will was read, probated and executed. Just at the time when we signed Ashton.

I still contend that it is highly likely that it was the fact of the debt cancellation becoming certain that enabled us to put together the financing to sign Ashton without changing fundamental financial policy.

If not, you tell me how the Ashton deal was financed.

Either which way Mr. Norwich will always be a true City hero for the ages. Let''s make sure we make him happy by striving with every sinew to stay up.

Doncaster should learn the lesson that transparency breeds trust & certainty, whereas secrecy breeds suspicion & uncertainty. And he must remember these things when next City come calling to us to support a share offer!! 

OTBC.