How stupid do we think TTA are?

[EASTLEY]

sorry to repeat myself but the wagebill will be one of the biggest costs associated with the club at the moment.

 

Lee Hughes for 2 years will have eclipsed the Eardley money on its own!!!

[oafcprozac]

Its all very well adding up revenue, but you have to take away the costs too.

 

What are wages a year? What are policing costs? Hospitality costs? Ground Maintenance? Pitch Maintenance? Stewarding Costs? Medical Costs? etc etc

 

Yes but Wozz, most of that hypothetical income was unearned so wouldn't have been accounted for - the main point is we haven't been doing as badly financially as some think and the money being re-invested in the most part has come from this unearned income I reckon, rather than TTA handouts.

 

 

Look at their first full season, Talbot was given a pisspoor budget and allowed to sign two or three full-timers and a procession of loanees. We were going down simple as despite the change of manager and rightly or wrongly it took gthe quite public abuse of TTA in the Main Stand for them to wake up and smell the coffee. Within 36 hours Luke Beckett had arrived on loan.

[ritchie82]

sorry to repeat myself but the wagebill will be one of the biggest costs associated with the club at the moment.

 

Lee Hughes for 2 years will have eclipsed the Eardley money on its own!!!

 

Hughes was on £85k a year, fact.

[oafcprozac]

sorry to repeat myself but the wagebill will be one of the biggest costs associated with the club at the moment.

 

Lee Hughes for 2 years will have eclipsed the Eardley money on its own!!!

 

The wage bill yes, but surely that is the main cost attributed to the losses, so add in the turnover and we're not doing as badly as many make out. providing the extra-income has been re-invested to make up the short-fall?

[EASTLEY]

Hughes was on £85k a year, fact.

 

Ok I don't want to dispute that.

 

I had heard from an extremely good and reliable source that in reality it was significantly more than than. Even if not that it was one senior player on significant money. Multiply that by 3 or 4 per annum and that will make in-roads into the figures quoted

[ritchie82]

Ok I don't want to dispute that.

 

I had heard from an extremely good and reliable source that in reality it was significantly more than than. Even if not that it was one senior player on significant money. Multiply that by 3 or 4 per annum and that will make in-roads into the figures quoted

 

I had two sources the people paying and err oh yeah, Lee Hughes.

[leeslover]

Yes but Wozz, most of that hypothetical income was unearned so wouldn't have been accounted for - the main point is we haven't been doing as badly financially as some think and the money being re-invested in the most part has come from this unearned income I reckon, rather than TTA handouts.

 

 

Look at their first full season, Talbot was given a pisspoor budget and allowed to sign two or three full-timers and a procession of loanees. We were going down simple as despite the change of manager and rightly or wrongly it took gthe quite public abuse of TTA in the Main Stand for them to wake up and smell the coffee. Within 36 hours Luke Beckett had arrived on loan.

Talbot had a massive budget, as we were still carrying the :censored: half of the big money signings M**re left us with.

[EASTLEY]

I had two sources the people paying and err oh yeah, Lee Hughes.

 

Fine I'm not getting into he said she said discussion. I was told what I was told 18 months or so ago and see no reason to doubt it.

 

To be honest its pretty irrelevant, the principle of expenditure on wages doesn't change, and to be fair I would expect Lee Hughes or other senior pros to be on that or significantly more.

 

 

[opinions4u]

Hughes has signed a two-year £80,000-a-year deal with the League One club

 

First Google linky I found, if it helps.

 

Could be scoring bonuses etc though.

 

 

[LaticsPete]

You're missing the key point Pete, no matter what anyone bids we do not have to sell!

As for the losses they're being overplayed, simple as adding to the martyr illusion of TTA's. As Ross quite rightly pointed out since taking charge officially in January 2004 there's been significant unearned income into the club.

 

September 2004 - V Spurs on TV £100,000+ (extra gate reciepts too)

November 2004 - V Thurrock TV £100,000+

January 2005 - City Highlights TV ? (Full House gate reciepts too)

January 2005 - Bolton TV (Pretty much a full house)

November 2005 - Chasetown TV (£100,000 )

December 2005 - Brentford TV (100,000)

December 2006 - Kings Lynn TV (100,000)

Play Off Matches Both Televised & extra gate reciepts

Gate money from Everton

Gate money from full houses vs Leeds x 2

£500,000 from Trotman

£150,000 from the Davies sale (kept quiet on the say so of Dick Knight but later let slip)

£300,000 from Eardley sale

 

So if we're losing half a mill a year I reckon from that little lot we've broke even, especially when you add 6 years worth of ST sales, a new kit every 20 minutes and the little corporate hospitality and marketing strategies we have.

 

 

With respect I'm answering your point about bids. If you're now talking about prices, that's different. As I said we can't dictate what anyone bids.

 

As for the figures you've listed, the club's published accounts show that we are running at a loss AFTER all that income. It's not gravy, it's pie filling.

[wozz_oafc]

Well if we are all going off what we've heard, I have heard that Gregans basic came to 150k a year on his last contract. So thats one player earning half of what we have apparently recieved for Eardley. So you can see how the money might go quite fast.

 

For what is worth I would guess that our total wage bill for all players and staff including bonuses would be well over £1m a year. Then I guess you have signing of fees to add to that. Anyone hazard a guess to what they might be? Never mind the other costs.

 

I understand people highlighting that we have received unexpected income, but maybe the TTA have used this to cover running costs rather than fork out themselves? Wouldnt you if it was your money? Esepcially as they have, despite what some may think maintained a competitive team until last seasons collapse.

[ritchie82]

Fine I'm not getting into he said she said discussion. I was told what I was told 18 months or so ago and see no reason to doubt it.

 

To be honest its pretty irrelevant, the principle of expenditure on wages doesn't change, and to be fair I would expect Lee Hughes or other senior pros to be on that or significantly more.

 

Yeah I suppose, who did we sign him from? Ashwell Prison FC, big bucks.

[EASTLEY]

 

 

He was a proven goal scorer, I had some information that I have no reason to question. He scored goals for us and no he's doing it for Notts County fair play to him.

 

This discussion is completely tangential to my point which is that the extra income generated would quickly be swallowed up by top players wages within the club, as well as infrastructure, tax, facilities upkeep and other expenditure.

 

 

[GlossopLatic]

You're missing the key point Pete, no matter what anyone bids we do not have to sell!

 

As for the losses they're being overplayed, simple as adding to the martyr illusion of TTA's. As Ross quite rightly pointed out since taking charge officially in January 2004 there's been significant unearned income into the club.

 

September 2004 - V Spurs on TV £100,000+ (extra gate reciepts too)

November 2004 - V Thurrock TV £100,000+

January 2005 - City Highlights TV ? (Full House gate reciepts too)

January 2005 - Bolton TV (Pretty much a full house)

November 2005 - Chasetown TV (£100,000 )

December 2005 - Brentford TV (100,000)

December 2006 - Kings Lynn TV (100,000)

Play Off Matches Both Televised & extra gate reciepts

Gate money from Everton

Gate money from full houses vs Leeds x 2

£500,000 from Trotman

£150,000 from the Davies sale (kept quiet on the say so of Dick Knight but later let slip)

£300,000 from Eardley sale

 

So if we're losing half a mill a year I reckon from that little lot we've broke even, especially when you add 6 years worth of ST sales, a new kit every 20 minutes and the little corporate hospitality and marketing strategies we have.

 

Sorry but their is no way on gods green earth that we are anywhere near breaking even. I would be disturbed by anyones grasp of figures if they think Oldham Athletic in their current state are.

Edited August 27, 2009 by GlossopLatic

[johnny punkster]

maybe the failure of TTA to bring a steady management and bring success is a reason we lose money.

no success = no extra bums on seats = no extra revenue.

[garcon]

While we're throwing made up numbers around, allow me to chuck in a couple of accurate ones.

 

Total club income (per annum) - £2.5M

 

(That's everything, gate receipts, merchandising, sponsorship/commercial, player sales/clauses, tv money, prize money, cup runs etc. etc.)

 

Total player salary budget (per annum) - £2M

 

(That's players' wages alone, including bonuses etc. It does not include football staff, non-football staff or any other outgoings)

 

Source? Simon Blitz, in the radio interview he did in the states a few months ago.

 

 

We know ground maintenance costs up to £400k per annum. So that leaves £100k for everything else ...

 

As for transparency, if you're a Trust member then you will have had the chance to see the annual balance sheet.

[Crusoe]

Heh. To try to get some hard facts I just went through Companies House to buy the last set of accounts. Waste of money; turns out the club has a small business exemption from providing detailed accounts. The last set of abbreviated accounts was provided for y/e 31/12/2007; the next set isn't due until 31/10/2009.

 

Unfortunately there's no P&L statement, so nothing on wages. However, it does show a net balance of (£2,700,827), about half a mil worse than the previous year. Now I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall you have to assign some value to player registrations in the accounts (bit hazy on this) as an intangible fixed asset - and in the last accounts these only came to £52,609 (i.e. that included our valuation of players, possibly amortised over the length of their contract). Don't read too much into this though, as I can't be sure I have this right.

[LaticsPete]

While we're throwing made up numbers around, allow me to chuck in a couple of accurate ones.Total club income (per annum) - £2.5M

 

(That's everything, gate receipts, merchandising, sponsorship/commercial, player sales/clauses, tv money, prize money, cup runs etc. etc.)

 

Total player salary budget (per annum) - £2M

 

(That's players' wages alone, including bonuses etc. It does not include football staff, non-football staff or any other outgoings)

 

Source? Simon Blitz, in the radio interview he did in the states a few months ago.

 

 

We know ground maintenance costs up to £400k per annum. So that leaves £100k for everything else ...

 

As for transparency, if you're a Trust member then you will have had the chance to see the annual balance sheet.

 

 

Stop muddying the water....

Edited August 27, 2009 by LaticsPete

[Guest FyldeBlue]

Well if we are all going off what we've heard, I have heard that Gregans basic came to 150k a year on his last contract. So thats one player earning half of what we have apparently recieved for Eardley. So you can see how the money might go quite fast.

 

For what is worth I would guess that our total wage bill for all players and staff including bonuses would be well over £1m a year. Then I guess you have signing of fees to add to that. Anyone hazard a guess to what they might be? Never mind the other costs.

 

I understand people highlighting that we have received unexpected income, but maybe the TTA have used this to cover running costs rather than fork out themselves? Wouldnt you if it was your money? Esepcially as they have, despite what some may think maintained a competitive team until last seasons collapse.

 

Quote Wozz....

For what is worth I would guess that our total wage bill for all players and staff including bonuses would be well over £1m a year.

 

For all those guessing !.....Wozz - your guess works out at £19,230 per week - Do any of you on here really believe that OAFC is being run for anything like that figure ?

 

Try another guess - I'll give you a clue - one senior Member/Director was on £2400 p.w. when Ian Stott was Chairman ! ...that was a long time ago, I'll guess he's not had any charitable feelings towards the club and said "it's OK cut my salary in half" or any other silly ideas since then.

 

Sorry to have to disagree with your guesstimate.....try working out how many staff we have, then how many players and so on, then Stewards and the Senior Officers ( Fire & Safety) then the Police bills and so on, you will soon find that our expenditure for items such as these are ASTRONOMICAL - then of course there are the ground, maintenance costs etc etc... and so it goes on.

 

Having not seen a balance sheet for last year I can't confirm one way or another....so as a daft example - here we go

 

25 to 30 Management / Senior squad players - at £1000 each AVERAGE per week makes a total mockery of £1m per year.

15 to 20 Other Staff/ Junior Classed players/Youth Players/ Office Staff etc.....at £200 to £500 each AVERAGE per week.

 

Then the ground and Maintenance costs etc Including Groundsman and Staff at £500,000 per year

 

Then Managing Director, CEO etc. will be getting salaries and other fees etc....

 

Then of course there is Electricity/Gas/ Rates/Office Expenses/Telephone Services/ etc. etc. and so it goes on

 

I'll bet there is little or no change out of £3m per year just for the running costs of the club.

 

Work it out on basic attendaces and being generous of 5.500 home matches @ say £14 average = gate money of £1.7m - and don't forget we have to pay VAT on that, the FA and League get a cut and so on.....all in all the club are losing around £1.3m per year.

 

This is why SC claims they are personally subsidising the club for around £15k per week - even that leaves a shortfall of a guesstimated figure of £0.5m per season.

 

I don't see any of the complainants on OWTB or indeed anywhere else coming up with any solid solutions, or money !...also I seriously don't envy the TTA or T4A for their role in OAFC, in fact personally I'm going to be eternally grateful to them for saving our club from disappearing off the face of the earth, I'm sure they feel that a few others should feel that way also, instead of all this suggestion and innuendo and in some cases basically lies about them.

 

 

I'm not going to quote an accurate figure but on these figures alone - it's not much fun running a football club !

[opinions4u]

Don't forget "other income" that doesn't come through the turnstiles.

 

Lotteries, competition prize money, sponsorship deals, club shop, TV coverage etc.

 

Narrows things back down to the £10k-£15k a week losses quoted by Corney. Which if I was in charge I'd be trying to flog a couple of Eardleys each season to plug.

Edited August 27, 2009 by opinions4u

[EASTLEY]

I suppose the conclusion we can take from all this is that the TTA and Simon Corney are communicating a true picture of the club in terms of income v expenditure and the losses being incurred?

[opinions4u]

I suppose the conclusion we can take from all this is that the TTA and Simon Corney are communicating a true picture of the club in terms of income v expenditure and the losses being incurred?

I've never seen any reason to doubt what they say.

 

I just wish they were prepared to pile more of their wealth in to the club.

 

Not a criticism. I understand why they don't.

 

They brought stability. I want a notch above stable though. Rather than stagnation.

Edited August 27, 2009 by opinions4u

[Guest FyldeBlue]

I've never seen any reason to doubt what they say.

 

I just wish they were prepared to pile more of their wealth in to the club.

 

Not a criticism. I understand why they don't.

 

They brought stability. I want a notch above stable though. Rather than stagnation.

 

 

Yes you can take it that they are telling it, as it is - well more or less, some things cannot be openly discussed.

 

Imagine this though - say another 2000 fans coming to each home league match - 2000 x £14 average cost = £650k per season and at that we nearly break even - so the answer is to set your sights on getting all your pals and their pals into the ground on match days.....

OR !

 

If the club said - bring your pals along and they will get in for just a £10.00 what would you do ?.... how many pals would you get to come ?.... yeh it's tough aint it !

Cheers

Edited August 27, 2009 by FyldeBlue

[EASTLEY]

Maybe they haven't got it to plough into the club at the moment, or maybe they are dis-heartened/dis-illusioned with what they see in terms of support of the town, council and fans who question their motives at every turn. That's not a criticism, I understand the once bitten twice shy mentality of most of the fans.

 

The town is full of small pressure groups(just like a countless others in the uk)that are worried/sceptical of changes to their environment caused by expansion or new siting of a professional sports club and the perceived benefits/issues that follow.

 

Maybe their just tired and are looking to recoup their investment therefore want to minimise any other losses incurred from the day to day running of the club, but without leaving the club in the perilous state it was in when they came in.

 

Truth is the the only people that could answer this one is the TTA

[Corporal_Jones]

Yes you can take it that they are telling it, as it is - well more or less, some things cannot be openly discussed.

 

Imagine this though - say another 2000 fans coming to each home league match - 2000 x £14 average cost = £650k per season and at that we nearly break even - so the answer is to set your sights on getting all your pals and their pals into the ground on match days.....

OR !

 

If the club said - bring your pals along and they will get in for just a £10.00 what would you do ?.... how many pals would you get to come ?.... yeh it's tough aint it !

Cheers

 

 

 

 

It's impossible, at least in my experience, to get friends and acquaintances to attend BP when the football on offer is mediocre and the club appears to be stagnating. Most people I know are no longer interested even in the occasional cheap offers.

 

And as I keep saying, the false dawns don't help.

Edited August 27, 2009 by Corporal_Jones