|
|
Post by flashblade on Feb 29, 2016 17:05:44 GMT
Yorkshire are reporting a £368k profit but also say they have rescheduled their debt and paid off Graves which all seems very weird. There is a flow chart in the literature which is beyond my understanding. I have no scanner to reproduce it. The profit of 368k is after charging interest and depreciation - BUT includes one off income of 781k, being an apparent waiver of debt by Leeds City Council. (Good luck, all you council tax payers!) So, the trading loss for the year was 413k (368 less 781). Depreciation is being written off over the following periods ( my underlining) Buildings - Carnegie Pavilion 125 years
!!? - other buildings 50 years Fixtures 4 years Plant & Equipment between 4 & 10 years Office equipment - telephone systems 4 years - computer equipment 2 years |
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Feb 29, 2016 17:57:38 GMT
As a Leeds Council tax payer I would like to know on what possible basis 781k has been waived? Perhaps, Flashblade your forensic examination of the accounts can identify how this has happened? How many county cricket clubs are being bailed out by their councils?
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Feb 29, 2016 18:37:47 GMT
As a Leeds Council tax payer I would like to know on what possible basis 781k has been waived? Perhaps, Flashblade your forensic examination of the accounts can identify how this has happened? How many county cricket clubs are being bailed out by their councils? Here is the disclosure made in the notes to the accounts (Note 8 on page 20): "The Graves family trusts have provided loans of £18.9m which has allowed the previous loans from Colin Graves, the Graves family trusts and Leeds City Council to be repaid. As part of the refinancing we are grateful to Leeds City Council who after reviewing the actual cost of interest that the Council had incurred in servicing the debt which demonstrated that the cost to the Council of the loan has been fully met by the Club, accepted £6.5m in settlement of the £7.4m capital outstanding on the loan. This gave rise to exceptional income, net of costs, of £781,106. " Read into it what you will! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2016 18:58:14 GMT
So the various loans from Graves and the trusts and companies he controls have not actually been paid off : they've merely been rescheduled and rolled up into one new big daddy loan - and he has paid off Leeds City Council and incorporated that loan into the ever-growing line of credit he has extended to Yorks CCC so that he now 'owns' the club more comprehensively than ever (i.e. tothe tune of £19 million) ?
And in the course of doing so, he has persuaded LCC to take a small haircut in recognition of (i) the vast interest they have earned from Yorkshire CCC over the course of the loan and (ii) the capital sum being repaid sooner than they expected?
Sounds like everyone should be happy. Or am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Mar 1, 2016 20:54:22 GMT
This may be of interest. From the 2015 Yorkshire CCC accounts 'Director of Finance's Report'.
The Graves family trusts, which are entirely independent from him in his personal capacity, have provided loans of £18.9m which has allowed the previous loans from Colin, the Graves family trusts and Leeds City Council to be repaid.
As part of the refinancing we are grateful to Leeds City Council who after reviewing the actual cost of interest that the Council had incurred in servicing the debt which demonstrated that the cost to the Council of the loan has been fully met by the Club, accepted £6.5m in settlement of the £7.4m capital outstanding on the loan.
As part of the final settlement, the Club was not charged a sum of £326,000 during the year in respect of interest on the loan. We are also grateful to both HSBC and Leeds Beckett University for reducing the rates of interest charged on their loans. HSBC have also granted the club a capital repayment holiday until 2018. The impact of the refinancing is a reduction in our annual interest charge of almost £300,000 per year and there are no scheduled capital repayments until 2019...The club is in a stronger financial position than it has been at any time in recent years.
yorkshireccc.com/the-club/annual-reports
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Mar 5, 2016 18:08:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Mar 5, 2016 21:23:33 GMT
I wouldn't mind looking at the numbers if anyone can find the Annual Report. I couldn't find it - perhaps it's not published yet. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 5, 2016 22:13:43 GMT
Grant is an assiduous and emphatic promoter of the club, particularly on social media, and that is vital to their interests, as a club with little success in their history and with powerful rivals located nearby. However the usual caveats need to apply to these statements, especially when followed by talk of multi-million pound renovation plans. Where is the money coming from and how is it going to be repaid? Loan watch: “We were also successful in securing further funding from Derby City Council for the next phase of developments, which includes a new £2million Media Centre complex due to be complete this summer."
Is the interest on £2 million likely to be more or less than a £15, 5888 "surplus"? |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Mar 8, 2016 9:38:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Mar 8, 2016 12:01:35 GMT
Extract from CricInfo story: "Cardiff staged the opening match against Australia - ending late on the fourth day - which along with an agreement with creditors to write-off large amounts of debt have allowed the club to announce EBITDA (earnings before interest tax depreciation and amortisation) of £1,201,119. The equivalent figure for 2014 was £579,297, with an operating loss of £88,237."So, even with the benefit of the test match, the club lost 88K. Ignore all EBITDA figures.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 10, 2016 8:19:18 GMT
Another day, another County Annual Report with a farcical and meaningless EBITDA result being viewed on the port bow as a very small iceberg, whilst the reality is that the monster underneath has already sliced the belly of the ship apart and will shortly crush it to death. Here is an extract from Northamptonshire's www.northantscricket.com/news/article/10772/financial-statement-, as published on their website "EBITDA (earnings before interest, depreciation and amortization) were at a loss of £54,315. It must be strongly stated that this result is in line with the Directors’ published forecast at the beginning of the financial year. " So that's ok then, small loss, very unfortunate but in no way unforeseen. And here, in the body of the Statement itself, under the section headed Director's Responsibilities (safeguarding the assets of the company, disclosing with reasonable accuracy the financial position of the company, that sort of thing) is the actual Result www.northantscricket.com/~northmed/docs/Northamptonshire%20County%20Cricket%20Club%20Limited%20-%202015%20accounts.pdf: "RESULTS The loss for the year , after taxation , amounted to £449,127 (2014 loss £305, 636)" That turns out to be an operating loss of £350K plus £90K in interest payments on debts. Somebody remind me please why 18 counties are so hallowed in tradition that we have to devise more and more compromises in order to keep them afloat, despite their manifest inability to run their affairs properly? The words of an almost forgotten Victorian poet, Arthur Hugh Clough come to mind when I think about the tenuous life support machine the ECB - encouraged by other, fearful county chairmen - is operating: "Thou shalt not kill; but needst not strive Officiously to keep alive.." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2016 9:36:11 GMT
Somebody remind me please why 18 counties are so hallowed in tradition that we have to devise more and more compromises in order to keep them afloat, despite their manifest inability to run their affairs properly? I agree in principle and 18 counties is way too many in this day and age. And I don't know how well or badly Northants manages its affairs. But to be fair to them, on a tiny membership and tiny gates (even at T20 they only get around 3,000, which in football terms is what non-league sides like Cheltenham, Maidstone and Kidderminster get), they probably do well not to lose even more money. Which isn't the same as saying they should be bailed out; sad to say it is becoming increasingly hard to justify their existence as a first-class professional club. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Mar 10, 2016 10:11:57 GMT
Bm,
As I have said various times before isn't it ironic that the ECB (England (Wales) Cricket Board) and the ECB (European Central Bank) have
the same acronym. Both are financially keeping a sinking ship afloat as both are driven by a desperate need not to fail.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Mar 24, 2016 17:15:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Mar 25, 2016 9:26:27 GMT
Our dear journo friend is full of prose at present and is banging out the stories as if his life depends on it. GD has returned to his 'bete noire' Northants and sinks his vulture teeth into the dying county as he continues to pick the carcass for further stories. In fairness, this is, perhaps, GDs best piece of journalism since joining Cricinfo. Northants is his story and one he worked hard to uncover, as he ploughed through the smoke and mirrors of deception and half truths like a proper investigative journalist. Presently, GD claims Northants are seeking a buyer for the club, which while standard practice in football, sounds a little shocking for county cricket. He writes, "Ailing Northamptonshire are aiming to raise a minimum of £1m by offering the chance of group equity investment to buy the county cricket club... they hope to be able to bring in 10 to 15 major investors, most of whom they say already have links to the club as supporters and benefactors, to provide some £50,000 each to allow for a reduction in the short-term debt and give additional working capital." Yet, £1m doesn't sound a lot of money and rather tars the potential opening explosive intro. For, surely this proposed consortium are investors and not buyers as the ground must be worth far more to a property developer? It is also unclear what each investor gets for his buck. A dying county with growing debts within a dying market-place doesn't sound that appetising. Why not sell it directly to a fervent Northants fan who has just won the lottery and be done with it. www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2016/content/story/989197.html |
|
