|
Post by thevoid on Mar 23, 2022 13:17:43 GMT
Where’s our West Country Miss Marple to tell us we’re flouting FFP and that he’s telling on us to the EFL? He's seeing his mum today for 'bitty'
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 23, 2022 13:20:12 GMT
Well done to the family, bailing us out yet again. I’m very happy to have such a strong backing for the club. Does this affect FFP? Or is that based on the running costs / P&L of the club? Bailing "us"? Bailing themselves.....
|
|
|
Post by mowlee on Mar 23, 2022 13:20:17 GMT
For those who think mons a certainty for next season.. read the 4th paragraph again.. the last four or five season have not proved too be successful.. certainly not a vote of confidence is it Well how else are they going to call it? saying even though these last few seasons have been unsuccessful we still believe Micheal is the man too takes us forward
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Mar 23, 2022 13:23:31 GMT
Where’s our West Country Miss Marple to tell us we’re flouting FFP and that he’s telling on us to the EFL? Last time I looked he had got Blackburn and Middlesbrough in his crosshairs - nobody is safe !!!
|
|
|
Post by Roger Everyone on Mar 23, 2022 13:23:34 GMT
re 'complete transformation of Delilah’s Bar into a contemporary sports bar' this is an opportunity to provide something decent one obvious improvement would be to stop charging an entry fee Apparently they are going to change it to an exit fee 😉
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Mar 23, 2022 13:23:36 GMT
So we finally get a statement, and Gods is nowhere to be seen! Isn't it obvious? Gods is John Coates and all this 'where's the club statements' stuff was him gauging reaction to a statement!
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Mar 23, 2022 13:33:22 GMT
Where’s our West Country Miss Marple to tell us we’re flouting FFP and that he’s telling on us to the EFL? He’s more like Inspector Clouseau. Perhaps Cato has finally caught up with him.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 23, 2022 13:41:30 GMT
Bottom line is that anyone who has put that much money in is free to handle matters as they darn well please and as we had 10 years in the PL after decades away it reasonable to argue that they haven’t made some extremely good decisions in the not too distant past. It’s always going to be a roller coaster ride for a club of our stature but it’s one hell of a nice feeling that ,with backing like theirs, we aren’t ever going to come crashing to the ground Derby style ! I agree Wuzza, although the lack of anything resembling a plan since 2017 worries me. Bunny - certainly since MON arrived, there HAS been a plan. Namely, MON was tasked (whilst avoiding relegation) with drastically cutting the wage bill, getting as many of the the high cost, high earning and underperforming players off the books as possible, and replacing them with cheap (or free) low paid players - and significantly reducing the average age of the permanent members of the squad. Now, you may feel that the plan didn't include some things you would have liked, but essentially MON has implemented the plan to an extent that I certainly didn't think was possible in such a short time frame. The end result is that (assuming that we are still not in breach of FFP) the next phase of the plan can take us forward in a way that would not have been possible had the first plan not been successful.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 23, 2022 13:45:41 GMT
Where’s our West Country Miss Marple to tell us we’re flouting FFP and that he’s telling on us to the EFL? He's seeing his mum today for 'bitty' Or writing a follow up letter Dear EFL, I wrote you but you still aint callin', I left my cell, my pager and my home phone at the bottom blah blah blah my name is Stan FFP's biggest fan.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 23, 2022 13:47:16 GMT
I agree Wuzza, although the lack of anything resembling a plan since 2017 worries me. Bunny - certainly since MON arrived, there HAS been a plan. Namely, MON was tasked (whilst avoiding relegation) with drastically cutting the wage bill, getting as many of the the high cost, high earning and underperforming players off the books as possible, and replacing them with cheap (or free) low paid players - and significantly reducing the average age of the permanent members of the squad. Now, you may feel that the plan didn't include some things you would have liked, but essentially MON has implemented the plan to an extent that I certainly didn't think was possible in such a short time frame. The end result is that (assuming that we are still not in breach of FFP) the next phase of the plan can take us forward in a way that would not have been possible had the first plan not been successful. Isn't that the point though Forny? It's again 100% been tasked to the manager to do that stuff. What is the next phase of the plan because it's hard to argue we're moving in the right direction on the pitch and arguably off it in some ways, for all the good work done in finally shifting the deadwood.
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Mar 23, 2022 13:50:37 GMT
Now this isn't a conspiracy theory but more an open question. Does this statement in any way affect our future ownership structure from the point of view I'm sure the Government are being forced to eradicate betting companies advertising their souls through football clubs. Not sure if there was a date for this to go through or its still work in progress, or indeed may never actually happen. With our Stadium being named Bet365 and all our kit and training gear carrying the Bet365 logo I'm wondering how if the Coates still own us for a long time to come, we'll be rebranded or be able to continue as we move through the banning of betting companies process & stopping themselves advertising via the means of football. I'm aware quite a few other clubs are sponsored by betting companies but is it going to be problematic that we are actually owned by a betting company and basically Bet365 are our main source of income and stability right now. Is this debt being written off a kind of cutting links with the Bet365 brand? I know we're a million miles away from being in a Chelsea type situation where a quick sale is required due to ownship issues as that's more political. But if the government do implement rule changes into football will that affect us all of a sudden? Or will Bet365 be able to back us still but perhaps as more a silent partner? ie still there supporting us up but without their branding appearing everywhere as it currently does? May be absolutely nothing to do with today's statement but it's kind of linked as is something we'll need to be dealing with as a club soon I'm sure? REVEALED: No more betting firms to sponsor front of football shirts www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10018601/No-betting-firms-sponsor-football-shirts-governments-review-gambling-laws.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Mar 23, 2022 13:50:40 GMT
No chance mate in my opinion with statements about “5 year development plans” Fair play to the family for their fantastic continued support👏👏 Well I hope the next 'five year development plan' is better than the last one Don’t we all but nobody can question their commitment
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 23, 2022 13:52:40 GMT
Does anyone question their commitment?
Just the way they do things.
Writing off mountains of debt they've created isn't something to cheer about imo.
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Mar 23, 2022 13:58:54 GMT
Now this isn't a conspiracy theory but more an open question. Does this statement in any way affect our future ownership structure from the point of view I'm sure the Government are being forced to eradicate betting companies advertising their souls through football clubs. Not sure if there was a date for this to go through or its still work in progress, or indeed may never actually happen. With our Stadium being named Bet365 and all our kit and training gear carrying the Bet365 logo I'm wondering how if the Coates still own us for a long time to come, we'll be rebranded or be able to continue as we move through the banning of betting companies process & stopping themselves advertising via the means of football. I'm aware quite a few other clubs are sponsored by betting companies but is it going to be problematic that we are actually owned by a betting company and basically Bet365 are our main source of income and stability right now. Is this debt being written off a kind of cutting links with the Bet365 brand? I know we're a million miles away from being in a Chelsea type situation where a quick sale is required due to ownship issues as that's more political. But if the government do implement rule changes into football will that affect us all of a sudden? Or will Bet365 be able to back us still but perhaps as more a silent partner? ie still there supporting us up but without their branding appearing everywhere as it currently does? May be absolutely nothing to do with today's statement but it's kind of linked as is something we'll need to be dealing with as a club soon I'm sure? I think you are right - the legislation that you are speculating about is the massive cloud on our long term financial horizon. Surely they will be working to ensure that disentangling the club from the company is possible without any catastrophic consequences. Being in the PL and benefiting from its income streams by the time this all happens will probably be crucially important.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Mar 23, 2022 14:03:27 GMT
I tweeted this last week: Having the billionaire Coates family as owners is as much a curse as a blessing. We have to feel so grateful all the time that we cannot be allowed to criticise them.
It seems appropriate to mention it again today. They have helped to create the mess they are now paying off. Without serious work to revise the operational side of the business, they had better be prepared to dig deep again year after year to cover more huge losses. The way to properly get out of this hole is to run a successful business, on and off the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Mar 23, 2022 14:04:04 GMT
Plenty of local pubs, we get the train into Stoke, there's a good half a dozen pubs with in a 10 minute walking distance then the shuttle bus to the stadium. Fanzones aren't just about drink and profit though. They are about engaging fans especially younger ones and making the match day more enjoyable whatever the result. Some fans are also too old or frail to walk ten minutes to a pub and back. I get your point but nobody would be forcing you to use the fan zone. Not that I want to be seen to be criticising the board on this thread and after their tremendous support.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Mar 23, 2022 14:08:52 GMT
I tweeted this last week: Having the billionaire Coates family as owners is as much a curse as a blessing. We have to feel so grateful all the time that we cannot be allowed to criticise them. It seems appropriate to mention it again today. They have helped to create the mess they are now paying off. Without serious work to revise the operational side of the business, they had better be prepered to dig deep again year after year to cover more huge losses. The way to properly get out of this hole is to run a successful business, on and off the pitch. Like us they are first and foremost fans of the club not investors. They did what they thought would be best for the club they support. Now they are trying to sort the issues out by being generous with their money. Not all investors' plans work out for the best, you only have to look up the road at Old Trafford.
|
|
|
Post by somersetstokie on Mar 23, 2022 14:10:46 GMT
Plenty of local pubs, we get the train into Stoke, there's a good half a dozen pubs with in a 10 minute walking distance then the shuttle bus to the stadium. Fanzones aren't just about drink and profit though. They are about engaging fans especially younger ones and making the match day more enjoyable whatever the result. Some fans are also too old or frail to walk ten minutes to a pub and back. I get your point but nobody would be forcing you to use the fan zone. Not that I want to be seen to be criticising the board on this thread and after their tremendous support. Because I come in off the Motorway and in through Trentham I tend to use the Hem Heath. Fairly local but I have not tried the walk to the ground from there.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 23, 2022 14:12:27 GMT
I tweeted this last week: Having the billionaire Coates family as owners is as much a curse as a blessing. We have to feel so grateful all the time that we cannot be allowed to criticise them. It seems appropriate to mention it again today. They have helped to create the mess they are now paying off. Without serious work to revise the operational side of the business, they had better be prepered to dig deep again year after year to cover more huge losses. The way to properly get out of this hole is to run a successful business, on and off the pitch. Like us they are first and foremost fans of the club not investors. They did what they thought would be best for the club they support. Now they are trying to sort the issues out by being generous with their money. Not all investors' plans work out for the best, you only have to look up the road at Old Trafford. It's going to take them being even more generous with their money down the line if they're not going to learn from those mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by bristolcityinpeace on Mar 23, 2022 14:15:07 GMT
Where’s our West Country Miss Marple to tell us we’re flouting FFP and that he’s telling on us to the EFL? Lol- small post...Debt write-offs are excluded from FFP as such, the equity conversion merely takes a club up to the Upper Loss Threshold. The equity vs loss threshold means that a club can lose £5m in a year in FFP terms ie £5m plus FFP exclusions if no equity at all put in, or £13m if equity in. Or anything in between- obviously 3 year rolling basis=£15m vs £39m- but then I would expect Stoke to be towards the Upper threshold anyway so it merely confirms expectations. The equity does not have to be evenly spread ie put in the same amount per year and £40m neatly covers a 5 year period of £8m a year averaged. Differing levels for PL and Championship, although the £5m remains constant at both... Great for the Balance Sheet but all past cases of debt write offs show that it makes no difference to the Profit and Loss account- which is what FFP is based on, hence the Stadium sale write off. If writing off debt counted towards FFP then there would be literally no point. Equity conversion does but only up to the gap between Upper and Lower Threshold in a 3 year Period. Strikes me as a convenient fig leaf anyway 'selling'/ Fixed Assets to be redeveloped if that is the intent, the redevelopment could be done no prob, no impact on FFP- all Tangible Fixed Asset expenditure is exempt from FFP. The Land Registry is interesting, seen no coverage of it by Stoke media or on here- Sheffield Wednesday fell foul of that, one reason why they fell foul in any event. Saw one or two on Twitter asking how the Land Registry aligns with it all.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 23, 2022 14:22:39 GMT
Now this isn't a conspiracy theory but more an open question. Does this statement in any way affect our future ownership structure from the point of view I'm sure the Government are being forced to eradicate betting companies advertising their souls through football clubs. Not sure if there was a date for this to go through or its still work in progress, or indeed may never actually happen. With our Stadium being named Bet365 and all our kit and training gear carrying the Bet365 logo I'm wondering how if the Coates still own us for a long time to come, we'll be rebranded or be able to continue as we move through the banning of betting companies process & stopping themselves advertising via the means of football. I'm aware quite a few other clubs are sponsored by betting companies but is it going to be problematic that we are actually owned by a betting company and basically Bet365 are our main source of income and stability right now. Is this debt being written off a kind of cutting links with the Bet365 brand? I know we're a million miles away from being in a Chelsea type situation where a quick sale is required due to ownship issues as that's more political. But if the government do implement rule changes into football will that affect us all of a sudden? Or will Bet365 be able to back us still but perhaps as more a silent partner? ie still there supporting us up but without their branding appearing everywhere as it currently does? May be absolutely nothing to do with today's statement but it's kind of linked as is something we'll need to be dealing with as a club soon I'm sure? I think you are right - the legislation that you are speculating about is the massive cloud on our long term financial horizon. Surely they will be working to ensure that disentangling the club from the company is possible without any catastrophic consequences. Being in the PL and benefiting from its income streams by the time this all happens will probably be crucially important. Have I missed something the article talked about banning betting sponsorship on the front of shirts (did it mention back of shirts ?) and while you might extrapolate that worst case to banning stadium naming rights there is no suggestion betting firms would be excluded from ownership. From memory shirt and stadium sponsorship was £2-£3m a season, I wouldn't say no to that but in terms of the funding by the family its peanuts although useful for ffp if we couldn't get an alternative sponsor I don't think there would be any obstruction to bet 365 continuing sponsorship but giving their place on the shirts to a charity like Donna Louise or Denise's foundation either way I don't see this as a dark cloud more an annoying light shower.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Mar 23, 2022 14:34:45 GMT
And that’s unlikely in reality as the losses at Stoke are a drop in the ocean for Bet365. Agree its unlikely unless they ever wanted to float but I still doubt Denise is that chuffed that £160m spent on Stoke returns £0 whereas £160m spent on bet 365 they'd expect 5%+ profit back, so I expect John and Peter dont get much at xmas and for birthdays What to get the man who has everything for his Birthday? I know, a 160 Million Pound loss!
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 23, 2022 14:36:28 GMT
Where’s our West Country Miss Marple to tell us we’re flouting FFP and that he’s telling on us to the EFL? Lol- small post...Debt write-offs are excluded from FFP as such, the equity conversion merely takes a club up to the Upper Loss Threshold. The equity vs loss threshold means that a club can lose £5m in a year in FFP terms ie £5m plus FFP exclusions if no equity at all put in, or £13m if equity in. Or anything in between- obviously 3 year rolling basis=£15m vs £39m- but then I would expect Stoke to be towards the Upper threshold anyway so it merely confirms expectations. The equity does not have to be evenly spread ie put in the same amount per year and £40m neatly covers a 5 year period of £8m a year averaged. Differing levels for PL and Championship, although the £5m remains constant at both... Great for the Balance Sheet but all past cases of debt write offs show that it makes no difference to the Profit and Loss account- which is what FFP is based on, hence the Stadium sale write off. If writing off debt counted towards FFP then there would be literally no point. Equity conversion does but only up to the gap between Upper and Lower Threshold in a 3 year Period. Strikes me as a convenient fig leaf anyway 'selling'/ Fixed Assets to be redeveloped if that is the intent, the redevelopment could be done no prob, no impact on FFP- all Tangible Fixed Asset expenditure is exempt from FFP. The Land Registry is interesting, seen no coverage of it by Stoke media or on here- Sheffield Wednesday fell foul of that, one reason why they fell foul in any event. Saw one or two on Twitter asking how the Land Registry aligns with it all. I think you are getting your hopes up on the land registry, Sheff Weds sold to their owner not effectively a transfer within the group like Stoke's is so no idea of the timelines or indeed if or how it needs to be registered, far more important will be payment of funds if there was any and or contract for sale, auditors would not sign off accounts if the deal was not legally complete at the date stated and you really should be more careful throwing around unfounded allegations that call into question the integrity of a multi billion pound companies accounts and directors unless of course you want to move to a smaller house / tent
|
|
|
Post by dg19531 on Mar 23, 2022 14:36:48 GMT
Does anyone question their commitment? Just the way they do things. Writing off mountains of debt they've created isn't something to cheer about imo. Merely reflects the reality of the situation, namely that money invested in most football clubs is effectively a donation and not a loan as there is no chance of ever getting your money back. I'd be surprised if the loan hadn't already been shown as impaired in the books of Bet365. The debt write off will result in a large exceptional credit in the accounts of SCFC. Unlikely to count towards FFP in my view.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 23, 2022 14:39:24 GMT
Agree its unlikely unless they ever wanted to float but I still doubt Denise is that chuffed that £160m spent on Stoke returns £0 whereas £160m spent on bet 365 they'd expect 5%+ profit back, so I expect John and Peter dont get much at xmas and for birthdays What to get the man who has everything for his Birthday? I know, a 160 Million Pound loss! That must be a right bugger to get into an envelope with a card
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 23, 2022 14:44:02 GMT
Does anyone question their commitment? Just the way they do things. Writing off mountains of debt they've created isn't something to cheer about imo. Merely reflects the reality of the situation, namely that money invested in most football clubs is effectively a donation and not a loan as there is no chance of ever getting your money back. I'd be surprised if the loan hadn't already been shown as impaired in the books of Bet365. The debt write off will result in a large exceptional credit in the accounts of SCFC. Unlikely to count towards FFP in my view. Wont count towards ffp if they had impaired it in bet 365 accounts they would have to do the opposite side in stoke holdings accounts at same time as net impact to the group is zero they have effectively just given cash to the club like you say.
|
|
|
Post by maninasuitcase on Mar 23, 2022 14:46:52 GMT
The boothen concourse needs to be bigger simple as. Compare it to Doncaster a third tier club who we played in the cup a few years ago. Their concourse was huge for a 12,000 stadium, plenty of room to have a pie and a pint instead of the claustrophobic boothen end. And ive said it a million times sort that toilet entrance on block 24 as its a fucking shambles trying to go for a slash.
And im still amazed they haven't utilised the railway that runs next to the ground to get fans to and from the ground.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Mar 23, 2022 14:48:34 GMT
For all the replacement seats and better facilities, which are welcome in themselves, the place will never look anything other than amateurish and unfinished.
No-one would intentionally design a stadium with three (two) open corners unless it was being done as cheaply as possible. It looks awful.
I don't know the ins and outs of FFP, but some clubs seem to obtain multi-million pound kickbacks from stadium naming deals, why couldn't we do the same with bet365 by filling in the remaining corners and making some money on it for the club at the same time?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2022 14:48:47 GMT
Is that a serious question? I meant local to the stadium that's out in the sticks. Why not drink in Stoke, Castle, Hanley and get the bus in. There's also plenty of pubs across the city that run matchday coaches.
|
|
|
Post by Glory Hunter on Mar 23, 2022 14:53:02 GMT
I tweeted this last week: Having the billionaire Coates family as owners is as much a curse as a blessing. We have to feel so grateful all the time that we cannot be allowed to criticise them. It seems appropriate to mention it again today. They have helped to create the mess they are now paying off. Without serious work to revise the operational side of the business, they had better be prepered to dig deep again year after year to cover more huge losses. The way to properly get out of this hole is to run a successful business, on and off the pitch. Some people just will never be happy. I reckon over 80 of the other 91 league clubs would give their right arm to have our owners, and of the remaining through, they depend on Middle Eastern/Chinese/American owners continuing to maintain their interest (always a question mark unlike rye Coates family) and generosity. Let’s have a look at the new Chelsea owners (especially if they are American), they will inject a large initial amount of cash, and like with Man Utd, they soon want to start having it repaid. We should feel immensely grateful for what and who we have.
|
|