Dear Mr Chairman

[Schards#2]

you run a business.thats why i asked you

Cheers for clearing up any ambiguity

Clearly, it's all easily understandable and available at everyone's fingertips.

[ZacNaloen]

So there isn't a years delay in the publication of your businesses accounts? Or you don't pay any attention and just let your accountant do what he wants?


That was the question he asked you.

[Schards#2]

So there isn't a years delay in the publication of your businesses accounts? Or you don't pay any attention and just let your accountant do what he wants?


That was the question he asked you.

There is a delay in the publishing of my company's accounts.

I would have no difficulty in establishing into what accounting year a significant lump sum payment fell.

The question I asked him was about when parachute payments were made, he answered, firstly, by saying this was all unambiguous in the accounts and, secondly by asking an irrelevent question about my own company.

What he did not do was answer my question so, presumably, it's not as unambiguous as he would have us believe.

It's relevent in that, if the last set of accounts show a black hole of £4m but don't take account of a multi million pound parachute payment received shortly afetr the accounting date, then people may view the sale of a major player without adequately replacing him in a different light even though what the club is saying may be born out by the last set of accounts.

[brendywendy]

you run a business.thats why i asked you

Cheers for clearing up any ambiguity

Clearly, it's all easily understandable and available at everyone's fingertips.

well, the accounts published each year have all added up, and made sense. so my point is, the only accounts that dont are the ones that are yet to be published.

[brendywendy]

So there isn't a years delay in the publication of your businesses accounts? Or you don't pay any attention and just let your accountant do what he wants?


That was the question he asked you.

There is a delay in the publishing of my company's accounts.

I would have no difficulty in establishing into what accounting year a significant lump sum payment fell.

The question I asked him was about when parachute payments were made, he answered, firstly, by saying this was all unambiguous in the accounts and, secondly by asking an irrelevent question about my own company.

What he did not do was answer my question so, presumably, it's not as unambiguous as he would have us believe.

It's relevent in that, if the last set of accounts show a black hole of £4m but don't take account of a multi million pound parachute payment received shortly afetr the accounting date, then people may view the sale of a major player without adequately replacing him in a different light even though what the club is saying may be born out by the last set of accounts.

the 4 million was the gap in this years income.
last years was bigger.

its totally ambiguous about the parachute payments, and all aspects of our finances until that years accounts are published.
which i assume is what happens with all businesses, hence the question about yours.

[Royal Lady]

I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.

[brendywendy]

I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.

and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too


and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc

[Royal Lady]

I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.

and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too


and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc

and the money for the expansion of the hotel is in there too.

LOL @ the idea that a set of accounts cannot be made for each entity separately.

[Schards#2]

I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.

and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too


and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc

So, if the wages are included, and the profits are included, is it reasonable to assume that the cost of extending the hotel is also included?

[brendywendy]

whoever said they couldnt RL, certainly not me.
they just arent.as the company comprises the football club and hotel.


im really not sure what you think is happening here? where the conspiracy is? please spell it out for me.



last year when everyone was doing this, the club came out and made a fullsome statement on finances in an attempt to quell the daft "where has all the money gone"ing
at the time tim dellor made several accusations about the accounts on BBCRB, and then the week after came out and apologised because he was wrong, and in fact the hotel had been a net contributor to the football business.

expanding the successful hotel will only increase the hotels profits, and their contribution to our finances, so i just cant understand what it is you are moaning about

[brendywendy]

I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.

and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too


and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc

So, if the wages are included, and the profits are included, is it reasonable to assume that the cost of extending the hotel is also included?

id assume so wouldnt you?

but what exactly is the problem here?

if you honestly think the chairman is robbing money from the club and laundering it through the hotel?
or do you just think that hes spent club money on the hotel expansion?

if thats the case i dont see a problem with that since the hotel has funded the club in the previous years, and the expansion will only help bring in more money.

all i know is that these accusations were made before and rebuffed totally and fully by the club

[Hoop Blah]

From what I can see, the hotel employs around 87 employees and it's wage bill is £1.9m.

[Schards#2]

and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too


and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc

So, if the wages are included, and the profits are included, is it reasonable to assume that the cost of extending the hotel is also included?

id assume so wouldnt you?

but what exactly is the problem here?

if you honestly think the chairman is robbing money from the club and laundering it through the hotel?
or do you just think that hes spent club money on the hotel expansion?

if thats the case i dont see a problem with that since the hotel has funded the club in the previous years, and the expansion will only help bring in more money.

all i know is that these accusations were made before and rebuffed totally and fully by the club

You appear to have answered the question put in the second line of your post with the last line of your post.

[brendywendy]

id assume so wouldnt you?

but what exactly is the problem here?

if you honestly think the chairman is robbing money from the club and laundering it through the hotel?
or do you just think that hes spent club money on the hotel expansion?

if thats the case i dont see a problem with that since the hotel has funded the club in the previous years, and the expansion will only help bring in more money.

all i know is that these accusations were made before and rebuffed totally and fully by the club

You appear to have answered the question put in the second line of your post with the last line of your post.

your problem is that the club has answered these questions before?

im not having a go at you schards, its just the accounts when they come out each year have always made sense, there are no glaring gaps and holes, so i seriously just want you to explain what the problems you percieve are, and why they are such a problem. thats all.

[Schards#2]

id assume so wouldnt you?

but what exactly is the problem here?

if you honestly think the chairman is robbing money from the club and laundering it through the hotel?
or do you just think that hes spent club money on the hotel expansion?

if thats the case i dont see a problem with that since the hotel has funded the club in the previous years, and the expansion will only help bring in more money.

all i know is that these accusations were made before and rebuffed totally and fully by the club

You appear to have answered the question put in the second line of your post with the last line of your post.

your problem is that the club has answered these questions before?

im not having a go at you schards, its just the accounts when they come out each year have always made sense, there are no glaring gaps and holes, so i seriously just want you to explain what the problems you percieve are, and why they are such a problem. thats all.

You might want to read the last few posts.

[Royal Lady]

the problem as I perceive it and I may be very wrong, I'll admit, is that if the hotel took £17 million or whatever it was from the football club in order to build the expansion etc, then THAT is why we have had problems in the last couple of years - we (RFC) are having to cut our cloth BECAUSE of the hotel. If we are unable to buy the players we want because of this, then I think it's fair to be slightly annoyed.

[ZacNaloen]

the problem as I perceive it and I may be very wrong, I'll admit, is that if the hotel took £17 million or whatever it was from the football club in order to build the expansion etc, then THAT is why we have had problems in the last couple of years - we (RFC) are having to cut our cloth BECAUSE of the hotel. If we are unable to buy the players we want because of this, then I think it's fair to be slightly annoyed.

No offense RL, but that's very very wrong.

and is precisely what the club refuted, and the accusation Tim Dellor had to retract this time last year.

The hotel contributed profit to the club. It's expansion paid for itself.

[Svlad Cjelli]

the problem as I perceive it and I may be very wrong, I'll admit, is that if the hotel took £17 million or whatever it was from the football club in order to build the expansion etc, then THAT is why we have had problems in the last couple of years - we (RFC) are having to cut our cloth BECAUSE of the hotel. If we are unable to buy the players we want because of this, then I think it's fair to be slightly annoyed.

But it's not - money was never going to spent on players, no matter how much was kicking around burning a hole in anyone's pocket.

It's a strategic decision to fund infrastructure and projects and not just throw money at running costs (i.e. player salaries) - not a tactical decision based on lack of liquidity (although that does now exist because of money tied up in Station Hill).

[Hoop Blah]

I think the point Schards is making is that if the accounts for 2009-10 don't inclue the parachute payment then they'll look a lot more like a company that needs to fill a shortfall with a few player sales and extensive cutting of the cloth.

The reality might be that the parachute money would make that financial year look a lot more healthy and mean that the sales were less needed and perhaps more questions should be asked of the club.

Personally I don't think that's the case and the club are just running to a pretty prudent business model whilst under pressure from lenders to do so.

I'd rather we saw more external investment to keep us more competitive, but realistically that's not what we're going to get at the moment.

[Svlad Cjelli]

I'd rather we saw more external investment to keep us more competitive, but realistically that's not what we're going to get at the moment.

Everyone agrees that, including many at the club - but the big problem is that there's absolutely no guarantee of any return on that "investment."