Dear Mr Chairman

[rabidbee]

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

that would presumably depend on whether or not they are, in fact, organised as separate entities.

If the hotel profits are now plugging the gap of the club's defecits, it would make some sense to issue accounts for the holding company that owns both - rather than separate accounts for each - (if, indeed, that is in fact how they're organised, and my recollection is vague). Madejski is trying to sell the club, so it is in his interests to present as positive a light as possible: thus, issue the accounts for holding company, with the football club's running defecit plugged to some extent by the hotel's operating profit.

NB I'm just speculating here.

[brendywendy]

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.[/quote]

your only problem is that you think the club is subsidising the hotel and that if true, then this is outrageous?
i am simply asking because im not entirely sure im reading it right in the previous posts you mention.

other than looking at the last few sets of accounts, and waiting for the newest sets to come out, and read them too, i really dont know how this confusion of yours can be helped.

[brendywendy]

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.

what if, and im not saying its the case, but what if in the previous 5 years the hotel generated 25 million of profit for the company and club.
would it be ok then?

and tbf i see the expansion of the only profitable part of the business as a very good thing for our future prosperity

[brendywendy]

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.

thank you, someone else remembers this too!

this is what i thought happened, hence why i am confused as to why these concerns are being raised again.or is there brand new information

[brendywendy]

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.

but i guess thats the same with all companys. you can only ever look at the current published set, the most up to date set of accounts, and that these will never include up to the minute details of current financial situation as of today.
also its pointless looking at the accounts of one year in isolation, its the over all accounts over a period of time that count, otherwise youll always get the oddd year where certain things are payed out/in either side of the accounts deadline

jm will know that if the next set of accounts come out and show a massive profit, and that this massive profit had been syphoned out of the club hed have some serious questions to answer, and any fan revolt would be hugely justified, and more importantly hugely damaging for JM, and the business he has tried to build here.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

If the hotel has paid for itself why is JM owed so much money by the Hotel????

It is there in the accounts, and still there has been no answer to what the extra £5mill on the infrastructure at the club was spent on, come on you that say it all adds up, show me where they spent the £5m, and why the statement said we made a loss when the accounts showed we made a profit. Fine to make a loss the following year, but that was NOT what the financial statement siad, it said that despite showing a profit, we actually made a loss.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

also its pointless looking at the accounts of one year in isolation, its the over all accounts over a period of time that count, otherwise youll always get the oddd year where certain things are payed out/in either side of the accounts deadline.

Don't companies cover this, like banks, by setting aside money for future perceived losses, eg bad debts.

[brendywendy]

If the hotel has paid for itself why is JM owed so much money by the Hotel????

It is there in the accounts, and still there has been no answer to what the extra £5mill on the infrastructure at the club was spent on, come on you that say it all adds up, show me where they spent the £5m, and why the statement said we made a loss when the accounts showed we made a profit. Fine to make a loss the following year, but that was NOT what the financial statement siad, it said that despite showing a profit, we actually made a loss.

i have no idea what you are referring to, but id guess the answers are in the accounts and club statements somewhere
there were 2/3 1 Million+ pitch relayings in there somewhere too i think
and those leather bucket seats in the dug outs dont come cheap you know.
plus 7.99 for the paddling pool we use as an ice bath
it all adds up

[brendywendy]

also its pointless looking at the accounts of one year in isolation, its the over all accounts over a period of time that count, otherwise youll always get the oddd year where certain things are payed out/in either side of the accounts deadline.

Don't companies cover this, like banks, by setting aside money for future perceived losses, eg bad debts.

yes. same as we are probably doing with the majority of teh money from gylfi

[Hoop Blah]

Out of sight out of mind...I suppose those who think there is something odd going on will say he'll sell up before then or just hope that by the time to figures come out it will be forgotten about to a certain extent.

For the record, I think the hotel actually made a net loss in 2009 and 2008.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

I wouldn't mind had Forbes not had that recaro seat as his ST last season.

And it was a £3-50p pool in the sale.

[brendywendy]

show me where they spent the £5m, and why the statement said we made a loss when the accounts showed we made a profit. Fine to make a loss the following year, but that was NOT what the financial statement siad, it said that despite showing a profit, we actually made a loss.

please print off the statement you quote, so we can all pour over it, and we can hopefully come to some sort of agreement.


in my memory it was a statement that covered from before the prem, to after relegation, and made total sense when added up.
the individual profit from that years accounts did not offset all the losses from before we went up/after we came down.

i guess youll just have to wait for the next set of accounts to put your mind at ease

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

we poured over it once before, and then there was no real agreement that it was the full story.

[brendywendy]

then i can hellp you no further.
it was enough to convince me that the club is well run, and the finances were in order
if you still insist on conspiracy theorys, and money syphoning i suggest you take it up with JM

[Arch]

wng

[Northern Git]

As far as I understand it there are three companies involved. RFC (limited), Millenium Madejski Hotel (limited) that are both 100% owned by RFC (Holdings) PLC.

The accounts that we tend to chew over on HNA? are the PLC accounts.

As with any set of accounts the numbers are just a snapshot of where a comapny is, financially at the end of a given financial year.

What you dont see with any year end accounts is the detail you would see if you had access to the monthly management accounts. These in my experiance are the revealing numbers. However, unless you are actively involved with a companies finanaces, the public does not get to see these.

My 'I would like to know more about that' button was pressed after JM's recent statement that he could continue to fund his other investments, specifically printing operations, because other 'assets are still producing revenue' (JMs words not mine) and then named the Madejski, amongst other of his businesses.

So my question is, if JM is quoted correctly, and as I know the journalist concerned, I have no reason doubt that he was, how is 'The Madejski' being used to support other areas of his businesses and how will this be reflected in the accounts?

[Sir Dodger Royal]

Accounts show what you want them to show. It is all about timimg and SDR has been created himself with various business interests in the past.

Seeing what happens to the cash in each of the businesses is the interesting part so the previous poster is correct, it is all about management accounts and cash flow.

Real factssssssssss

[westendgirl]

I also recall that there were no provisions for Directors tasking money, in which case any money they are paid must be in the wages part, and there was solid talk of Nigel Howe getting a £1million bonus when we got promoted.

there are only 2 directors SJM and Ian Wood-Smith and it is stated that neither took any remuneration. There is no way from the published accounts to find out what specific playing staff or non-playing staff were paid so no idea about Howe.

[westendgirl]

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?

They are but only on the balance sheet not in profit and loss accounts as they are capital not revenue. SO not in any profit/loss figures quoted

[westendgirl]

also its pointless looking at the accounts of one year in isolation, its the over all accounts over a period of time that count, otherwise youll always get the oddd year where certain things are payed out/in either side of the accounts deadline.

Don't companies cover this, like banks, by setting aside money for future perceived losses, eg bad debts.

the accounts dhould be prepared using specific accounting rules that mean that this is no longer as relevant as it used to be.