View Full Version : 2013/4 Accounts

03-12-2014, 03:47 PM
On Official site... 8 million promotion bonuses !

03-12-2014, 03:52 PM
old news but pass the popcorn.

03-12-2014, 04:33 PM
Accounts at the link - view external link (http://tinyurl.com/oowk5q3)

03-12-2014, 06:46 PM
Performance based payments, seems fair enough to me.

03-12-2014, 06:57 PM
had we not made these payments we would have made a 3.5M profit and had to pay tax, so a small loss of 4M is a good move.

03-12-2014, 07:14 PM
won't those figures include the transfer money received for Charlie (4M was it?)?

so in spite of receiving a handsome fee we still "lost" 3.7M over the course of the season, before promotion bonuses were paid.

03-12-2014, 07:34 PM
Eh? You can't strip out money that came into the club and then go "yeah, but...". That doesn't make sense. Fair play to Garlick, he said we were on track to break even and without the promotion bonuses we'd have made a small profit. Can't say fairer than that.

03-12-2014, 09:11 PM
"so in spite of receiving a handsome fee we still "lost" 3.7M over the course of the season, before promotion bonuses were paid."

Not sure I understand that - without the promotion bonuses we've made a small profit from how I read it. Obviously that includes the Austin money but that was the sale necessary to allow us to run last season without losing money.

03-12-2014, 09:19 PM
Did we receive all the Austin money in one lump?

03-12-2014, 09:25 PM
Nothing is ever said re: transfers but I think they paid most of it up front but like most deals there were add ons and I was told them winning promotion got us a further payment.

03-12-2014, 09:29 PM
If we hadn't have won promotion then we wouldn't have lost nearly 8 million on bonuses.

When are the board going to think of us fans?

I have never been to Rotherham's new ground.

03-12-2014, 09:30 PM
The p&l is a reflection of the past.

The balance sheet is a statement of wealth. It includes the entire squad at a value circa 3m. Ings even at tribunal is worth that

Al fine in my view given the likely future p&l

03-12-2014, 09:34 PM
Oh and nobody referred to 4m of directors loans repaid

And why not. Promotion is why they lent the money and we got it

Tin hat on

03-12-2014, 09:40 PM
I don't think anyone should have a problem with the loans being paid back although I did hear that some of that money was used by said directors to increase their share holding which is even better.

03-12-2014, 11:09 PM
Happy we paid out 8m in bonuses. Would gladly do the same this year if we stayed up.

Incentive laden contracts HAVE to be the modern way we survive in this league imo, need to give generously for staying up, we cant afford long contracts on big wages but we have to give players rewards somehow. Sensible investment without mortgaging our future.

04-12-2014, 12:25 AM
When we receive the money for the transfers doesn't make any difference to the profit.

We wouldn't have paid any tax as we had tax losses brought forward to set off against any profits.

The value of players on the balance sheet is based on what we paid for them, decreasing for each year of the contract, so is probably somewhat understated given players such as Trippier, Ings, etc.

Interesting to see that the wages stayed around constant with the prior year once you stripped out the promotion costs. There was a lot of talk of them being cut dramatically.

I see that interest on the Directors' loans is at a lower rate (6.5%) than the commercial loans (10%-11%).

It looks like John B converted ~ 1.5m of loans into shares.

Who was the 5m of signings related to if it didn't include Marvin Sordell, Stephen Ward, Matt Taylor, Lukas Jutkiewicz, George Boyd, Steven Reid and Matt Gilks ?

Did we change auditor at some point? I thought we used to have KPMG.

04-12-2014, 07:53 AM
I assume the wage bill was inflated by performance related elements of the basic salary - i.e. win bonuses (and perhaps goal bonusses in some cases). Presume these go in the general wage costs as they can't properly be treated as promotion costs.

04-12-2014, 09:27 AM
"Did we change auditor at some point? I thought we used to have KPMG."

aggi - about a couple of months ago I think, I read about the club changing auditor. I think they might have gone back to a local company.

04-12-2014, 12:22 PM
Interesting that match day incomes increased by 14% and yet catering sales and retail sales only increased by 4%. That's pretty poor.

If the 14% increase had been replicated in retail sales and catering sales that would have meant 198k extra which would have been equivalent to 1980 retainers.

04-12-2014, 12:37 PM
The amount players got in win bonuses depended on the position in the league.

Dyche could have saved us a fortune by having a poor start and making a late run for 2nd spot.

04-12-2014, 12:42 PM
bobcloth1, as it was with 5 games to go a lot of people thought we wouldn't hang on to 2nd. Imagine if we'd have stayed in the top two and then lost out to Derby or Wigan on the last day of the season. All those bonuses for nothing!

04-12-2014, 12:45 PM
Clearly learnt his lesson this season by keeping us down there for now.

04-12-2014, 12:45 PM
"Dyche could have saved us a fortune by having a poor start and making a late run for 2nd spot."


05-12-2014, 08:18 AM
But then I wouldn't have been able to sing "we're number one for Christmas" around the office even in London

05-12-2014, 09:05 AM
It's not really a surprise that retail and catering sales have not increased that much. The club shop has been a shambles for some time in terms of stock and staffing. People are walking away without spending money. Hopefully the new commercial guy from Bradford will sort it.

People give up trying to buy food and drink at half time due to the huge queues and very slow service meaning you will inevitably miss part of the game.