2024 Accounts

[matt_magpie]

Kieran Maguires on magpie circle now, very interesting.

[Old_pie]

It will be interesting to see the accounts for the Year Ended 30th June 2025 in 12 months' time. As well as a full season of income from the NEST, they will also include a net profit of just under ?1m on transfer dealings in and out. I expect the loss for the year to dip below ?1m for the first time since 2015 (?997k). Could the unthinkable even happen, and we actually show a profit?

If we show a profit in the near future it will either because we've found and sold the next George Best or the owners are giving up and taking the money and running.

[Old_pie]

Kieran Maguires on magpie circle now, very interesting.

He certainly got a grip on the EFL's financial rules.

My take on all this, some of which I've mentioned earlier is:

1) The Reedtz Bros are prepared to put in about 1.5million/year. This is what they are prepared to pay to run a football club and consider it as the cost of their season ticket with trimmings. 750k each, over 30 home games a mere 25k/game.

They, unlike Hardy and Trew, are not driven by the desire for adulation and fame and they only support Notts because that is the club they ended up with in their bid to prove their theories of how a football club can be run sustainably (ie not beyond their abilities to prop up). I believe they intended to do this by making maximum use of their Radar data and no doubt successes in the transfer market enhance the profile of Radar. Like any project they will become somewhat emotionally invested because of the effort they have put in, but they will never be driven emotionally and that has positive and negative connotations for us.

2) I don't agree with Kieran that the Bros have put in the 27million showing at a loss on the Balance sheet. My theory is that a significant amount of this is money owed to Hardy. Example of how this works:

Hardy holds out for a price of (I'm making up figures here), 15million. The Bros agree to pay off the 3million HMRC debt, tell Hardy he can have 2million cash and the remaining 10million will show as a non-convertable debenture (this means Hardy cannot call it in). If ever the club makes it big then the club can pay some/all of it to Hardy. The likelyhood is that this figure will always show and I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few million there due to Trew.

I don't see any way that rational businessmen would have put in 27million and the above is my only explanation of the balance sheet in the absence of having access to the full and detailed accounts. Kieran Maguire also would not have access to the full accounts but can deduce more from trying to work out our wage figure from the EFL anonymous figures.

The issue for the Bros is that they know that potentially they can reduces their losses by getting into a higher league and if they delay doing that it is going to cost them more in the long run - but they have to get it right.

[Mud Pie]

He certainly got a grip on the EFL's financial rules.

My take on all this, some of which I've mentioned earlier is:

1) The Reedtz Bros are prepared to put in about 1.5million/year. This is what they are prepared to pay to run a football club and consider it as the cost of their season ticket with trimmings. 750k each, over 30 home games a mere 25k/game.

They, unlike Hardy and Trew, are not driven by the desire for adulation and fame and they only support Notts because that is the club they ended up with in their bid to prove their theories of how a football club can be run sustainably (ie not beyond their abilities to prop up). I believe they intended to do this by making maximum use of their Radar data and no doubt successes in the transfer market enhance the profile of Radar. Like any project they will become somewhat emotionally invested because of the effort they have put in, but they will never be driven emotionally and that has positive and negative connotations for us.

2) I don't agree with Kieran that the Bros have put in the 27million showing at a loss on the Balance sheet. My theory is that a significant amount of this is money owed to Hardy. Example of how this works:

Hardy holds out for a price of (I'm making up figures here), 15million. The Bros agree to pay off the 3million HMRC debt, tell Hardy he can have 2million cash and the remaining 10million will show as a non-convertable debenture (this means Hardy cannot call it in). If ever the club makes it big then the club can pay some/all of it to Hardy. The likelyhood is that this figure will always show and I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few million there due to Trew.

I don't see any way that rational businessmen would have put in 27million and the above is my only explanation of the balance sheet in the absence of having access to the full and detailed accounts. Kieran Maguire also would not have access to the full accounts but can deduce more from trying to work out our wage figure from the EFL anonymous figures.

The issue for the Bros is that they know that potentially they can reduces their losses by getting into a higher league and if they delay doing that it is going to cost them more in the long run - but they have to get it right.

interesting post. I guess the exact accounting of that 27m could vary a lot then.

[Evesham Pie]

OK, to try and shed some light on this I've looked at the accounts since 2019. In summary the losses since the brothers took over appear to be in the region of ?12.2m based upon the movements in P&L reserves.

At June 2019 the accumulated losses in the balance sheet were ?23.3m. These losses represent the losses under Munto, Trew and Hardy.

The 2019 accounts disclose that as part of the Reedtz takeover (post year end) that ?7.9m of debts were written off. This will have been accounted for as a profit by Notts as the waiver of money owed by the club is a gain, and therefore a profit.

At the point the takeover happened the accumulated losses would have been approximately ?15.4m (being the ?23.3m as at June 2019 less the ?7.9m profit on the debt waiver). As the accumulated losses at June 2024 were ?27.65m this implies losses under the Reedtz ownership of ?12.2m.

The losses by year, based upon the reserve movements, are :-

2020 ?4.0m (peak Covid impact)
2021 ?2.2m
2022 ?1.7m
2023 ?2.8m
2024 ?1.5m

The overall Reedtz losses of ?12.2m broadly reconcile to the debt of ?17.2m owed to the Reedtz at June 2024 when you take into account the net capex of ?2.3m, ?1.6m higher cash balance and ?1m less owed to HMRC.

Hope this makes sense.

[Jampie]

Yes that makes perfect sense, thanks for the summary!

[SwalePie]

OK, to try and shed some light on this I've looked at the accounts since 2019. In summary the losses since the brothers took over appear to be in the region of ?12.2m based upon the movements in P&L reserves.

At June 2019 the accumulated losses in the balance sheet were ?23.3m. These losses represent the losses under Munto, Trew and Hardy.

The 2019 accounts disclose that as part of the Reedtz takeover (post year end) that ?7.9m of debts were written off. This will have been accounted for as a profit by Notts as the waiver of money owed by the club is a gain, and therefore a profit.

At the point the takeover happened the accumulated losses would have been approximately ?15.4m (being the ?23.3m as at June 2019 less the ?7.9m profit on the debt waiver). As the accumulated losses at June 2024 were ?27.65m this implies losses under the Reedtz ownership of ?12.2m.

The losses by year, based upon the reserve movements, are :-

2020 ?4.0m (peak Covid impact)
2021 ?2.2m
2022 ?1.7m
2023 ?2.8m
2024 ?1.5m

The overall Reedtz losses of ?12.2m broadly reconcile to the debt of ?17.2m owed to the Reedtz at June 2024 when you take into account the net capex of ?2.3m, ?1.6m higher cash balance and ?1m less owed to HMRC.

Hope this makes sense.

Very illuminating analysis. Thanks Evesham!

[matt_magpie]

OK, to try and shed some light on this I've looked at the accounts since 2019. In summary the losses since the brothers took over appear to be in the region of ?12.2m based upon the movements in P&L reserves.

At June 2019 the accumulated losses in the balance sheet were ?23.3m. These losses represent the losses under Munto, Trew and Hardy.

The 2019 accounts disclose that as part of the Reedtz takeover (post year end) that ?7.9m of debts were written off. This will have been accounted for as a profit by Notts as the waiver of money owed by the club is a gain, and therefore a profit.

At the point the takeover happened the accumulated losses would have been approximately ?15.4m (being the ?23.3m as at June 2019 less the ?7.9m profit on the debt waiver). As the accumulated losses at June 2024 were ?27.65m this implies losses under the Reedtz ownership of ?12.2m.

The losses by year, based upon the reserve movements, are :-

2020 ?4.0m (peak Covid impact)
2021 ?2.2m
2022 ?1.7m
2023 ?2.8m
2024 ?1.5m

The overall Reedtz losses of ?12.2m broadly reconcile to the debt of ?17.2m owed to the Reedtz at June 2024 when you take into account the net capex of ?2.3m, ?1.6m higher cash balance and ?1m less owed to HMRC.

Hope this makes sense.

Really good detail and in line with what Mace said of around 16m.

Maguire said best ran EFL economically were Exeter (Trust), Stevenage and Rotherham probably best of all.
Rotherham have done well by getting to Champ and yo yo-ing where increased tv monies etc are around 9 million which then drop to around 1m L1 but they have spent conservatively when in Champ.
Said he believed our strategy was best, stick to football philosophy, less manager sackings, less player turnover etc, he?s a Brighton fan so makes sense. Says some fans will totally get it and some won?t be as patient and see owners as only as good as your last weeks worth of results, he must go on this board 😂.

[Old_pie]

OK, to try and shed some light on this I've looked at the accounts since 2019. In summary the losses since the brothers took over appear to be in the region of ?12.2m based upon the movements in P&L reserves.

At June 2019 the accumulated losses in the balance sheet were ?23.3m. These losses represent the losses under Munto, Trew and Hardy.

Agree that this is the likely conclusion

The 2019 accounts disclose that as part of the Reedtz takeover (post year end) that ?7.9m of debts were written off. This will have been accounted for as a profit by Notts as the waiver of money owed by the club is a gain, and therefore a profit.

What profit? Profit is excess of earnings over expenditure. If the debts were written off then either folk who were owed monies agreed to no longer be owed the monies or someone as put some money in. HMRC, other football clubs and probably the milkman would not write off their debts. The balance sheet can also be improved by an increase in shares.

There has to be a better explanation. (Disclaimer: I haven't downloaded all the previous accounts) but I would still posit that Hardy and probably Trew still have some monies which under the right conditions the club could (but are unlikely to) pay out, and a large amount of the debt is money owed to the Bros. Note that nearly 19million is shown as Other Creditors.

[ancientpie]

OK, to try and shed some light on this I've looked at the accounts since 2019. In summary the losses since the brothers took over appear to be in the region of ?12.2m based upon the movements in P&L reserves.

At June 2019 the accumulated losses in the balance sheet were ?23.3m. These losses represent the losses under Munto, Trew and Hardy.

The 2019 accounts disclose that as part of the Reedtz takeover (post year end) that ?7.9m of debts were written off. This will have been accounted for as a profit by Notts as the waiver of money owed by the club is a gain, and therefore a profit.

At the point the takeover happened the accumulated losses would have been approximately ?15.4m (being the ?23.3m as at June 2019 less the ?7.9m profit on the debt waiver). As the accumulated losses at June 2024 were ?27.65m this implies losses under the Reedtz ownership of ?12.2m.

The losses by year, based upon the reserve movements, are :-

2020 ?4.0m (peak Covid impact)
2021 ?2.2m
2022 ?1.7m
2023 ?2.8m
2024 ?1.5m

The overall Reedtz losses of ?12.2m broadly reconcile to the debt of ?17.2m owed to the Reedtz at June 2024 when you take into account the net capex of ?2.3m, ?1.6m higher cash balance and ?1m less owed to HMRC.

Hope this makes sense.

Makes perfect sense & thanks for the effort, am I missing something or can someone explain the jump in 2023, was it the nest or pitch or something else? COYP