|
| Finacial Reports for 2011 |
+15
LUFCTALK MODERATOR
Posts: 3705
Joined: 28 June 2010
Location: We all love a Mc D
|
Mar 31, 2012 00:02
Report on financial statements...
Leeds United Football Club Limited ('Leeds United') is the primary wholly owned subsidiary of Leeds City Holdings Limited ('Holdings').
The financial year end for both companies is 30th June 2011.
Leeds United Dot Com
|
|
|
johnh
LUFCTALK Sponsor
Posts: 920
Joined: 24 January 2012
Location: maidenhead berkshire
|
Mar 31, 2012 11:30
I see a note to the accounts states that the value of the playing squad is estimated to be £10,630,000 MORE than the net book value of the squad in the accounts. Was the estimate arrived at after the West Ham game or the Forest game? !!!!
|
|
|
|
dangermouse
Posts: 320
Joined: 21 July 2010
|
Apr 04, 2012 11:29
Leeds accounts are now available from Companies House. According to reports on twitter this morning they make for interesting reading. A few of the lowlights from Andrew Haighs twitter feed.
The club have sold part of the season ticket incomes for the next 2 years to part fund the East Stand development. No idea what proportion.
Money to Directors ( Bates, Harvey, Lorimer, Allen) rose from £171,000 to £299,000. A year on year rise of 71.8%.
But don't worry its not all bad news, we have an investor who has ploughed 32 quid into the club....
someone unamed has bought 32 preferential shares in the club at £1 each. The shares are valued at £4m.
|
|
|
|
dlw10
Posts: 1182
Joined: 14 September 2011
Location: Stoke on Trent
|
Apr 04, 2012 12:29
dangermouse
Leeds accounts are now available from Companies House. According to reports on twitter this morning they make for interesting reading. A few of the lowlights from Andrew Haighs twitter feed.
The club have sold part of the season ticket incomes for the next 2 years to part fund the East Stand development. No idea what proportion.
Money to Directors ( Bates, Harvey, Lorimer, Allen) rose from £171,000 to £299,000. A year on year rise of 71.8%.
But don't worry its not all bad news, we have an investor who has ploughed 32 quid into the club....
someone unamed has bought 32 preferential shares in the club at £1 each. The shares are valued at £4m.
I wish people wouldn't throw snippets like this about - as portrayed here this becomes propaganda not facts. I dont blame you DM, if this is how Haigh has tweeted it, but straight away it just looks wrong to me. Remember that Bates took no emoluments from the club in the previous year (note 6 in the accounts) and the total directors emols is shown as £174k. I also just find the statement about the pref shares ridiculous! I will apply for the accounts and see if I can make more sense of them.
|
|
|
|
dangermouse
Posts: 320
Joined: 21 July 2010
|
Apr 04, 2012 13:05
DLW, I also find the story about the shares ridiculous. Unfortunately though I don't find it unbelievable at all. By all means have a look and see if you can get any extra clarity on this. But if it does turn out to be true I will interested to hear if your opinion has changed.
While money may not be going directly to Ken Bates from the club, would you really be surprised if it found its way to him indirectly through rental income from ER and TA. Also would you be really surprised if it was he or a family member or close friend who was the mystery preferential shareholder due 4m quid when the club is sold?
For more information on these preferential shares see article below from thesquareball. Not the impartial source that you may want, but worth a read.
External Link
As accounts were only made available this morning more time may be needed to digest them in full. But there are definitely questions to answer. Are season ticket holders happy that their money is being used to pay for corporate facilities in the East Stand rather than been given to NW to rebuild a badly neglected squad? What happened the millions we have received from player sales? Why has someone created a mechanism whereby they can siphon off £4m if the club is sold for their investment of £32? You couldn't make this up, and of course people are up in arms and asking the question what the hell is going on?? I think it is quite obvious the whole murky, secretive way the club operates stinks.
|
|
|
|
birkybullufc
Posts: 1295
Joined: 31 May 2011
|
Apr 04, 2012 13:20
Is the mystery shareholder Ben Kates?
The silver lining for the sale of season tickets and the sale of the preferential shares is that it look's like Bates is cashing in while he can in readyness to sell the club. Only problem is who is going to be daft enough to buy it from him? They will either be very dodgy or have more money than sense.
|
|
|
|
dlw10
Posts: 1182
Joined: 14 September 2011
Location: Stoke on Trent
|
Apr 04, 2012 13:56
dangermouse
DLW, I also find the story about the shares ridiculous. Unfortunately though I don't find it unbelievable at all. By all means have a look and see if you can get any extra clarity on this. But if it does turn out to be true I will interested to hear if your opinion has changed.
While money may not be going directly to Ken Bates from the club, would you really be surprised if it found its way to him indirectly through rental income from ER and TA. Also would you be really surprised if it was he or a family member or close friend who was the mystery preferential shareholder due 4m quid when the club is sold?
For more information on these preferential shares see article below from thesquareball. Not the impartial source that you may want, but worth a read.
External Link
As accounts were only made available this morning more time may be needed to digest them in full. But there are definitely questions to answer. Are season ticket holders happy that their money is being used to pay for corporate facilities in the East Stand rather than been given to NW to rebuild a badly neglected squad? What happened the millions we have received from player sales? Why has someone created a mechanism whereby they can siphon off £4m if the club is sold for their investment of £32? You couldn't make this up, and of course people are up in arms and asking the question what the hell is going on?? I think it is quite obvious the whole murky, secretive way the club operates stinks.
Right, I have just downloaded the accounts and have quickly scanned through them. Remember anyone can log onto the Companies House website and download a copy of the accounts for just £1. The registration number is 06233875 and the full name is Leeds United Football Club Limited.
Having read the SquareBall piece re the pref shares I can understand why that is not mentioned at all in the accounts (I have just been looking for it in there!) as they say they found it in a doc at companies house dated December 2011 ie after the accounts date - it will therefore show in next years accounts. My guess is that it is Ken Bates laying the ground for his exit - which should please most people! As the owner of the club there is nothing wrong in him ensuring that when it is sold he gets his whack out of it - remembering that he takes no other form of payment out of the club. If people disagree with that then presumably if the club was sold for £90m they would expect the £90m to stay in the club? He had the nouse, expertise, balls, and wherewithall to buy it, nothing was stopping anyone else doing it so at some point he hopes to reep the rewards.
The Directors emoluments have increased from £174k to £299k but again none of that has been paid to Bates or on behalf of Bates. My guess is that there was some sort of bonus paid when the club got promoted - remembering that these accounts are from July 2010 to June 2011. The notes clearly state that Bates takes no emoluments.
I am still of the opinion that Bates only interest is in making a capital bonanza when the club is sold, not in taking any salary or payment out of the club now.
Other than the above there is actually very little of interest in these accounts. Some of the Season ticket revenues for both 2012/13 and 1013/14 have been "sold" for a total sum of £5m which does look like how the East Satnd Dev has been/is being paid for.
I am trying to keep to the facts, of which the accounts is one document that we hope is "fact" rather than try to use the accounts to bash Bates again. As I have said many times before, I wouldn't buy a second hand car from Ken Bates, he is far too cute a businessman, far better than me! BUT I have still yet to see anything in terms of his financial handling of Leeds United that I probably would not have done myself. He is out to make money, yes of course he is, but I still reckon he is doing it in a legal and legitimate manner unlike, say, the Craig Whyte's of this world who alledgedly has committed various legal infringements in his time!
Oh, and for the record, as a season ticket holder, I am quite happy that future ST sales have been used as security for the East Stand Development, that development will bring in much needed revenue for many years to come. As to considering that it is at the expense of the playing side, I do not agree. I consider that the £9, £10, or £12m that we pay in wages (whatever the actual figure is - none of us know as all staff wages are lumped together in the accounts) is among the best in the Championship, and represents what this club can afford. Yes I'd like us to sign Messi - but let's be realistic, we should, like any club, only pay what we can afford - we still are yet to see the full damage in terms of clubs going to the wall because they have failed to live within their means - I could go and buy a Ferrari tomorrow, but I'd then be bankrupt in a few weeks!
|
|
|
|
Pecky10
Posts: 2728
Joined: 28 December 2011
Location: New shirt? No chance! Bought a whole new house last time!
|
Apr 04, 2012 14:07
dlw10
I could go and buy a Ferrari tomorrow, but I'd then be bankrupt in a few weeks!
But think of the fun you'd have in the meantime DLW 
|
|
|
|
dangermouse
Posts: 320
Joined: 21 July 2010
|
Apr 04, 2012 16:50
DLW, not tyrying to have a go at you mate but you have done an amazing U turn in your efforts to support Bates and the board on this one. When I first mentioned the preferential shares, you wanted me to keep to facts and not "propganda" as you put it.
" I also just find the statement about the pref shares ridiculous!" you said
After some research I assume you now accept that this story is likely fact. But rather than being ridiculous you now think.
"As the owner of the club there is nothing wrong in him ensuring that when it is sold he gets his whack out of it - "
You have certainly changed your tune! I understand Ken Bates is not here to selflessly support Leeds United. He bought it and is perfectly entitled to seek a profit when he sells it. But he or his holding company will receive the monies from the new owners for any future sale. Whatever is left after their investment is the profit/loss they make. Why should he guarantee he can remove for himself 4million out of the club for an investment less than what he charges us for a matchday ticket? The market should decide how much he profits/looses from selling the club not him. People are not paying money to the club for him to guarantee himself a fat profit regardless of the market value of the club. If he is doing as great a job as he tells us he is he should make a healthy profit when he sells anyway, and that is without going into our suspicions on the mysterious companies in the Caribbean who own ER and TA who get paid millions in rent every year.
Regarding your statement
"I consider that the £9, £10, or £12m that we pay in wages (whatever the actual figure is - none of us know as all staff wages are lumped together in the accounts) is among the best in the Championship, and represents what this club can afford. Yes I'd like us to sign Messi - but let's be realistic, we should, like any club, only pay what we can afford "
I love the old "we can't afford Messi you know", "we aren't going to go back to the days of crazy spending under Risdale" lines. This is a complete red herring thrown out to try to scare us off ever expecting any sort of ambition to be shown. No one is expecting Messi, nor crazy spending! But if we are serious about really going for promotion next year we will need an amount similar to the loan secured for the East Stand to turn the awful squad we have now around. We are after all a football club remember, and not just a small time mid table Championship club at our level, we're Leeds United!
As for the East Stand development it is all well and good but it shouldnt be the priority right now. Another myth is that it is going to make us huge amounts of money, it won't. If it was going well its unlikely it would make more than a million a year. So we are maybe seven years or so before it breaks even, and even after that it will turn a modest profit in the grand scheme of things assuming it is still doing well. We will loose more in lost ST and merchandise sales as a result of lack of progress on the playing field than this would ever make.Why on earth would the club prioritise a scheme like this in a property we do not own over building a squad to reach the Premiership? I'll leave you to work that one out! You may be happy for the club to use your ST money on a scheme like this,and other constant loss makers like Yorkshire Radio but I bet you are in the minority.
Finally our total wage bill is not among the best in the Championship as you claim but the 13th best according to 10/11 figures. This figure will probably have increased since but not by enough to put us amongst the best as you claim. Especially considering we are comparing wages for all our staff against other clubs playing staff only. Our rate of wages against % of turnover puts us bottom of the league at 35% less than half of what most other clubs have. I agree many clubs are overspending hugely on this but we are at the other extreme, not being prudent, but starving the playing side of our business. Have a look at the article at the Scratching Shed site. Not fully up to date or complete but it does a really good job of pulling the available figures together and certainly gives you a good indication of where we stand in relation to other clubs in the division.
External Link
Sorry again if this comes across as a criticism of you, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect it. I just think all the evidence points to the fans of this club being taken for a ride by the board. The sooner we all wake up and see it the better.
|
|
|
|
Pecky10
Posts: 2728
Joined: 28 December 2011
Location: New shirt? No chance! Bought a whole new house last time!
|
Apr 04, 2012 18:24
Not downloaded the accounts (I don't even like reading my own and at least they're in the Black  ) but... update from The Square Ball this evening to say that the preferential shares cost £3.2m, not £32!!!! They were bought for £100,000 each, not £1. Just a small typo then!
Link to correction
|
|
|
|
Leeds Leeds Leeds
Posts: 118
Joined: 02 April 2012
Location: \"where the streets have no names\"
|
Apr 04, 2012 18:40
Pecky10
Not downloaded the accounts (I don't even like reading my own and at least they're in the Black ) but... update from The Square Ball this evening to say that the preferential shares cost £3.2m, not £32!!!! They were bought for £100,000 each, not £1. Just a small typo then!
Link to correction
Thats that theory out of the window then!
|
|
|
|
dangermouse
Posts: 320
Joined: 21 July 2010
|
Apr 04, 2012 20:04
Damn! I was just about to send off a cheque to Ken for £32 myself! Big difference certainly, but still would like to know who it was, and where the 3.2 million went. Maybe next years accounts will tell us. One mystery half solved, many more to go! 
|
|
|
|
isrodger
Posts: 1378
Joined: 25 May 2009
Location: Norwich well everyone else has gone there!
|
Apr 04, 2012 20:25
Intersting article on relative turnovers and wages spends in the championship
http://www.thescratchingshed.c...s-2010-11/
I don't have the capability to post ... Maybe one of the admin could sort it. In my view exposes our complete lack of investment in te playing squad and questions where te rest of the money goes.
|
|
|
|
sheepy
Posts: 10384
Joined: 08 October 2008
Location: Rothwell
|
Apr 04, 2012 20:40
dangermouse
Money to Directors ( Bates, Harvey, Lorimer, Allen) rose from £171,000 to £299,000. A year on year rise of 71.8%
So Lorimer gets £299k?
We are we all surprised when he backs Bates in the press? for £299k you can't really blame the bloke too much 
|
|
|
|
dlw10
Posts: 1182
Joined: 14 September 2011
Location: Stoke on Trent
|
Apr 04, 2012 22:19
sheepy
dangermouse
Money to Directors ( Bates, Harvey, Lorimer, Allen) rose from £171,000 to £299,000. A year on year rise of 71.8%
So Lorimer gets £299k?
We are we all surprised when he backs Bates in the press? for £299k you can't really blame the bloke too much
Just in case it is not obvious, assume Sheepy is joking here! The £299k is shared between Harvey, Lorimer and Allen! I would guess Harvey is the bulk of it.
|
|
|
|
dlw10
Posts: 1182
Joined: 14 September 2011
Location: Stoke on Trent
|
Apr 04, 2012 23:07
dangermouse
Sorry again if this comes across as a criticism of you, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect it. I just think all the evidence points to the fans of this club being taken for a ride by the board. The sooner we all wake up and see it the better.
(Bold: All we can expect from each other!)
Not going to try to argue all of your piece BUT!
Just worth pointing out that my original point is now vindicated - it looked ridiculous, and was in fact bollox! We must all be so careful in going off on one when fed what looks like fact! Even I was lulled into trying to come up with a justification for what I was being told was fact - I should know better and should have checked out that document myself! For you, that part of your statement is now whether 800k on a £3.2 k investment is commercially acceptable!
I don't like the statement you make above - again it is said with such vehemence that it pushes people to believe it is fact not opinion and only the blind (or those asleep) can't see it!! I could equally well write: I just think all the facts point to the fans of this club being extremely well served by its board. The sooner we all wake up and see it the better. No one can actually give me any factual information to show my statement is wrong - we all have a different opinion as to what the right figure we should be spending on players is.
(I have another axe to grind in that I am firmly of the opinion that all players are paid too much and that does colour my thinking on this)
Incidentally we should all be careful with the Scratching Shed figures too, the guy has done a sterling job pulling all that together but it is impossible to read it as a factual comparison as all clubs are presenting their figures differently, so at the end of the day there is too much interpretation to be done.
At the end of the day, I am far more comfortable with Bates methodology than most other clubs at this time. I do appreciate that it doesn't please the average fan - he just wants the best team possible to get us into the Prem. I want us in the Prem ASAP, but I recognise that it should be attacked with a costed, affordable plan, and not just treated as a get there at all costs excercise. From what I can gleen, we are following the former. Bates is using all his knowhow, all the tax and financial tricks in the book, to make as much money out of his stewardship as possible along the way- I did the same when I was part of a board running a company! That is the way it works - unless you work for a charity. BUT to the best of my knowledge and belief he ain't done nothing illegal - if he ever does, that is then unacceptable and I will be the first to complain. I do though think he is also determined to get us where we all want to be - that is how he makes most money funnily enough.
As my parting shot on this, I do think we will now start to see even more money ploughed into the playing side. You may have already seen this intimated by other commentators. Essentially, Bates has now almost completed his infrastructure work. The stadium did need work to update it, we did need to put in place first class hospitality areas - both to ensure new buyers were not put off by a rickety old stadium, and to help generate future income in what is becoming a very difficult market to make money from. You scoff at the £1m the East Stand may bring in (I havent checked that figure but it sounds fantastic to me - if I could invest £5m and get back £1m every year I'd be happy!). But if it was a million then that would amount to doubling our present operating profit! Not bad eh? We must also remember that the club has the option to buy back the ground for a fixed £14m (again something like that, can't be bothered to look up exact figures) even though the current market bvalue is £50 odd million. Again, looks like good potential business to me.
BUT point being we should now be able to generate better profitablity, have less capital spend to worry about and so can focus on the playing costs. Bates as good as said this in his prog notes a few weeks ago. It is a happy coincidence that we believe we now have a bloke running the team who can spend the increased money wisely - and if it all works out , up we go!Simples. Oh that is was as simple as that.
Main thing we guys can do? Stick together, support the team. MOT.
|
|
|
|
sheepy
Posts: 10384
Joined: 08 October 2008
Location: Rothwell
|
Apr 04, 2012 23:11
dlw10
sheepy
dangermouse
Money to Directors ( Bates, Harvey, Lorimer, Allen) rose from £171,000 to £299,000. A year on year rise of 71.8%
So Lorimer gets £299k?
We are we all surprised when he backs Bates in the press? for £299k you can't really blame the bloke too much
Just in case it is not obvious, assume Sheepy is joking here! The £299k is shared between Harvey, Lorimer and Allen! I would guess Harvey is the bulk of it.
i was jesting a bit, but even so and im being serious now, if Lorimer gets 75k a year for what he does, its easy money really.
|
|
|
|
dlw10
Posts: 1182
Joined: 14 September 2011
Location: Stoke on Trent
|
Apr 04, 2012 23:29
sheepy
dlw10
sheepy
dangermouse
Money to Directors ( Bates, Harvey, Lorimer, Allen) rose from £171,000 to £299,000. A year on year rise of 71.8%
So Lorimer gets £299k?
We are we all surprised when he backs Bates in the press? for £299k you can't really blame the bloke too much
Just in case it is not obvious, assume Sheepy is joking here! The £299k is shared between Harvey, Lorimer and Allen! I would guess Harvey is the bulk of it.
i was jesting a bit, but even so and im being serious now, if Lorimer gets 75k a year for what he does, its easy money really.
Yeah it is, course it is - but he does have to put in quite a few appearances, at the Pav every other week, at the Regional meetings, entertaining folk etc. You and I would love to do it I expect! BUT in the context of this stupid sporting commercial world where Gary CrispEater can earn £2m quid for presenting one TV show a week and get a car to drive him home at the company cost, then I don't begrudge Lash his £75k or whatever it is! He also has the responsibilities that go with being a company director - everyone used to laugh at me when I said that about myself, but there are some onerous reponsiblities in that , esp if things go wrong! Finally, I think we get better value out of PL at that sort of money than any Prem footballer I can think of who prob gets that every two weeks! Barmy money. Why oh why is there not more of an outcry from ordinary folk about footballers wages?
|
|
|
|
bogdan
Posts: 9902
Joined: 08 October 2008
|
May 18, 2012 09:26
An in-depth look at the club's finances over the past few seasons, by The Swiss Ramble.
(too big an article too be worth posting here)
|
|
|
|
birkybullufc
Posts: 1295
Joined: 31 May 2011
|
May 23, 2012 11:06
Article in the Yorkshire Post based on report from KPMG.
Looks like if we get promotion back to the Premier League before 2017/18 we have another £4.75million to pay back.
http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/573998114?-
|
|
|
|
1 Guest(s), 0 Member(s) Viewing This Topic:
|
|
