rmjlondon
11:56AM Flag
absolute nonsense, I understand that if we don't get a very good gate this evening we will be struggling to pay wages at the end of April !!!
I understand that I've heard that if we don't win 8-0 in front of 9,000 tonight the club will be wound up, Gareth will move to QPR and Jim and Bill will burn down Adams Park and sell the land to Devc's boss for housing. Don't shoot the messenger...
Who is leaking all this financial information to richie...is he marlowchair's child? There needs to be a thorough Line of Duty investigation...nothing worse than dirty football club management.
Given we took the second part of the £500,000 loan because we needed to, I very much doubt its been partly paid back. The trust stated in February if the Americans bid fails then the other bidder will pay off the loan...problem being there is no other bidder now so if the American bid fails or they walk away we have a very large sum of money to find quite quickly.
I was told by a reliable source that Sam Saunders had his contract paid up when he left, which would seem strange if we're not in a position to pay wages. I'm sure one of our regular 'in the know' posters could confirm whether this was true.
“Ever fallen in love with someone
Ever fallen in love, in love with someone
Ever fallen in love, in love with someone
You shouldn't have fallen in love with?”
@Sherrinford said:
I was told by a reliable source that Sam Saunders had his contract paid up when he left, which would seem strange if we're not in a position to pay wages. I'm sure one of our regular 'in the know' posters could confirm whether this was true.
Not quite true .
We shopped Sam around to try and find a club to take him on loan for all or part of his wages . Unfortunately this requires firstly a club prepared to take him and pay a significant amount towards his wages to make it viable , secondly the player must agree to go to that club. Location , level club plays at , manager at club etc all play into that decision .
We asked other players besides sam to go out o. Loan during this season but they declined .
We were unable to get sam out on loan so a financial decision is then made , so we pay him his full wage for the rest of his contract when not using him ? Or do we agree a pay out to terminate the contract and allow him to go as a free agent .
So a pay out does not necessarily mean lavish financial spending , in this case it means a net better result for the club by seasons end .
@Vital Don't you remember, right at the start of the season they said if an American Consortium isn't in charge and we don't get a full house by the time we play Charlton the game's up. Obviously richie was the only one listening...
@TrueBlu said:
Mr Marlow. Are we so tight for cash that April wages may not be paid? As has been suggested
Yes but it’s not unusual. Monthly cash flow has been a juggle for a long time. Sunderland match helped greatly but then fines hurt a little too. Frustrating,
We are not getting the food and beverage turnover that we budgeted for through the kiosks bars and overall secondary spend which has hurt our forecast cashflow too.
So while the answer to your question is yes, I don’t think it’s cause for hysteria.
I should add wages are always paid. Hmrc and wages are the priority at all times and we are all run in that regard.
It’s the creditors , services , trades , suppliers , printers , stationary , utilities , etc that are out off and the rolling credit ledger increases as a result . It put enormous pressure on front line staff.
It also worsens our overall position month to month by very definition as our bottom line has more debt and less revenue month to month .
Some really amateurish decision making on commercial deals hasn’t helped matters.
1) No, HMRC are not prioritised in a cash flow crisis. They are way down the list. Suppliers who can interfere with future trade come second after payroll. HMRC are one of the last to be paid
2) It is rarely a good idea to delay utilities to any extent especially if you value your computers to sell tickets, floodlights to illuminate the pitch for evening games etc etc.
3) "Bottom line" is the difference between revenue and costs. It does not measure debt or cash flow nor is it affected in any way by it unless the debt is interest bearing
4) There is no reason why cash flow issues should impact revenue unless you have been unable to pay critical suppliers - eg if you haven't paid the brewery, they may not supply more beer which may mean you have no beer to sell.
5) there is no evidence that there has been "really amateurish decision making on commercial deals"
Marlow is right that wages are prioritised but as usual the vast majority of his post is just made up nonsense.
We've had three relatively big crowds in the last month - Sunderland, Portsmouth and tonight, where Charlton have already sold over 1000 tickets. Plus the early bird season ticket money that @Vital mentions above. I confess I don't know how much truth there is in the concerns above re. wages, but IF it is the case that we're struggling to pay them after those "windfalls", then we're clearly in a worse financial position then I think a lot of us feared.
I don't normally rise to your trolling but I can't help myself but comment on your view of "accuracy"...
1) You are talking about the legal ranking of creditors on insolvency. My reading of the post is that it is WWFC's choice to prioritise HMRC over other creditors in the normal course of business. If that is the case and is based on sensible thinking of the consequences of who gets paid first then it seems fair enough.
2) I don't see anywhere that it is suggested that utilities going unpaid is a good thing. If we can't pay everyone then someone has to wait to get paid, and however you cut it there are consequences of not making payments. These decisions are needed if there isn't enough cash to go round.
3) I don't see an incorrect use of a (somewhat) technical accounting term as really being "made up nonsense". It is clear to understand the actual point of the statement (as you demonstrated by explaining what was meant by bottom line in the post) even if not technically correct
4) You may well have answered your own criticism
5) No evidence that you have seen doesn't necessarily mean there is no evidence
Comments
oh well, maybe you should learn to read properly !
the boy in the signed Hylton shirt is on the red bull again!
rmjlondon
11:56AM Flag
absolute nonsense, I understand that if we don't get a very good gate this evening we will be struggling to pay wages at the end of April !!!
That’s a worry. Where did you here that from
I understand that I've heard that if we don't win 8-0 in front of 9,000 tonight the club will be wound up, Gareth will move to QPR and Jim and Bill will burn down Adams Park and sell the land to Devc's boss for housing. Don't shoot the messenger...
I'm not sure about the rumours above, but I'm certain that if we don't win tonight, there will be a lot of moaning on the fb site.
the reason CMS isn't here is due to wages, he wasn't allowed to go on loan cos we felt like it we couldn't afford to pay his wages.
Will they be selling off the club's stock of crisps on the cheap after the end of the game tonight @Wendoverman?
Who is leaking all this financial information to richie...is he marlowchair's child? There needs to be a thorough Line of Duty investigation...nothing worse than dirty football club management.
Given we took the second part of the £500,000 loan because we needed to, I very much doubt its been partly paid back. The trust stated in February if the Americans bid fails then the other bidder will pay off the loan...problem being there is no other bidder now so if the American bid fails or they walk away we have a very large sum of money to find quite quickly.
@mooneyman if they actually have any left under this fiasco of a management team...
I was told by a reliable source that Sam Saunders had his contract paid up when he left, which would seem strange if we're not in a position to pay wages. I'm sure one of our regular 'in the know' posters could confirm whether this was true.
They're hardly going to plunge us into financial crisis. The "guys" have just "fallen in love with the club" and just want to be "part of the journey"
It's heartwarming stuff
Have we "fallen in love" with them though Eric?
Divorce pending?
Lucky the law is changing to allow "no fault" divorces soon @micra.
“Ever fallen in love with someone
Ever fallen in love, in love with someone
Ever fallen in love, in love with someone
You shouldn't have fallen in love with?”
Not quite true .
We shopped Sam around to try and find a club to take him on loan for all or part of his wages . Unfortunately this requires firstly a club prepared to take him and pay a significant amount towards his wages to make it viable , secondly the player must agree to go to that club. Location , level club plays at , manager at club etc all play into that decision .
We asked other players besides sam to go out o. Loan during this season but they declined .
We were unable to get sam out on loan so a financial decision is then made , so we pay him his full wage for the rest of his contract when not using him ? Or do we agree a pay out to terminate the contract and allow him to go as a free agent .
So a pay out does not necessarily mean lavish financial spending , in this case it means a net better result for the club by seasons end .
Mr Marlow. Are we so tight for cash that April wages may not be paid? As has been suggested
Considering we've just pocketed a load of early bird season ticket cash, it's hard to see how @rmjlondon can be on the right track.
@Vital Don't you remember, right at the start of the season they said if an American Consortium isn't in charge and we don't get a full house by the time we play Charlton the game's up. Obviously richie was the only one listening...
Someone's trousered that cash!
Yes but it’s not unusual. Monthly cash flow has been a juggle for a long time. Sunderland match helped greatly but then fines hurt a little too. Frustrating,
We are not getting the food and beverage turnover that we budgeted for through the kiosks bars and overall secondary spend which has hurt our forecast cashflow too.
So while the answer to your question is yes, I don’t think it’s cause for hysteria.
Hopefully no-one will be demanding their ST money back in June if not happy as promised!
I should add wages are always paid. Hmrc and wages are the priority at all times and we are all run in that regard.
It’s the creditors , services , trades , suppliers , printers , stationary , utilities , etc that are out off and the rolling credit ledger increases as a result . It put enormous pressure on front line staff.
It also worsens our overall position month to month by very definition as our bottom line has more debt and less revenue month to month .
Some really amateurish decision making on commercial deals hasn’t helped matters.
Amateurish. Is that down to M Davies or other powers. But he is very much a ‘my way’ kind of person!
In the interests of accuracy
1) No, HMRC are not prioritised in a cash flow crisis. They are way down the list. Suppliers who can interfere with future trade come second after payroll. HMRC are one of the last to be paid
2) It is rarely a good idea to delay utilities to any extent especially if you value your computers to sell tickets, floodlights to illuminate the pitch for evening games etc etc.
3) "Bottom line" is the difference between revenue and costs. It does not measure debt or cash flow nor is it affected in any way by it unless the debt is interest bearing
4) There is no reason why cash flow issues should impact revenue unless you have been unable to pay critical suppliers - eg if you haven't paid the brewery, they may not supply more beer which may mean you have no beer to sell.
5) there is no evidence that there has been "really amateurish decision making on commercial deals"
Marlow is right that wages are prioritised but as usual the vast majority of his post is just made up nonsense.
We've had three relatively big crowds in the last month - Sunderland, Portsmouth and tonight, where Charlton have already sold over 1000 tickets. Plus the early bird season ticket money that @Vital mentions above. I confess I don't know how much truth there is in the concerns above re. wages, but IF it is the case that we're struggling to pay them after those "windfalls", then we're clearly in a worse financial position then I think a lot of us feared.
remember @Last_Quarter there is no evidence that we are struggling to pay wages this month apart from an anonymous post on the gasroom.
We do know however that overall we have significant cash flow issues
I don't normally rise to your trolling but I can't help myself but comment on your view of "accuracy"...
1) You are talking about the legal ranking of creditors on insolvency. My reading of the post is that it is WWFC's choice to prioritise HMRC over other creditors in the normal course of business. If that is the case and is based on sensible thinking of the consequences of who gets paid first then it seems fair enough.
2) I don't see anywhere that it is suggested that utilities going unpaid is a good thing. If we can't pay everyone then someone has to wait to get paid, and however you cut it there are consequences of not making payments. These decisions are needed if there isn't enough cash to go round.
3) I don't see an incorrect use of a (somewhat) technical accounting term as really being "made up nonsense". It is clear to understand the actual point of the statement (as you demonstrated by explaining what was meant by bottom line in the post) even if not technically correct
4) You may well have answered your own criticism
5) No evidence that you have seen doesn't necessarily mean there is no evidence
In light of the fact that we are obviously NOT 'paying their wages' does that mean we have no legitimate grounds for player criticism?