
Still this situation will only last until 2007 guys eh !!?

Moderators: Charnwood, Bluemike
Unfortunately you are right DB, the CVA payments are only a couple of hundred thousand a year, so in the overall scheme of things they are hardly significant!Dubai Blue wrote:Sorry to be so negative but I'm not sure that the CVA ending changes things very much. We don't have that much debt now under the CVA anyway. Its a milestone but all it really means is that it will be easier to run up silly debt if our board chooses to.
I suspect that they will continue to run the club in the same way as under the CVA.
If the CVA payments are only a coupe of hundred thousand pounds how come we had no change left over from the sale of darren Bent! As i'm led to believe that was why we had to sell Kelvin Davis because Benty's money was swallowed up by the CVA?bluebird wrote:Unfortunately you are right DB, the CVA payments are only a couple of hundred thousand a year, so in the overall scheme of things they are hardly significant!Dubai Blue wrote:Sorry to be so negative but I'm not sure that the CVA ending changes things very much. We don't have that much debt now under the CVA anyway. Its a milestone but all it really means is that it will be easier to run up silly debt if our board chooses to.
I suspect that they will continue to run the club in the same way as under the CVA.
The only way out of this mess, is through new investment and increased income, neither of which appear likely at present!
Our good honest board would have to explain that for you!!GavITFC wrote:If the CVA payments are only a coupe of hundred thousand pounds how come we had no change left over from the sale of darren Bent! As i'm led to believe that was why we had to sell Kelvin Davis because Benty's money was swallowed up by the CVA?bluebird wrote:Unfortunately you are right DB, the CVA payments are only a couple of hundred thousand a year, so in the overall scheme of things they are hardly significant!Dubai Blue wrote:Sorry to be so negative but I'm not sure that the CVA ending changes things very much. We don't have that much debt now under the CVA anyway. Its a milestone but all it really means is that it will be easier to run up silly debt if our board chooses to.
I suspect that they will continue to run the club in the same way as under the CVA.
The only way out of this mess, is through new investment and increased income, neither of which appear likely at present!
Bents transfer fee was taken into last years accounts to reduce the reported trading loss. However, our cash flow has yet to see the benefit as I believe the fee is being paid in two hits - one at Xmas followed by another payment next summer.If the CVA payments are only a coupe of hundred thousand pounds how come we had no change left over from the sale of darren Bent! As i'm led to believe that was why we had to sell Kelvin Davis because Benty's money was swallowed up by the CVA?
Interesting points being raised by all on here. But surely there isnt a Club in this land that hasnt got a significant debt hanging round it's neck at the moment ....(Leeds £70-80m ?? Cardiff, Derby..Newcastle...the list goes on).bluebird wrote:Bents transfer fee was taken into last years accounts to reduce the reported trading loss. However, our cash flow has yet to see the benefit as I believe the fee is being paid in two hits - one at Xmas followed by another payment next summer.If the CVA payments are only a coupe of hundred thousand pounds how come we had no change left over from the sale of darren Bent! As i'm led to believe that was why we had to sell Kelvin Davis because Benty's money was swallowed up by the CVA?
The club are claiming that Davis's fee was used to sign Parkin, eith the remainder added to our wage budget for the season.
Having studied the latest accounts, IMO our problem is not our level of debt, most of which is in affect a long term "mortgage". It is more to do with our short term cash flow, in that we are failing to generate sufficient working capital to fund the short term requirements of the business.
As, Rossi has pointed out in another thread, it is the responsibilty of the directors to ensure that the business has sufficient funding. This can only come through investment or through significant improvement to our income.
As others have pointed out before, if we keep playing as badly as we are at present, season ticket sales are likely to be down by a least 33% next summer, so this problem is likely to get worse in the medium term.
...must admit I dont know either ...how about "company's voluntary administration"G'daddy wrote:neither do i , but i suspect its better that we dont.tim_itfc wrote:dont wanna sound stupid,
but wot CVA mean??
tim_itfc wrote:dont wanna sound stupid,
but wot CVA mean??