Club Financial Statement

[Uke]

I've long since given up worrying about things over which I have no control or say in

Life's too short

[Dirk Gently]

.....

So far we have been able to establish the costs of the pitch,costs at Hogwood and the cost of the Media Centre together totalling around £4million but the other £3.5 million (or put another way 3 or 4 decent players)?

With any club there has to be a balance between what is spent on and off the pitch.
At the moment the assets on the pitch strike me as being vastly inferior to the assets off the pitch and if the assets on the pitch are not improved upon the assets off the pitch (revenue streams) will start to fall in value.

Yes, but to a certain extent we're a massive victim of timing and circumstances. We got to the PL and had an amazing successful year, and on the strength of that it was decided to invest in infrastructure improvements.

Never forget that in that second PL season it was so damn close whether we went down or not - if Fulham hadn't scored 3 goals in 20 minutes away at Man City on 26th April (just 3 games from the end of the season) we would have stayed up and this would all be history.

But if we felt it unlikely that we'd be staying up I doubt we'd have ever spent this money on infrastructure improvements to bring them to a PL standard, but the decision for that was made when we finished 8th in the PL and was understandable at the time. And you can bet SJM would have been criticised like hell for not making those investments.

And the paradox is that because we did invest then we're suffering a it more now, of course, but hindsight is a wonderful, wonder thing and it's so easy to be wise after the event.

[Silver Fox]

I still feel a bit narked though that for my insignificant (to the club,but significant to me) contribution each year I can't question the board (which would be the case if I were but a miniscule shareholder in a public limited company)to elaborate on the item of infrastrucure stated in the financial statement.

Do you feel the same about places where you do your shopping?

[Sun Tzu]

I still feel a bit narked though that for my insignificant (to the club,but significant to me) contribution each year I can't question the board (which would be the case if I were but a miniscule shareholder in a public limited company)to elaborate on the item of infrastrucure stated in the financial statement.

Do you feel the same about places where you do your shopping?

We do tend to have a much stronger attachment to our football club than our grocer so I understand BR2's point.

The option to become a shareholder is one that people could take up. It's rare for shares to come up for sale and if they do they tend to either be snapped up by SJM or passed on privately so it's not easy. STAR is of course a shareholder so any STAR member could ask for a question to be raised at the AGM.

However I can;t see it getting an answer, in much the same way as I can't see an M&S shareholder getting too far with a question aboput the cost of new toliets at the neasden branch of M&S !

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Mr TS that is why i still loves you xxxx

[Hoop Blah]

Although not technically correct, as fans we are more than mere consumers of RFC, we're the reason it's here. It's our club in all but name and the current owner, management etc etc are just tempory custodians of OUR CLUB.

I don't think we need to know the in's and out's of everything that goes on but we have a bloody big vested interest in making sure all is being done to make the club successful and viable for many years to come. Because of that I think the club have a duty to give us a certain level of information over and above that I'd expect from any other organisation I spend money with.

[Dirk Gently]

Although not technically correct, as fans we are more than mere consumers of RFC, we're the reason it's here. It's our club in all but name and the current owner, management etc etc are just tempory custodians of OUR CLUB.

I don't think we need to know the in's and out's of everything that goes on but we have a bloody big vested interest in making sure all is being done to make the club successful and viable for many years to come. Because of that I think the club have a duty to give us a certain level of information over and above that I'd expect from any other organisation I spend money with.

Morally - yes. Leaglly and in practice - absolutely not.

[Hoop Blah]

Although not technically correct, as fans we are more than mere consumers of RFC, we're the reason it's here. It's our club in all but name and the current owner, management etc etc are just tempory custodians of OUR CLUB.

I don't think we need to know the in's and out's of everything that goes on but we have a bloody big vested interest in making sure all is being done to make the club successful and viable for many years to come. Because of that I think the club have a duty to give us a certain level of information over and above that I'd expect from any other organisation I spend money with.

Morally - yes. Leaglly and in practice - absolutely not.

Yep, agreed, that's why I said not technically correct.

[Sun Tzu]

Because of that I think the club have a duty to give us a certain level of information over and above that I'd expect from any other organisation I spend money with.

That presupposes that we would willing and /or able to do anything with that information !

It's intersting that some people have interpreted the statement as indicating that the club is in a bad state financially - yet there has not been a single suggestion that we as fans should 'do' anything.

If the information is to be provided simply so that we can get a bit worked up on a website then there's not much point is there ?

As far as I can see the only point at which anyone came close to wanting to 'do' anything was Terminal B asking why an ISA had not been set up and he backed down rapidly when he was aked if he was going to start one !

Your point is pretty valid though - 'fans' in a wide sense are quite important to a club (although not as important as they were and possibly not even essential these days). Clubs ignore them at their peril but when those fans are fairly passive consumers rather than actively involved I'm sure the club must wonder whether being totally transparent is worthwhile...

[Forbury Lion]

However I can;t see it getting an answer, in much the same way as I can't see an M&S shareholder getting too far with a question aboput the cost of new toliets at the neasden branch of M&S !

The board have a duty to respond to shareholders. The shareholders are the owners and they appoint the board.

[Dirk Gently]

However I can;t see it getting an answer, in much the same way as I can't see an M&S shareholder getting too far with a question aboput the cost of new toliets at the neasden branch of M&S !

The board have a duty to respond to shareholders. The shareholders are the owners and they appoint the board.

True, but in the real world the quality of the response that shareholders get is proportionate to the size of shareholding they hold - that's not just at RFC, that's everywhere (e.g. when anti-war protesters who old a few shares in BAE stand up at thier AGM).

Don't forget that SJM has sufficent shares that he has the option to do a forced buy-out of all other shares if he wanted to and to take the club entirely private - the same as Glazer did at Man Utd.