Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Sun May 20, 2012 1:00 pm  

It is evident (and long discussed/theorised) that the fiscal commitments to both Harris and Orford have played some part in the current predicament. What is equally apparent, and is conveniently forgotten by some, is our complete mismanagement of both player recruitment, staff recruitment and the overall brand strategy. All have been woefully inept irrespective of both Harris and Orford factors. Of that there is zero doubt and, you would expect, to come under close scrutiny from the review including the conduct of the CEO and senior management, because it was their individual and collective mandate. Let us not forget that this is not purely determining the size of a perceived debt, but it's primary causes.

The other concern, is the alleged legal knowledge and subsequent cause and effect assumptions that some posters on this board have made. They predominantly being that CC, Agar, Coulby etc have some underlying pre-ordained outcome of a lengthy review,which, is consultative in design. I find it disturbing that said posters are perhaps misusing some of their core knowledge of for instance, insolvency, liquidation and administration to suggest that this is a de facto outcome for the review and that their personal "understanding" is somehow actuality rather than opinion. Similarly the "I'll be watching" mantra is equally disturbing, because again, their is the over-assumption that there is some element of wrong-doing or dastardly deeds taking place, when in reality all we have to do is await the outcome and official response.

I have elements of faith in those carrying out the review, given their personal and collective business success, to do what needs to be done. I'm not really sure whether I have greater faith in some board posters belief they can individually do better; since quite simply, "put your money where your keyboard is".

As ever, the most tempered, reasoned responses seem to be from Maiselbugs, Bobsmyuncle and Martinwildbull. Some of the other usual, vitriolic suspects, to me, are way off the mark and disturbingly so. Futile assessments of what needs to be done, may be done or is being done are just that, futile. In the interim I remain hopeful and indeed convinced, that the current review team will put the right structure in place to move us forward as a club. It is surely no more complex than that.

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Sun May 20, 2012 1:44 pm  

Will you be getting your old job back after this process is over?

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Sun May 20, 2012 8:12 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Will you be getting your old job back after this process is over?

Educate me with another spectacularly inaccurate assumption of yours...

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Sun May 20, 2012 9:10 pm  

Gurus_Beard wrote:

Educate me with another spectacularly inaccurate assumption of yours...

It's not inaccurate though is it Simon?

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Sun May 20, 2012 9:29 pm  

MicktheGled wrote:

It's not inaccurate though is it Simon?

??

As a potential Poirot, you make an excellent part time broadcaster.

Epic fail.

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Mon May 21, 2012 8:41 am  

a few more graphs with data taken from a number of sources and using one or two assumptions, though where it is stated that previous years have been modified I have used those figures. GDP is for the UK, Disposable income is sort of for Bradford, Unemployment definitely so. I have assumed that purchase of intangible assets is player purchases. operating figures have been taken where possible to exclude any Odsal/extraordinary items effect as the aim is to see the performance of the business rather than any financial engineering. despite the foregoing being an apparent disclaimer, any inaccuracies in the figures are entirely my responsibility, if anybody has any better please let me have them.

the most important line in the trends section is that red one in the middle, cost of sales, which stays pretty level after the return to Odsal. The other line of note is admin costs, which you can see goes up sharply on the return to Odsal, then reduces quickly when Hood took over and then slowly as time progresses, basically not much left to cut. So Caisleys prediction came home to roost. High Odsal costs, declining income.

As for the bench marking, I originally titled it Caisley V Hood, but the new title is I believe far more suitably ambiguous as to which is which. The graph that probably clinches it for me is the transfer fees net - average a year btw -Caisley a net spender, Hood a net receiver, and a reminder that recent player recruitment has been driven by a need to survive as much as by the needs of the team.

The figures also show that one of the individuals involved in the review process both created and walked away from one of hte most intractable financial issues facing the club, so I am just hoping that his years in the wilderness have given him a fresh insight into how to deal with it, and most importantly the funds. And that is why I am a bit concerned about the disclaimers in the news release, as to how much funders would be willing to put in. Lets hope its a billionaire.

and to bring things up to date BB, recent recruitment has shown an upward trend, and theres a good core of experienced and young players to build on, and an excellent academy side that despite being depleted by the senior teams injuries has kept winning. AND it looks like we are going to have some exciting half backs of our own coming through not just forwards that stay and outside backs that we then sell off.

anyway, not long to wait now.

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Mon May 21, 2012 9:26 am  

Well one thing's for sure. If it's who you seem to think it is he wont be getting his job back at Leeds. They were really glad to see the back of him. Failed miserably.

[Bulliac]

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Mon May 21, 2012 9:38 am  

martinwildbull wrote:

a few more graphs with data taken from a number of sources

Interesting. I suppose,(not being, in any way, disparaging btw, as you've obviously spent a good bit of time on it) if it shows anything definite, it's that the more you put in the more likely you are to do well, though obviously you can only put in what you've got, and at the minute it's not a lot.

The area in general isn't awash with money either, but I guess we already knew that. FWIW, and I accept it's probably not a lot, I don't expect CC to come up any great amounts, not because of any failings on his part but because I doubt they are there to be found; not around here, anyway. Hope I'm wrong, but Hood had an open offer to anyone interested, with serious cash, to come forward and got nothing; let's hope CC has a wider circle of business contacts.

With the past misjudgments, it's a bit of a cliché, but the only people who don't make mistakes are people who don't make decisions. Not only that, but we do learn from mistakes (or most of us do ) and these are intelligent people, so I'm sure any lessons from the past have been read, marked and inwardly digested, as it were. As you say, not long to go...

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Mon May 21, 2012 10:06 am  

DenisJ wrote:

Well one thing's for sure. If it's who you seem to think it is he wont be getting his job back at Leeds. They were really glad to see the back of him. Failed miserably.

I see your use of grammar is as widely as inaccurate as your assumption as to who I am, or rather am not. One of your alter ego's (appropriately) also recently suggested I am Chris Caisley. Perhaps you should create yet another username for additional suggestions; obviously not using your Bulls work address.

MWB, interesting graphs, but maybe they need some more context around playing performance, off-field activity etc. I'm loathe to analyse an OPTA-style sports club model because there are too many indefinables.

Bulliac, re: making a mistake requires someone to make a decision; absolutely spot on

Re: Bulls finances 'considerably worse than originally thoug : Mon May 21, 2012 1:47 pm  

GB the performance side has been hacked around ad nauseam, and there are others far better qualified than I am to comment in detail. The league position graph and the net player spend/receipts pretty much say all you need to know on the background to the performances over the last couple of years. Faced with the unattractiveness of the Bulls to top quality experienced players, and the Orford situation being a case in point, and a lack of money anyway, the club have sensibly focused on youth, and the team approach typified in football by the likes of Stoke and until recently Bolton. I feel that we are at long last at the start of an upcyle, even if a year late, better late than never. so it is crucial to have financial stability to keep that improvement going, and in particular keep the young developing players.