Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:48 pm  

Well clearly that was the thrust given the Campbell reference, but interested to understand the issue with the numbers you quoted and your view?

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:05 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

Well clearly that was the thrust given the Campbell reference, but interested to understand the issue with the numbers you quoted and your view?

I was paraphrasing you, don’t act silly.

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:02 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

Classic RG spin

Here's another way of looking at it chap:
- The losses you quote for Saints include big depreciation charges (approx £500k p.a.) for a stadium that has been fully paid for whilst the club remains debt free;
- Early teething problems at the stadium (hospitality/catering etc subsequently taken in house, cladding-gate etc) led to chunky losses in early years, but after adjusting for depreciation, Saints made an opeprating profit in both 2015 and 2016 - we didn't make a final in either year. Wigan lost about £650k by the same measure in 2016 alone despite winning SL
- 2017 was a difficult one and a loss of c.£0.7m was made as lots of changes made and costs incurred (KC and some associated staff leaving mid-contract, connection lost between club and town) HOWEVER McManus has advised he expects us to be back in profit for 2018 without a final appearance. We will know soon enough as the accounts are due shortly. In 2017 Wigan lost £450k-ish despite winning the WCC and making (and profitably losing) the Challenge Cup Final.
- After recent conversion of shareholder loans to equity, Saints have a positive net asset position of £22m and no debt. Wigan are balance sheet insolvent with minimal assets, owe c.£1m to the Bank and c.£6m to Lenagan - hopefully neither of them ever need the money back.

I know you long banged the "it's better to rent than have assets" drum with respect to Saints, but let's have a bit of balance eh.

Saints just announced that the 2018 accounts show us back in profit (before depreciation) as McManus trailed. Hopefully the Wigan numbers improve materially too; accounts due next month.

The game needs all of our big clubs in rude health, here's hoping Wigan can stem the losses.

Next TV deal is a huge moment for the sport.

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:44 am  

FearTheVee wrote:

Well clearly that was the thrust given the Campbell reference, but interested to understand the issue with the numbers you quoted and your view?

Strugging to see how you cant see what he is alluding to. Despite it being a higher figure, 650k written as that looks a larger figure than £0.7m as written

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:58 am  

FearTheVee wrote: Saints just announced that the 2018 accounts show us back in profit (before depreciation) as McManus trailed. Hopefully the Wigan numbers improve materially too; accounts due next month. The game needs all of our big clubs in rude health, here's hoping Wigan can stem the losses. Next TV deal is a huge moment for the sport. I wonder who posted this a couple of years ago. "Bit misleading to tag EBITDA as profit but an improvement nonetheless." http://forums.redvee.net/showthread.php ... it-in-2016

FearTheVee wrote: Saints just announced that the 2018 accounts show us back in profit (before depreciation) as McManus trailed. Hopefully the Wigan numbers improve materially too; accounts due next month. The game needs all of our big clubs in rude health, here's hoping Wigan can stem the losses. Next TV deal is a huge moment for the sport. I wonder who posted this a couple of years ago. "Bit misleading to tag EBITDA as profit but an improvement nonetheless." http://forums.redvee.net/showthread.php ... it-in-2016

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:46 am  

thepimp007 wrote:

Strugging to see how you cant see what he is alluding to. Despite it being a higher figure, 650k written as that looks a larger figure than £0.7m as written

Only if you have no grasp of numbers at all.

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:48 am  

Rogues Gallery wrote: I wonder who posted this a couple of years ago. "Bit misleading to tag EBITDA as profit but an improvement nonetheless." http://forums.redvee.net/showthread.php ... it-in-2016 It is misleading. EBITDA and profit are two different things of course. But then saints have no interest to pay as we are debt free, and no tax to pay as the depreciation on the fully paid for stadium acts as a hefty tax shield against modest operating profits. So it’s the correct metric to measure. When I posted the above we had a very different balance sheet, with big interest charges on loan accounts. Now we don’t as all the connected party debt has been converted to equity, but then you knew that.

Rogues Gallery wrote: I wonder who posted this a couple of years ago. "Bit misleading to tag EBITDA as profit but an improvement nonetheless." http://forums.redvee.net/showthread.php ... it-in-2016 It is misleading. EBITDA and profit are two different things of course. But then saints have no interest to pay as we are debt free, and no tax to pay as the depreciation on the fully paid for stadium acts as a hefty tax shield against modest operating profits. So it’s the correct metric to measure. When I posted the above we had a very different balance sheet, with big interest charges on loan accounts. Now we don’t as all the connected party debt has been converted to equity, but then you knew that.

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Tue Aug 13, 2019 10:40 am  

FearTheVee wrote: It is misleading. EBITDA and profit are two different things of course. But then saints have no interest to pay as we are debt free, and no tax to pay as the depreciation on the fully paid for stadium acts as a hefty tax shield against modest operating profits. So it’s the correct metric to measure. When I posted the above we had a very different balance sheet, with big interest charges on loan accounts. Now we don’t as all the connected party debt has been converted to equity, but then you knew that. So your actual loss was around £650K last year, which was a big improvement but still a big loss. If McManus says it's drizzle I would get my big brolly and wellies https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/docu ... 0845ddf3da

FearTheVee wrote: It is misleading. EBITDA and profit are two different things of course. But then saints have no interest to pay as we are debt free, and no tax to pay as the depreciation on the fully paid for stadium acts as a hefty tax shield against modest operating profits. So it’s the correct metric to measure. When I posted the above we had a very different balance sheet, with big interest charges on loan accounts. Now we don’t as all the connected party debt has been converted to equity, but then you knew that. So your actual loss was around £650K last year, which was a big improvement but still a big loss. If McManus says it's drizzle I would get my big brolly and wellies https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/docu ... 0845ddf3da

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:16 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

So your actual loss was around £650K last year, which was a big improvement but still a big loss. If McManus says it's drizzle I would get my big brolly and wellies

I think you're delibertaely misunderstanding the numbers so I'll leave it with a couple of points of clarification then you can interpret how you like.

You've taken a number (£650k loss) that is stated after a £250k interest charge that relates to connected party balances which have since been converted to shares. It is completely meaningless whe looking at the underlying operating profit - the charge won't exist next year.

Your number also is stated after non-cash depreciation charges of c.£450k. We could depreciate the (fully owned and paid for) stadium by £10m if we wanted to and show a £10m loss for you to get excited about, ut in reality it wouldn't make any difference at all to the underlying trading performance and cash generation of the Saints.

It's a big improvement on last year and I expect we'll see further improvement for the year to October 2019.

But the Wigan accounts will be out soon so you'll be able to try to find your angle that says they are far rosier and continue your line that owning a stadium is a mugs game.

Re: Lam to stay on in 2020 : Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:49 am  

No mate. Reading your boring drivel is the real mugs game. Who cares about the benefits of owning v renting? As long as a club remains viable - whether that is due to the generosity of its owner or otherwise - that’ll do me. For you, I’m sure years of winning bugger all have been cushioned by the fact that someone - not you though - owns your stadium. Big deal.