OAFC Accounts 2022-23

[BradKnowles1]

Accounts published seems to confirm 100k spent on Nuttall. 
 https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/04989487

Edited March 28 by BradKnowles1

[nzlatic]

Where would player signing on fees or agent fees come into this? Could they be included in that £100k?

[Dickie Down]

Two questions from me on the basis of not really understanding finance and balance sheets;

 

1. What does it tell us about the financial health, or otherwise, of the club.

 

2. What is the assumed thought process behind not including an income statement?

 

 

[Littlemoor Lad]

Whatever the cost

It was a waste of good money 

[BradKnowles1]

18 minutes ago, Dickie Down said:

Two questions from me on the basis of not really understanding finance and balance sheets;

 

1. What does it tell us about the financial health, or otherwise, of the club.

 

2. What is the assumed thought process behind not including an income statement?

 

 

I think it can be concluded we are reliant on the Rothwells putting their money in 

[Dickie Down]

9 minutes ago, BradKnowles1 said:

I think it can be concluded we are reliant on the Rothwells putting their money in 

In that case let's buy some season tickets.

[GlossopLatic]

34 minutes ago, BradKnowles1 said:

I think it can be concluded we are reliant on the Rothwells putting their money in 

 

Yes we are that Creditors figure of £7.5mill is quite eye popping £5.5million of that is other creditors I'm assuming that is directors loans from the rothwells. While effectively that would mean OAFC owes the Rothwells £5.5million its highly unlikely they will call it in just as in the case of Chris Moore Simon Blitz and probably Abdallah Lemsagam too they will eventually just write them off.

 

The question going into next season is how much of that cash is left and how willing will the Rothwells be to throw more money at it? I'm not anticipating them to turn off the taps I think we will have a very competitive budget at this level at this level next season certainly one that if used wisely will be enough for us to get promotion. But I think we need to be smarter at how we spend our budget I think we probably all know that.

 

It was interesting to see that we have £2million owed to us in debtors. Who owes us that kind of money?

[Dickie Down]

15 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Yes we are that Creditors figure of £7.5mill is quite eye popping £5.5million of that is other creditors I'm assuming that is directors loans from the rothwells. While effectively that would mean OAFC owes the Rothwells £5.5million its highly unlikely they will call it in just as in the case of Chris Moore Simon Blitz and probably Abdallah Lemsagam too they will eventually just write them off.

 

The question going into next season is how much of that cash is left and how willing will the Rothwells be to throw more money at it? I'm not anticipating them to turn off the taps I think we will have a very competitive budget at this level at this level next season certainly one that if used wisely will be enough for us to get promotion. But I think we need to be smarter at how we spend our budget I think we probably all know that.

 

It was interesting to see that we have £2million owed to us in debtors. Who owes us that kind of money?

Is is it coincidence that the £2 m figure for debtors is the same as the figure for the creditors minus the assumed Rothwell portion?

[League one forever]

So grateful the Rothwells are here, but when you look at that- who would be a football owner. . 
 

Imagine having to pay so many players who are nowhere near the side or been frozen out.
 

It must be galling. 

[PeteG]

So looking at those figures, it seems like the club lost around £1.7 million in the first year that the Rothwells owned the club which is not unusual for any football club. The issue is the losses for this year will most likely have increased, especially when you look at the signings such as Norwood, the sacking of Unsworth and staff plus the appointment of Mellon. The EFL payments will have finished for next season, so the question is how long can the Rothwells continue to bank roll the club to the tune of £2 million plus per year? Will they have to drastically cut the budget? Either way, it seems imperative we get back in the EFL asap. Of course, there will be income from the North Stand etc. that won't be in the clubs accounts so it may well be that they are happy to put that income into the club and therefore vastly reducing those losses. I'd assume they will be happy to throw a decent budget at next season as a minimum but there must surely come a point where the budget will have to be cut if we remain in this league for a sustained period of time. Just goes to show that 99% of football clubs are totally reliant upon owners pumping substantial amounts of money in and this idea of fan ownership is just not feasible. The problem isn't Oldham Athletic but football in general.  

[GlossopLatic]

41 minutes ago, Dickie Down said:

Is is it coincidence that the £2 m figure for debtors is the same as the figure for the creditors minus the assumed Rothwell portion?

 

No I think it will be different things I don't know exactly what they will be,  but in layman's terms creditors are people we owe money too and debtors are who owe us money. It could be anything for all we know.

[jsslatic]

8 minutes ago, PeteG said:

So looking at those figures, it seems like the club lost around £1.7 million in the first year that the Rothwells owned the club which is not unusual for any football club. The issue is the losses for this year will most likely have increased, especially when you look at the signings such as Norwood, the sacking of Unsworth and staff plus the appointment of Mellon. The EFL payments will have finished for next season, so the question is how long can the Rothwells continue to bank roll the club to the tune of £2 million plus per year? Will they have to drastically cut the budget? Either way, it seems imperative we get back in the EFL asap. Of course, there will be income from the North Stand etc. that won't be in the clubs accounts so it may well be that they are happy to put that income into the club and therefore vastly reducing those losses. I'd assume they will be happy to throw a decent budget at next season as a minimum but there must surely come a point where the budget will have to be cut if we remain in this league for a sustained period of time. Just goes to show that 99% of football clubs are totally reliant upon owners pumping substantial amounts of money in and this idea of fan ownership is just not feasible. The problem isn't Oldham Athletic but football in general.  

 

'We can't afford to go up.'

[PeteG]

28 minutes ago, jsslatic said:

 

'We can't afford to go up.'

Think we can't afford to NOT go up! Although, that said, Huddersfield have just released their accounts and they show a debt of £50 million despite have a below average wage bill for the Championship so it does show how much investment you really need to climb the pyramid. 

[GlossopLatic]

I think we have to accept that football clubs infact sports clubs in general are failed business models. The club only really makes significant money 23 days a year yet the outgoings are on a daily basis any other business would go under with such unsustainable losses. Promotion won't solve that it will boost revenue but if we want to be competitive at that level we will have to pay out more in wages on the pitch.

 

We are very much at the whim of the owners fortunately we have the right ones in charge. As proved though football does attract alot of bad actors such as vain football agents or other opportunists who want the status of being involved but Contribute nothing. These people unfortunately do alot of damage to football clubs and football in general keeping them away from football is a difficult thing.

 

 

[Dickie Down]

5 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

I think we have to accept that football clubs infact sports clubs in general are failed business models. The club only really makes significant money 23 days a year yet the outgoings are on a daily basis any other business would go under with such unsustainable losses. Promotion won't solve that it will boost revenue but if we want to be competitive at that level we will have to pay out more in wages on the pitch.

 

We are very much at the whim of the owners fortunately we have the right ones in charge. As proved though football does attract alot of bad actors such as vain football agents or other opportunists who want the status of being involved but Contribute nothing. These people unfortunately do alot of damage to football clubs and football in general keeping them away from football is a difficult thing.

 

 

It really is unsustainable.

 

Reading today that Wrexham's owners lost £5m to get them promoted last season.

 

I always think back to the early years of the Premiership when Jack Walker bought the league for Blackburn.

 

Wonder what the equivalent money would have bought him now?

 

I support the Rothwells and am grateful for everything that they have done for us, but they are clearly no fools and we ought not to expect them to throw their wealth into a money pit indefinitely.

[Lags]

18 hours ago, Dickie Down said:

It really is unsustainable.

 

Reading today that Wrexham's owners lost £5m to get them promoted last season.

 

I always think back to the early years of the Premiership when Jack Walker bought the league for Blackburn.

 

Wonder what the equivalent money would have bought him now?

 

I support the Rothwells and am grateful for everything that they have done for us, but they are clearly no fools and we ought not to expect them to throw their wealth into a money pit indefinitely.

 

The likes of Brighton and Brentford do well in regards to the money pit. Sold many a player and found cheaper replacements to help out. 

Southampton did it for years until their failure to replace players one season.  That's the risk with this policy.

[LightDN123]

7 hours ago, Lags said:

 

The likes of Brighton and Brentford do well in regards to the money pit. Sold many a player and found cheaper replacements to help out. 

Southampton did it for years until their failure to replace players one season.  That's the risk with this policy.

Considering it’s 2 years since having a proper right back at the club, I wouldn’t trust our recruitment strategy to start finding young talented players to sell on. 
 

Something is fundamentally wrong with our recruitment. 
 

I think a DOF is needed. 

[yarddog73]

8 minutes ago, LightDN123 said:

Considering it’s 2 years since having a proper right back at the club, I wouldn’t trust our recruitment strategy to start finding young talented players to sell on. 
 

Something is fundamentally wrong with our recruitment. 
 

I think a DOF is needed. 

Not another wage

[PeteG]

1 hour ago, yarddog73 said:

Not another wage

Speaking of wages, it's interesting that the number of staff employed has only gone up by about 4 despite now having to run the North Stand 7 days a week coupled with the fact we were told under the previous regime we had no scouts, no sports scientist, no ground staff etc. etc. Another load of lies or have we not really employed all these backroom staff and scouts we've been told about.

[AndyB2]

Has the foundation reviewed these and offered any views, concerns etc?

[AndyB2]

On 3/28/2024 at 6:50 PM, Dickie Down said:

It really is unsustainable.

 

Reading today that Wrexham's owners lost £5m to get them promoted last season.

 

I always think back to the early years of the Premiership when Jack Walker bought the league for Blackburn.

 

Wonder what the equivalent money would have bought him now?

 

I support the Rothwells and am grateful for everything that they have done for us, but they are clearly no fools and we ought not to expect them to throw their wealth into a money pit indefinitely.

Clubs fucked mate. Without getting lucky with major investment, the best we can hope for is a corney style era of managing to keep us in league 2 on crowds of 3-4K with no real prospects of moving forward.

 

Rothwells will be done after next season. 

[Theoutsider]

1 hour ago, PeteG said:

Speaking of wages, it's interesting that the number of staff employed has only gone up by about 4 despite now having to run the North Stand 7 days a week coupled with the fact we were told under the previous regime we had no scouts, no sports scientist, no ground staff etc. etc. Another load of lies or have we not really employed all these backroom staff and scouts we've been told about.

Not looked at the accounts for Oldham Event Centre then…  

[PeteG]

41 minutes ago, Theoutsider said:

Not looked at the accounts for Oldham Event Centre then…  

Yes, only losses of around half a million there so not as bad as the football side of things.

[Can Neil Redfearn Do It]

8 hours ago, PeteG said:

Yes, only losses of around half a million there so not as bad as the football side of things.

 

I'd say it's considerably worse since the OEC is a commercial venture whereas the football club is not..

[PeteG]

9 minutes ago, Can Neil Redfearn Do It said:

 

I'd say it's considerably worse since the OEC is a commercial venture whereas the football club is not..

Tbf, they have probably had to spend a small fortune improving the place because he it hadn't had a penny spent on it since it was opened under the previous clowns running it