Re: Season 22/23 accounts

31
wattsville_boy wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 1:26 pm
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 10:20 am
Taunton Iron Cider wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 10:12 am The worry has to be as to how much, if any, this deficit will affect GC’s playing budget for next season. Personally, until this ongoing cash haemorrhage can be resolved, I now can’t envisage a significant change from this year’s budget, particularly as RP seem intent on continuing to extract their pound of flesh.
I hope/believe a key part of the new regime will be playing hard(er)ball with RP - stewarding costs and % of bar take for example are huge issues - as I've often said RP need us - 25 + 'event days' (at least a % of which will be 'big' games) compared to around half that for rugby helps to 'sweat the asset' in a way rugby alone, even if Newport RFC moved back in, simply could not do.
I'd be happy if someone cleaned the bogs in the Compeed stand occasionally. The stench of ammonia because of stale piss is not the most welcoming aspect of ground sharing...
Maybe that comes out of the second ten million we give them :grin:

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

32
[*]
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 12:35 pm
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 12:23 pm
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 11:06 am
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 10:20 am
Taunton Iron Cider wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 10:12 am The worry has to be as to how much, if any, this deficit will affect GC’s playing budget for next season. Personally, until this ongoing cash haemorrhage can be resolved, I now can’t envisage a significant change from this year’s budget, particularly as RP seem intent on continuing to extract their pound of flesh.
I hope/believe a key part of the new regime will be playing hard(er)ball with RP - stewarding costs and % of bar take for example are huge issues - as I've often said RP need us - 25 + 'event days' (at least a % of which will be 'big' games) compared to around half that for rugby helps to 'sweat the asset' in a way rugby alone, even if Newport RFC moved back in, simply could not do.
It doesn't matter playing poker if you only have a pair of twos, if you know your opponent only has a king high. Newport County have no alernative to Rodney Parade and the rugby know that. Rodney Parade need us less than we need them. And no amount of wishful thinking can alter that.
My fault for delving into the RP lease/other situation BUT while your point has merit who else are they going to get as viable tenants? = nobody - so while RP/ANother (other than Newport County and/or the Dragons) owns RP and RP remains a sports venue (highly likely in the medium term) we are the only viable tenant who prop up RP - its an uneasy relationship but a mutually beneficial one so makes sense for RP to lessen the likelihood that we'd want to move.

longer term things may change - Dragons downgraded/scrapped by WRU? = County offered RP at a favorable rate? County promoted to league 1 and stay there for a while? = we seriously explore a new stadium build in [say] East Newport where new housing and station are planned, County relegated? we move back to spytty, etc, etc but for now majority of fans and sane people want us to stay at RP with perhaps more favorable terms.
I'm sure you're right about the majority of people want County to stay at Rodney Parade on more favourable terms. Unfortunately whilst the rugby will survive without Newport County, Newport County will not survive without Rodney Parade.

By way of analogy. You are a millionaire. Your aeroplane crashes in the desert. I have a bottle of water and you are dying of thirst. I can charge you what I like. And if you say £100,000 os too much for a bottle of water and I have no one else who will buy the bottle of water, I will merely point out that you can either accept my terms or you'll be dead. And for good measure I now want £200,000 because I don't like people trying to play hardball with me..
Sorry to break into your fantasies, but County can and have played elsewhere, that is a fact. It is why when dealing with valuation comparables come into play. We have played at Cardiff and we could play at Bristol Rovers or FGR as has been mentioned before terms.

If we owned RP all the £800k losses would be ours, and the Dragon's could play elsewhere.

Grounds lose money. We are not in the thatcher era of chucking money at the FA to give out 50:50 grants for all seater stadia, those days are gone. Clubs can't raise cash against grounds, as the banks know the grounds can't be sold to repay debt. So it's simply do what Wasps and Wimbledon have done, raise bonds to sell with good returns. The London Broncos play at Wimbledon to help reduce to £700k annual dividends.

Don't be fooled into thinking that the Dragon's can survive, which is why they are trying to offload RP, as did the WRU did previously making it a condition of the sale of the region. 10 games a year doesn't pay the costs.......

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

34
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 12:35 pm
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 12:23 pm
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 11:06 am
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 10:20 am
Taunton Iron Cider wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 10:12 am The worry has to be as to how much, if any, this deficit will affect GC’s playing budget for next season. Personally, until this ongoing cash haemorrhage can be resolved, I now can’t envisage a significant change from this year’s budget, particularly as RP seem intent on continuing to extract their pound of flesh.
I hope/believe a key part of the new regime will be playing hard(er)ball with RP - stewarding costs and % of bar take for example are huge issues - as I've often said RP need us - 25 + 'event days' (at least a % of which will be 'big' games) compared to around half that for rugby helps to 'sweat the asset' in a way rugby alone, even if Newport RFC moved back in, simply could not do.
It doesn't matter playing poker if you only have a pair of twos, if you know your opponent only has a king high. Newport County have no alernative to Rodney Parade and the rugby know that. Rodney Parade need us less than we need them. And no amount of wishful thinking can alter that.
My fault for delving into the RP lease/other situation BUT while your point has merit who else are they going to get as viable tenants? = nobody - so while RP/ANother (other than Newport County and/or the Dragons) owns RP and RP remains a sports venue (highly likely in the medium term) we are the only viable tenant who prop up RP - its an uneasy relationship but a mutually beneficial one so makes sense for RP to lessen the likelihood that we'd want to move.

longer term things may change - Dragons downgraded/scrapped by WRU? = County offered RP at a favorable rate? County promoted to league 1 and stay there for a while? = we seriously explore a new stadium build in [say] East Newport where new housing and station are planned, County relegated? we move back to spytty, etc, etc but for now majority of fans and sane people want us to stay at RP with perhaps more favorable terms.
I'm sure you're right about the majority of people want County to stay at Rodney Parade on more favourable terms. Unfortunately whilst the rugby will survive without Newport County, Newport County will not survive without Rodney Parade.

By way of analogy. You are a millionaire. Your aeroplane crashes in the desert. I have a bottle of water and you are dying of thirst. I can charge you what I like. And if you say £100,000 os too much for a bottle of water and I have no one else who will buy the bottle of water, I will merely point out that you can either accept my terms or you'll be dead. And for good measure I now want £200,000 because I don't like people trying to play hardball with me..
But to use your analogy 'we' might die of thirst but the seller is left with a bottle of water they can't sell to anyone else and no money to maintain their water bottle making machine - so they've just cut off their nose to spite their face (and acted like a right current as well) so any sensible 'seller of water' wouldn't look to charge a stupid amount, slightly over the odds? - perhaps but not a silly amount.

Or if we do pay the £200,000 we'd then make darn sure we had an alternative option next time around and the water seller would only get the one shot at making their '200K' (money which is likely swallowed up in covering the cost of producing the bottle of water in any case) so still lose out.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

35
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 2:33 pm quote]



But to use your analogy 'we' might die of thirst but the seller is left with a bottle of water they can't sell to anyone else and no money to maintain their water bottle making machine - so they've just cut off their nose to spite their face (and acted like a right current as well) so any sensible 'seller of water' wouldn't look to charge a stupid amount, slightly over the odds? - perhaps but not a silly amount.

Or if we do pay the £200,000 we'd then make darn sure we had an alternative option next time around and the water seller would only get the one shot at making their '200K' (money which is likely swallowed up in covering the cost of producing the bottle of water in any case) so still lose out.
Okay let's examine this.

Re-read the club statement. Rodney Parade upped the match-day cost by 39%. And Newport County swallowed that. I get you don't like it but we had no choice. Rodney Parade Limited won't be cutting off their nose to spite their face because they know we will blink first. You can't negotiate unless you are in a position to walk away. Going back to poker, to win you don't have to be very good, you just need to be better than your opponent. If you're dying of thirst I know you will pay everything you have for the bottle of water.

Bangit' thinks we can re-locate to Bristol. Do you? :grin:

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

36
They’d probably rip up the grass , put down a 4G pitch and whore it out daily.
[/quote]

Exactly. If we were not at RP the rugby could lay a plastic pitch and hire it out all day every day. This "They need us" attitude can be carried too far. To me it is clear that we cannot afford to remain at RP.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

37
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:00 pm
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 2:33 pm quote]



But to use your analogy 'we' might die of thirst but the seller is left with a bottle of water they can't sell to anyone else and no money to maintain their water bottle making machine - so they've just cut off their nose to spite their face (and acted like a right current as well) so any sensible 'seller of water' wouldn't look to charge a stupid amount, slightly over the odds? - perhaps but not a silly amount.

Or if we do pay the £200,000 we'd then make darn sure we had an alternative option next time around and the water seller would only get the one shot at making their '200K' (money which is likely swallowed up in covering the cost of producing the bottle of water in any case) so still lose out.
Okay let's examine this.

Re-read the club statement. Rodney Parade upped the match-day cost by 39%. And Newport County swallowed that. I get you don't like it but we had no choice. Rodney Parade Limited won't be cutting off their nose to spite their face because they know we will blink first. You can't negotiate unless you are in a position to walk away. Going back to poker, to win you don't have to be very good, you just need to be better than your opponent. If you're dying of thirst I know you will pay everything you have for the bottle of water.

Bangit' thinks we can re-locate to Bristol. Do you? :grin:
We couldn't permanently re locate to Bristol but if we were without a stadium the FA would sanction a temporary ground-share (as per Coventry city), we have options and the more RP takes the P the more we will explore, if not immediately realize straightaway, those options so it make sense for them to dial it down a bit - unlike [say] with the residential property market they ain't gonna find a new anchor tenant any new tenant ever other than us because no professional sports club of the required standing does/will exist in Newport.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

38
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:00 pm
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 2:33 pm quote]



But to use your analogy 'we' might die of thirst but the seller is left with a bottle of water they can't sell to anyone else and no money to maintain their water bottle making machine - so they've just cut off their nose to spite their face (and acted like a right current as well) so any sensible 'seller of water' wouldn't look to charge a stupid amount, slightly over the odds? - perhaps but not a silly amount.

Or if we do pay the £200,000 we'd then make darn sure we had an alternative option next time around and the water seller would only get the one shot at making their '200K' (money which is likely swallowed up in covering the cost of producing the bottle of water in any case) so still lose out.
Okay let's examine this.

Re-read the club statement. Rodney Parade upped the match-day cost by 39%. And Newport County swallowed that. I get you don't like it but we had no choice. Rodney Parade Limited won't be cutting off their nose to spite their face because they know we will blink first. You can't negotiate unless you are in a position to walk away. Going back to poker, to win you don't have to be very good, you just need to be better than your opponent. If you're dying of thirst I know you will pay everything you have for the bottle of water.

Bangit' thinks we can re-locate to Bristol. Do you? :grin:
Match day costs are nothing to do with rent, they are to do with the costs of hiring facilities like hospitality.
Hospitality costs are related to staff and food costs which have risen and things like business rates which have been reduced but now reinstated.

Coventry moved to Northampton to play, they got promoted, and are now doing well in the championship and semi finals of the FA Cup.

The Dragons are not stupid, they know HJ won't pay ridiculous amounts, so it's mutually beneficial to reduce the losses at RP. Its the Dragons losses now, not the WRU.

If we move out the Dragons will go bust before County do, and they know it.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

39
G Guest wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:09 pm They’d probably rip up the grass , put down a 4G pitch and whore it out daily.
Exactly. If we were not at RP the rugby could lay a plastic pitch and hire it out all day every day. This "They need us" attitude can be carried too far. To me it is clear that we cannot afford to remain at RP.
[/quote]

Mmmm lots of other 4G/other sports pitches to rent in/around Newport so lots of competition - once the novelty of playing at RP died off it wouldn't make that much money - Cardiff/Pontyrpridd rugby for example aren't raking it in are they I wouldn't have thought? - RP wouldn't cover the loss of a reasonable rent for 25-30 professional football games by hiring out a 4G pitch.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

40
CathedralCounty wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:30 pm
G Guest wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:09 pm They’d probably rip up the grass , put down a 4G pitch and whore it out daily.
Exactly. If we were not at RP the rugby could lay a plastic pitch and hire it out all day every day. This "They need us" attitude can be carried too far. To me it is clear that we cannot afford to remain at RP.
Mmmm lots of other 4G/other sports pitches to rent in/around Newport so lots of competition - once the novelty of playing at RP died off it wouldn't make that much money - Cardiff/Pontyrpridd rugby for example aren't raking it in are they I wouldn't have thought? - RP wouldn't cover the loss of a reasonable rent for 25-30 professional football games by hiring out a 4G pitch.
[/quote]

If Newport Rugby couldn't afford to rent it, who is a bigger team than Newport Rugby support wise? Also utility costs for a stadium the size of RP will have risen dramatically, probably now around 100k a year more with the electronic advertising and flood lighting.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

41
G Guest wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:09 pm


Exactly. If we were not at RP the rugby could lay a plastic pitch and hire it out all day every day. This "They need us" attitude can be carried too far. To me it is clear that we cannot afford to remain at RP.
Whether we can or should stay at Rodney Parade. Whether we should have have developed a stadium over the last 35 years. Were debates we should have had but did not. I agree with you about the 'they need us' argument but that was always only part of our problem. The real issue was that in 1988 we the fans owned the club and failed for understandable reasons to think long term. In 2015 again we bought our club and failed to invest in the long term. The consequence of that is that the fans owned club model ultimately failed.

For the future Newport County is not our club. It is the club we support. I regret that. I believed and still believe that done properly fans having control of the club is the way forward for the likes of Newport County. But that ship has sailed. Newport County is now owned and run by a Swansea business man. It is an ownership model which most football league clubs operate under.

Huw Jenkins will run Newport County for one purpose, that being to make money for Huw Jenkins. Now to make money he has to make Newport County successful. And if he does, I believe that is in the modern vernacular a win/win.

As with all things there is a good and bad side. On the downside we don't own Newport County. On the upside, the stadium issue is no longer our problem, it's Huw Jenkins' problem.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

42
Bangitintrnet wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:25 pm

Match day costs are nothing to do with rent, they are to do with the costs of hiring facilities like hospitality.
Hospitality costs are related to staff and food costs which have risen and things like business rates which have been reduced but now reinstated.

Your argument thus far has been that by renting we avoid having to pay matchday costs. Now you're saying that not only are we paying rent but that we are still being hit with matchday costs.

You are not too bright are you? :grin:

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

44
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:53 pm
G Guest wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:09 pm


Exactly. If we were not at RP the rugby could lay a plastic pitch and hire it out all day every day. This "They need us" attitude can be carried too far. To me it is clear that we cannot afford to remain at RP.
Whether we can or should stay at Rodney Parade. Whether we should have have developed a stadium over the last 35 years. Were debates we should have had but did not. I agree with you about the 'they need us' argument but that was always only part of our problem. The real issue was that in 1988 we the fans owned the club and failed for understandable reasons to think long term. In 2015 again we bought our club and failed to invest in the long term. The consequence of that is that the fans owned club model ultimately failed.

For the future Newport County is not our club. It is the club we support. I regret that. I believed and still believe that done properly fans having control of the club is the way forward for the likes of Newport County. But that ship has sailed. Newport County is now owned and run by a Swansea business man. It is an ownership model which most football league clubs operate under.

Huw Jenkins will run Newport County for one purpose, that being to make money for Huw Jenkins. Now to make money he has to make Newport County successful. And if he does, I believe that is in the modern vernacular a win/win.

As with all things there is a good and bad side. On the downside we don't own Newport County. On the upside, the stadium issue is no longer our problem, it's Huw Jenkins' problem.
It may not be Huw Jenkins problem, if he decides that he can't make a profit and decides to walk away without a replacement private investor. However, I think that he is likely to try to find a range of commercial solutions to the loss position, howsoever caused and without moving from RP, which I think remains the best option as a home ground, In fairness, I think most of these commercial options were spelt out in his proposal. What was not spelt out was the possibility of a significant increase in ticket pricing and the increasing criticalness of £100k and more ongoing contribution from the Trust but not into asset provision but into cashflow.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

45
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 4:10 pm
Bangitintrnet wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 3:25 pm

Match day costs are nothing to do with rent, they are to do with the costs of hiring facilities like hospitality.
Hospitality costs are related to staff and food costs which have risen and things like business rates which have been reduced but now reinstated.

Your argument thus far has been that by renting we avoid having to pay matchday costs. Now you're saying that not only are we paying rent but that we are still being hit with matchday costs.

You are not too bright are you? :grin:
You just make it up as you go along.

The capital costs of ownership are one thing, but you also have to factor in maintaining which is also a big cost.

When renting its the owners problem, which is why pitch renewal and electronic advertising and general maintenance fell upon RP. So any debt related to that sat with RP. Covid ment that the facilities weren't used, but the maintenance and replacement costs were still a financial problem for RP. That's why RP was in so much debt, because both codes deferred payments.

However when the region was seperated all deferred payments had to be paid back by both codes, before the deal could be completed, that's what we were told at one of the meetings.

Match costs have always been separate because you only hire what you require, I.E. less floodlighting on a Saturday afternoon. The Bisley only for smaller games etc.

It's simple even for you to understand, but of course the Thatcherite in you wants ownership, just like council house owners, who gained ownership and responsibility for new windows, central heating, re wiring, new kitchens and bathrooms. So instead of rents being low due to high availability, people bought the problems that the Thatcher government didn't want, and rental prices rose due to lack of availability. The banks made loads of money because paying back a mortgage at 5% per annum over 30 years is a much bigger cost than a 10% loan over a shorter term.

Stadia are more like cars, they lose money due to lack of willing buyers. Hence the WRU wanting out.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users