Re: Season 22/23 accounts

17
SixtyYearFan wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 4:53 am
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 2nd, 2024, 11:30 pm
SixtyYearFan wrote: April 2nd, 2024, 11:16 pm

The fact that the club has made a loss has no bearing on what debt it has or otherwise.


:roll:
You can make a loss of tens of millions of pounds but be completely debt free. Why you cant understand that extremely basic fact, despite being educated on it countless times, is beyond me.
Because he doesn't want to know, it doesn't suit the fantasy. In the last 4 years we have had covid we have had the pitch sorted, a third of the teams in League 2 were relegated to non league. Roughly half of our division has been promoted, and likewise a similar number relegated to league two. Despite all the challenges County are still a mid table league 2 club with zero financial problems. Is there any other team that has been so successful financially whilst maintaining their pyramid status?

Of course it required low interest, unsecured money, most likely government money via the WRU. While others have accumulated large debt over the same unprecedented period, County have nothing, zero........

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

19
At the end of the day, HJ took the Club on with knowledge, I am sure, of the true financial position. So, 'caveat emptor' could be said to apply.

My uninformed opinion is that the former AFC Board at the time of the transfer may now take the view that, since the transfer date, all previous responsibilities, including communication and financial responsibility, has been removed from them by the transfer. That is, the slate has been wiped clean by virtue of an informed HJ completing the transfer .

They may also consider that future communication to the fans on any aspect of the AFC, including its financial position, is entirely a matter for HJ. However, I think that the extent to which the Trust specifically is or should be informed on the ongoing situation at the AFC is different from that of the general fanbase. The reason being that the Trust is a part owner. How this will work out in practice is yet to be revealed and put into effect.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

20
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.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

21
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.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

22
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.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

23
Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 9:32 am At the end of the day, HJ took the Club on with knowledge, I am sure, of the true financial position. So, 'caveat emptor' could be said to apply.

My uninformed opinion is that the former AFC Board at the time of the transfer may now take the view that, since the transfer date, all previous responsibilities, including communication and financial responsibility, has been removed from them by the transfer. That is, the slate has been wiped clean by virtue of an informed HJ completing the transfer .

They may also consider that future communication to the fans on any aspect of the AFC, including its financial position, is entirely a matter for HJ. However, I think that the extent to which the Trust specifically is or should be informed on the ongoing situation at the AFC is different from that of the general fanbase. The reason being that the Trust is a part owner. How this will work out in practice is yet to be revealed and put into effect.
I own shares in Newport AFC. As such I am a part owner of the club. I doubt very much Huw Jenkins will consider my views.

Chris, I accept entirely your good intentions but the Trust shareholders and members were kept in the dark when they owned the majority of the shares. That Huw Jenkins will make decisions on any other basis than he believes are in his best interest I simply don't think will happen. It may well be that Mr Jenkins will communicate with supporters but we will only be told what he wants us to be told.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

24
Stan A. Einstein wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 11:15 am
Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 9:32 am At the end of the day, HJ took the Club on with knowledge, I am sure, of the true financial position. So, 'caveat emptor' could be said to apply.

My uninformed opinion is that the former AFC Board at the time of the transfer may now take the view that, since the transfer date, all previous responsibilities, including communication and financial responsibility, has been removed from them by the transfer. That is, the slate has been wiped clean by virtue of an informed HJ completing the transfer .

They may also consider that future communication to the fans on any aspect of the AFC, including its financial position, is entirely a matter for HJ. However, I think that the extent to which the Trust specifically is or should be informed on the ongoing situation at the AFC is different from that of the general fanbase. The reason being that the Trust is a part owner. How this will work out in practice is yet to be revealed and put into effect.
I own shares in Newport AFC. As such I am a part owner of the club. I doubt very much Huw Jenkins will consider my views.

Chris, I accept entirely your good intentions but the Trust shareholders and members were kept in the dark when they owned the majority of the shares. That Huw Jenkins will make decisions on any other basis than he believes are in his best interest I simply don't think will happen. It may well be that Mr Jenkins will communicate with supporters but we will only be told what he wants us to be told.
I think that the difference for the Trust is that, as one bloc, it owns 27% of the shares. Further, as one bloc, it has the potential of providing a unfied voice and a strong voice in HJ's ear. I understand that you, as an individual shareholder, count, along with some 600 others of the same ilk. Those individual shareholders are not represented as an organised and focused unit so their individual and probably disparate voices will to a large extent be disregarded by HJ as not, in reality, having any voice or coherent voice at all that he can effectively communicate with.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

25
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 wonder what Spytty might look like now had we spent the money spent at RP there instead?

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

26
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.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

28
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.
They’d probably rip up the grass , put down a 4G pitch and whore it out daily.

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

29
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..

Re: Season 22/23 accounts

30
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...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chris Davis, Coxy