AGM

Joined: 07 Sep 2015, 21:28

24 Feb 2017, 19:04 #11

From page 3 of Annual Report and Accounts:

"TWENTY TWENTY in 2020

....we are supportive of the new initiative....please remain open-minded about the proposed new competition."

In view of the last clause quoted, the Club might at least pretend to be 'open-minded' itself!!

We're invited to join in the debate at the AGM. Not much point when the Club has already signalled its position!
I got my stuff today too.

Still a little bit worried that the ground development funding is still up in the air. I will go to the AGM but I'm not confident the briefing to members will leave us any the wiser.

I have no expertise in accountancy but I think a £3256 surplus (before tax) on turnover of £8.7m seems a bit thin.

After tax the club lost £105.174.

One cost that seems to have risen a little bit is Director's remuneration.
Including wages, pensions and social security costs: (page 17)

2015 it shows £126,188
2016 it shows £318,525

I'm sure there's a simple explanation!
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Jun 2016, 20:58

24 Feb 2017, 21:58 #12

The club are cutting it very fine, for the 21 days notice of the AGM. The AGM is only 23 days away, and the accounts and agenda should be (under the club own rules) with all members at least 21 days before the 18th of March. We must recieve them within the next two days, or the meeting will have to be re-arranged.
So now we have the stuff for the meeting. But on two key issues I am concerned at how we are being kept in the dark.

On the south stand development we are merely told to await an update at the meeting. In a club that already faces massive repayments on its debts in the next few years we have no idea how it is proposed to finance this scheme that continues to be described as essential to finance the existing debt! A circular argument (and a vicious one at that) if ever there was one.

Several posts have professed to not being expert in accountancy. But you don't have to be expert to know that a business making £3000 surplus on turnover of almost £9 million cannot realistically hope to repay debts of £25 million and contemplate taking on still more. I know many on here prefer to focus on the cricket itself. But we are moving ever closer to being the next Durham but on an even bigger scale. If that doesn't scare you, it should.

On the Twenty20 in 2020 issue we are told the club supports this ECB venture and we are promised a debate. But at what point and on what basis did the club reverse its position from its previous statements at the members forum that it was opposed to a city based franchise system? Mr Denison now attempts to row back on his previous position by merely saying we don't want the team using Headingley to be called Leeds. If the board has already made up its mind what is the purpose of a debate other than to pay lip service to the notion that YCCC is still a members club?
Reply
Like

Joined: 06 Nov 2013, 17:12

25 Feb 2017, 07:42 #13

Spot on, Danum!

Incidentally, i have never seen such a thin, insubstantial statement of advocacy as we have from this year's Members Committee applicant...very disappointing...
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Oct 2013, 20:03

25 Feb 2017, 10:10 #14

Yes, Danum has summed up my worries completely. Also agree about the members' committee applicant. Vaguely suggested he would be a different sort of representative without suggesting anything concrete. If I want that sort of candidate I can get it in national elections. I'm actually considering sending it back with a vote against.

Did we get information about this vacancy? I know it's largely a power-free talking shop, but it still seems a shame that there aren't more candidates.
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 11:26

25 Feb 2017, 10:47 #15

Well summed up Danum. We are in a financial mess and I can not see any way out of it.

I can see why the club have back-tracked on the T20 comp - the cash tills are ringing for them!!! It may, however, turn out not to be the "cash-cow" they expect.
Reply
Like

Joined: 02 Apr 2009, 12:57

25 Feb 2017, 11:29 #16

surely the club budgets on a break even figure.
Any surplus is used to draw down existing debt?
I would say that a balance book surplus of £3k on a turnover of £9m reduced any risk of corporation task and demonstrated good financial management to be honest.....?
But again - I'm no accountant..
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Jan 2017, 09:51

25 Feb 2017, 13:03 #17

"Sir, for I dare not say dear"

It is expedient that I should inform you that the undersigned is not Crushed. Some flickering efforts to spare you the premature knowledge of this not calamitous position, you may observe in him this day, but hope has not sunk beneath the horizon and the undersigned is not Crushed, for assets exceed liabilties to the distance of 3000, and therefore, the dust and ashes are not scattered

On
The
Head
Of

Wilkins Micawber
Reply
Like

Joined: 02 Apr 2009, 12:57

25 Feb 2017, 15:17 #18

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen, nineteen and six, result happiness.
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.

David Copperfield.
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 11:26

25 Feb 2017, 15:33 #19

Fine great, we made a profit of £3000, but that is not going to make any impact on the £25M we still owe. £700000 in interest ad infinitum!!! 5M profit every year for the next 5 years is needed, and that is not going to happen.
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Jan 2017, 09:51

25 Feb 2017, 17:21 #20

But the risk is carried by those who lend, rather than by those who borrow. If the borrower can no longer service the debt, then the lender has to decide whether or not to foreclose. If he decides to do so, he then owns a cricket ground, and presumably, will look to put it to use.

It seems to me that YCCC would no longer own the ground, but would look to rent it from The Graves Family Trust, as opposed to doing so from Caddick, as it did in the past. And, of course, The Graves Family Trust would own a city-based international cricket venue outright.

Um!
Reply
Like