Guest Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Not really all his fault though that is it? Alot of those losses have stemmed from the fact that we have had to pay off management teams etc, and lets be honest, not just SM, was in favour of appointing Mcghee and Brown (I should also mention I said on here the day he was appointed that Mcghee was a massive mistake, and was slated for it and eventually banned)). You can certainly lay the blame for the Link to comment
muttonhumper Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 lets face it was no different than any other novice chairman in 90s scottish football (british isles?) who overspent because it was fashionable. Fit?I was under the impression we had a fairly minimal debt at the turn of the century, and that it's been horrendously managed since then? Kaino? Link to comment
ollie1903 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 He's a joiner, of course he's thick.Renders the reading of the rest of your tedious waffle as pointless Link to comment
Jonty Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Our losses stemmed from what? Our lossed stemmed from too high a wages to turnover ratio, amongst other factors, but none of which have been from on field performances mate - wakey wakey. We budget to finish in bottom half so anything else is a bonus We budget to finish in the bottom half of the table? Never understand this one to be honest - our wages are the fourth highest in the league so enlighten me. As already noted, when we had a successful season (2007/08) we were actually able to reduce our debt. Given the parlous state of the finances of many of our rivals, including the old firm, its pretty clear to me the marginal cost of getting a successful team on the park has dropped significantly in the last couple of seasons. Far from reducing our wage/turnover further I'd argue now would be the time to speculate. Its a two sided equation remember - if you increase turnover (which a successful team would undoubtably do) then the wage/turnover figure would drop. None - but that's not the point. We need to increase awareness amongst the fan base as to the chain of events that needs to take place. Milne gets decent bid for Pittodrie, Milne gets finances in place for new stadium, Milne then pisses off or at very least, stands down as Chairman and let's someone else on Board take reigns. He is already on record as saying if there was somebody out there he would step aside. The purpose of this thread was to enlighten folk as to what an unsuitable man Milne is to be both representing our Club at the highest level and furthermore, managing it (or mismanaging it rather). My alternative is simple... Milne stands down as Chairman and someone else take over. Milne eventually sells his shares once all 'key elements are put in place and we pull the trigger' as he puts it. That's not a difficult set of circumstances to get your head around is it? The purpose of this thread was to enlighten folk as to what an unsuitable man Robinson is to be both representing our Club at the highest level and furthermore, managing it (or mismanaging it rather). My alternative is simple... Robinson stands down as Chairman and someone else take over. Hell I hear theres even some banking dude from Lithuania interested. Robinson eventually sells his shares once all 'key elements are put in place and we pull the trigger' as he puts it. That's not a difficult set of circumstances to get your head around is it? Link to comment
spamspamspam Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 It's not often you hear Stewart Milne nowadays, and there's a really good reason for that. During his interview to various sicofants/members of the media, he came away with a statement that clearly blew my mind. Questioned on whether it might be a good idea, based on the current housing market, whether it may be a good idea to delay the sale for a year or two, he came away with this pearl: "We're living in the most uncertain time in the last 100 years". Now, don't get me wrong - the crash in the banking sector that started in the US, then cascaded around the world, sending stock markets crashing and bringing banks to their knees - this was really bad. But worse than the threat of the entire world falling under the control of Nazi Germany? More intense than the Cold War and threat of nuclear proliferation? Worse than the threat of terrorism and the scenes witnessed in New York? I think we need to get things in perspective here. Anyway. I've dissected the entire interview. Some stand outs: How do you think the AGM went? SM - nothing unusual (basically, he expects the sort of questions he's always asked about failure on and off the park) Happy with the direction of the club?SM - no one is happy. Everyone thought we had a chance based in squad we assembled over the summer. Signs are there over last two games that we can improve and see us finish the season in a position the fans expect to see us in (not many folk, other than Tup I think, thought we'd amassed a league winning squad. The signing of Clark just confirmed what we knew to be honest. And just where does Milne believe our expectations lie - top six? Was that what he was hinting at?) Has there been an over reaction by media to being bottom?SM - not really, just what you'd expect for us and the likes of Hibs (now, what he should have said here was, no, it is quite right that the fans and media made a deal about it, as a club such as AFC should never be propping up the league and I for one, will ensure it never happens again). Crowds poor, how big a concern is this? SM - big concern, but that's the difficult environment we're living in. But we have factors within our control to change that, like getting consistent performances (note he never said improved performances - we are consistent... just consistently poor). We will also try and build stronger bridges with fan base (yes, you have said this before, after McGhee was sacked. Where is the evidence that this is happening? In summary, this 'should' have been a pretty simple question to answer.) What sort of commitment are you and other shareholders going to make?SM - The likes of my company, AAM and others make huge commitment and will continue to make significant commitment (commitment in the shape of interest baring loans at previous stage and now interest free loans in order to stave off the the threat of administration perhaps? You will inevitably get repaid on those loans yes? So, not exactly a commitment as such? More a sticking plaster over a seeping wound?) Sicofant Steven - Hey Stewart, buddy, ever get the feeling that you don't need this sh*t, from 'the fans' and feel like calling it a day with this failed experiment? (well, that's what it came across like)SM - part and parcel of running a football club. When things are good, you don't get flack, but when things go wrong, folk are on your back (to me, this is where Milne is complete blinkered - he sees the flack from fans as a direct result of football results and lets all off field results wash over him, almost with some naivety as to what we can see in black and white - ie debt, debt and more debt) Sicofant Steven - do 'fans' need to realise that without the likes of you and Hugh, the club could go into Administration? SM - clubs in this day and age need folk like us to support them. Running a club in today's environment is very challenging. We've had drastic drop in TV revenue, so you need 2 or 3 guys to give that support. (yet again, blaming AFC's woes on the current climate. Are we all blind not to see that the root cause of our problems was created some 10 years ago, if not more? What we are seeing now is just a continuation of the mismanagement of AFC with no credible attempt to get us out of this spiral of debt. The support the Board give is no more than is required to stave of the the threat of administration until such a time as we can sell up and pay off the huge debt amassed by said Board of Directors. It's like he blames it all on Sky Sports or Setanta. Not our fault fans - it's the world economy, the Eurozone crisis, the housing market crash, the war in Iraq!!) Is it good that we have 2 new Board members with ties to Oil and Gas industry? SM - yes, but we cannot expect much more from industry as they have lots of pressure from folk for help, likes of the Maggie project. (sorry, are we comparing ourselves to a charitable organisation, looking for handouts?. I'm sure the question was one of external investment in AFC, not helping to sponsor the next match ball) Delay on closing date - for positive or negative reasons?SM - positive in that some folk had asked for more time, due to it being a busy time of the year (hmm, I smell a rat). The decision was deferred until the turn of the year (which is a bit wishy washy... is that 1st Jan 2012 or just whenever someone else makes a bid?)We have to wait until Feb 2012 then take stock, weigh up all the factors, make sure all the key elements are in place before pulling the trigger. (what are these key elements? Finding the money for both the repayment of the loans and ensuring we broker new lending facilities, which are not in place passed this date?) Is there a chance that the project could be in doubt then?SM - no, the timing maybe, but not the project. Question of timing if it goes ahead (hmm this all sounds fishy and basically like we're heading down this road on a wing and a prayer) Any chance SMG will bid for the land? SM - yes, we've made it clear we'll bid (have you really, when was this???). It's in AFC's best interests to ensure we drive the bids up. (so if someone else reckoned the land is worth Link to comment
K-9 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Not really all his fault though that is it? Alot of those losses have stemmed from the fact that we have had to pay off management teams etc, and lets be honest, not just SM, was in favour of appointing Mcghee and Brown (I should also mention I said on here the day he was appointed that Mcghee was a massive mistake, and was slated for it and eventually banned)). You can certainly lay the blame for the Link to comment
K-9 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Not really all his fault though that is it? Alot of those losses have stemmed from the fact that we have had to pay off management teams etc, and lets be honest, not just SM, was in favour of appointing Mcghee and Brown (I should also mention I said on here the day he was appointed that Mcghee was a massive mistake, and was slated for it and eventually banned)). You can certainly lay the blame for the Link to comment
Jonty Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Got as far as first line and yes, of course it is. And what other clubs are losing two million a year, even in years no interest on dents payable. Most SPL clubs are losing money at the moment, some on a worse scale than us. The Chairmans fault at those clubs too? Link to comment
K-9 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Fit?I was under the impression we had a fairly minimal debt at the turn of the century, and that it's been horrendously managed since then? Kaino?1.154 million debt as at 20th June 1999 Link to comment
Jazzer_Bett Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Christ 00s then ye get the point chief pedant Link to comment
Jonty Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 So Milne and boards fault for appointing wrong man from start but not their fault when things go bad on the park????? And who missed anything from calculations? Last 3 years we have lost over 6 million - Fact. Every single year under Milne's stewardship we have lost money bar the 1 year where we had euro run. And if never had the Euro run our debt would be pushing 20 million and we would probably be in administration. Which managerial appointment by Milne was not backed by the vast majority of fans at the time of appointment? Even Pele was hailed as the messiah by most and he was a barely functioning alcoholic. Hindsight is a wonderful thing as they say... My point was that you are presenting the last three years as it skews the figures in your favour - a £4 million loss over 4 years is nowhere near as bad as a £6million loss over 3 years. (I havnt checked any figures btw.) Link to comment
K-9 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Most SPL clubs are losing money at the moment, some on a worse scale than us. The Chairmans fault at those clubs too?Are they? Here's me thinking most of the league were actually cutting their debts. Club - 2010 debt - 2009 debt - Movement Link to comment
muttonhumper Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Christ 00s then ye get the point chief pedant Eh? Zero pedantry there. You said this: lets face it was no different than any other novice chairman in 90s scottish football (british isles?) who overspent because it was fashionable. Now you are changing it to 00's, when he wasn't a novice chairman.So I don't get the point. Mainly because you don't have one. Link to comment
The Boofon Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Are they? Here's me thinking most of the league were actually cutting their debts. Club - 2010 debt - 2009 debt - Movement Link to comment
Jonty Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Are they? Here's me thinking most of the league were actually cutting their debts. Club - 2010 debt - 2009 debt - Movement Link to comment
K-9 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Statistics are like mini skirts as they say. In the absence of club turnover figures, and without a background into the history of each clubs debt (Motherwell's for example if far lower as they have "used" the administration escape route) and each clubs future plans then I don't know what the above is telling us?It is telling you that only 4 clubs are losing money and only Celtic losing more than us (but year before they cut their debt). What it tells you is that your statement is blatently untrue: Most SPL clubs are losing money at the moment, some on a worse scale than us. The Chairmans fault at those clubs too? But here's the turnover figures you ask for same period: Turnover by club2010 £’000 2009 £’000 2010 Movement 2009 Movement Aberdeen 7,053 8,557 -18% -34%Celtic 61,715 72,587 -15% -1%Dundee United 6,052 5,792 4% -1%Falkirk 3,839 5,366 -28% 18%Hamilton 2,543 1,859 37% 67%Heart of Midlothian 7,908 8,307 -5% -9%Hibernian 7,064 7,711 -8% -4%Kilmarnock 6,136 6,922 -11% -20%Motherwell 4,380 4,430 -1% -5%Rangers 56,287 39,704 42% -38%St Johnstone 4,045 2,474 64% -2%St Mirren 3,875 3,546 9% 20% Link to comment
Jazzer_Bett Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Eh? Zero pedantry there. You said this: lets face it was no different than any other novice chairman in 90s scottish football (british isles?) who overspent because it was fashionable. Now you are changing it to 00's, when he wasn't a novice chairman.So I don't get the point. Mainly because you don't have one. Link to comment
muttonhumper Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Eh?You think it's hysterical that you don't have a point? Are you feel? Link to comment
tup Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Renders the reading of the rest of your tedious waffle as pointless Plumber then. Link to comment
Red Morning Light Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Beggars canna be choosers. Thread closed. Link to comment
Jonty Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 It is telling you that only 4 clubs are losing money and only Celtic losing more than us (but year before they cut their debt). What it tells you is that your statement is blatently untrue: But here's the turnover figures you ask for same period: Turnover by club2010 £’000 2009 £’000 2010 Movement 2009 Movement Aberdeen 7,053 8,557 -18% -34%Celtic 61,715 72,587 -15% -1%Dundee United 6,052 5,792 4% -1%Falkirk 3,839 5,366 -28% 18%Hamilton 2,543 1,859 37% 67%Heart of Midlothian 7,908 8,307 -5% -9%Hibernian 7,064 7,711 -8% -4%Kilmarnock 6,136 6,922 -11% -20%Motherwell 4,380 4,430 -1% -5%Rangers 56,287 39,704 42% -38%St Johnstone 4,045 2,474 64% -2%St Mirren 3,875 3,546 9% 20% Only 4 clubs losing money - really? Dundee Uniteds figures are skewed by their Scottish Cup win, they are now losing money. Falkirk are in the first division they are now losing money. Ditto Hamilton. Hearts are f4cked. Hibs posted their first loss in years (£900k) - they dont have to pay for upkeep of their stadium and don't have large current debt, largely thanks to player sales. Motherwell have written off their debt through administration, hence they don't have to pay interest anymore. Rangers are f4cked. St Mirren sold their stadium and eliminated their debt. And your figures are for 2009 and 2010 - current (2011) figures have probably deterioated further. Everybody thought that RBS was hugely profitable in 2007 afterall. As I said you can use statistics to tell you whatever you like. At least the Dons appear to have a plan (of sorts) to tackle our debt Link to comment
Redstar Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Plumber then.Thought he was a Sparky Link to comment
The Boofon Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Thought he was a Sparky His trade doesn't really have all relevance to all of this to be fair. He's a cunt that's all you need to know and 4 years as a builder, sparky or fucking laboratory technician won't make any difference to that. Link to comment
K-9 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Only 4 clubs losing money - really? Dundee Uniteds figures are skewed by their Scottish Cup win, they are now losing money.United debt in 2006 £7.6 - United debt in 2010 £5.7M Hearts are f4cked.Big time. Hibs posted their first loss in years (£900k) - they dont have to pay for upkeep of their stadium and don't have large current debt, largely thanks to player sales.Hibs debt 2003 £14.5M - Hibs Debt 2011 £5.9M But who pays for upkeep of their stadium? Motherwell have written off their debt through administration, hence they don't have to pay interest anymore.True - hence why left them out. But they still aren't losing money. Rangers are f4cked.Hun debt cut from £74M in 2004 to £27M now so not that bad a state pre tax case. St Mirren sold their stadium and eliminated their debt.Yup - cut their debt from 1.4 million on back of stadium move. Seems we aint going to be cutting our debt at all with our stadium move though!! And your figures are for 2009 and 2010 - current (2011) figures have probably deterioated further. Everybody thought that RBS was hugely profitable in 2007 afterall. As I said you can use statistics to tell you whatever you like. At least the Dons appear to have a plan (of sorts) to tackle our debtFeel free to search - not a club in the league failing as badly as AFC constantly are. Losing 2 million in years where no interest is being paid is just unbelievable. Am using statistics to show what you said is most clearly not even close to the truth. What are those plans then? At the agm Milne now saying that our debt levels will remain about the same but will just be organised in a different way through a mortgage. That is not "tackling the debt" Edit: United cutting debt year on year apparently My link Killie debt cut in 2011 My link Link to comment
Guest Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 There's got to be some infiltration of Milne family members AFC employees, or the likes on this chat site. That's the only reasonable excuse for so much unsubstantiated drivel in defence of the clubs finances and record. Please, all those who are not in agreement, state your case for the defence. - You are happy enough for the current Chairman/Directors to remain in place as there is no viable alternative (please tick here)- You are happy to wait for their business plan to unfold, and have confidence that they will succeed in this plan (please tick here)- Debts amassed should not be attributed to the Chairman of AFC (please tick here)- The sole responsibility of the prudent management of AFC does not reside with the Chairman of the Board of Directors (please tick here)- Current increases in debt are subject to the problems found in the current state of Scottish football (please tick here)- Any and/or all lack of success in terms of winning anything other than the Aberdeenshire Cup, is the sole responsibility of the players and manager at the time (please tick here)- Bad luck and misfortune have contributed to our £15m of debt and lack of silverware in the past 15 years- Top 6 finishes and cup final appearances are what we should be aiming for in this current time (please tick here) The above statements, if you buy in to them, are the contributing factors to our problems. You have allowed this to happen. No one raised the alarm bell when it was clear that AFC was on fire. Simple put, if you sign up to any of the above, then you are clearly demonstrating an inability to dissect the chalf from the wheat. Hoodwinked. Now, see me. I am part of this remote band of bluesky thinkers: - I have never been a believer in Stewart Milne as Chairman- The sole responsibility of ANY companies health, lies squarely with the Chairman- I want to see change at the highest level, including the removal of most of the Directors, the CEO and the Director of Football.- I am prepared to wait until any plan to sell Pittodrie and arrange further borrowings, is put in place, based on the promise that the above changes take place within the next 12-18 months Link to comment
The Boofon Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 There's got to be some infiltration of Milne family members AFC employees, or the likes on this chat site. That's the only reasonable excuse for so much unsubstantiated drivel in defence of the clubs finances and record. Please, all those who are not in agreement, state your case for the defence. - You are happy enough for the current Chairman/Directors to remain in place as there is no viable alternative (please tick here)- You are happy to wait for their business plan to unfold, and have confidence that they will succeed in this plan (please tick here)- Debts amassed should not be attributed to the Chairman of AFC (please tick here)- The sole responsibility of the prudent management of AFC does not reside with the Chairman of the Board of Directors (please tick here)- Current increases in debt are subject to the problems found in the current state of Scottish football (please tick here)- Any and/or all lack of success in terms of winning anything other than the Aberdeenshire Cup, is the sole responsibility of the players and manager at the time (please tick here)- I strongly believe that there are no other viable alternatives to Stewart Milne as Chairman (please tick here)- Bad luck and misfortune have contributed to our Link to comment
Jazzer_Bett Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Eh?You think it's hysterical that you don't have a point? Are you feel? MH you are getting a bit worked up min, relax On topic piece in the rag and some interesting commments after; http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/future-of-football/2011/12/21/spl-must-have-courage-to-make-decision-on-two-tier-league-in-next-few-months-says-aberdeen-chief-stewart-milne-86908-23650759/ Link to comment
Jonty Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Feel free to search - not a club in the league failing as badly as AFC constantly are. Losing 2 million in years where no interest is being paid is just unbelievable. Am using statistics to show what you said is most clearly not even close to the truth. What are those plans then? At the agm Milne now saying that our debt levels will remain about the same but will just be organised in a different way through a mortgage. That is not "tackling the debt" http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/11.08.08%20-%20annual%20financial%20review%20of%20ScottishFootball%20_FINAL.pdf According to the PwC annual report into Scottish Football finances we lost £84k in 2010, and £1,642k in 2009 so I am not too sure where you are taking your figures from? (PwC Source: Statutory Accounts; Table: Net Profit/(Loss) by club before tax). The plans as I understand them, are to sell Pittodrie and move into a new (hopefully higher revenue generating/lower maintenance costs) stadium and convert the present debt into a long term mortgage (presumably at a lower interest rate). Broadly the plan is; - More Revenue + (Less Stadium Maintenance Costs) + (Lower Debt Service Payments) = More money to pay off debt + Invest in team. Which to me is a far preferable situation than compared to Hibs / Dundee Utd / Kilmarnock etc who's plan appears to be to muddle along and hope things take a turn for the better. Link to comment
RUL Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 We budget to finish in the bottom half of the table? Never understand this one to be honest - our wages are the fourth highest in the league so enlighten me. As already noted, when we had a successful season (2007/08) we were actually able to reduce our debt. Given the parlous state of the finances of many of our rivals, including the old firm, its pretty clear to me the marginal cost of getting a successful team on the park has dropped significantly in the last couple of seasons. Far from reducing our wage/turnover further I'd argue now would be the time to speculate. Its a two sided equation remember - if you increase turnover (which a successful team would undoubtably do) then the wage/turnover figure would drop. He is already on record as saying if there was somebody out there he would step aside. The purpose of this thread was to enlighten folk as to what an unsuitable man Robinson is to be both representing our Club at the highest level and furthermore, managing it (or mismanaging it rather). My alternative is simple... Robinson stands down as Chairman and someone else take over. Hell I hear theres even some banking dude from Lithuania interested. Robinson eventually sells his shares once all 'key elements are put in place and we pull the trigger' as he puts it. That's not a difficult set of circumstances to get your head around is it?afc budgets on finishing 7th and going out of the cups in the first round. There's no correlation between that and having the 4th biggest budget as the reason for that is we have the 4th biggest income. It's not by magic of Milne that we have the 4th biggest budget, he puts fuck all into the pot. P.s I thought we were down to 6th biggest budget Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now