West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

A selection of the very best posts and/or most memorable threads on KUMB since the current Forum launched in 2002.

Moderator: Gnome

Post Reply
User avatar
hammer1975
Posts: 16642
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:16 pm
Has liked: 934 likes
Total likes: 1089 likes

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by hammer1975 »

cheers CH

can we re-name this - hammers count the cost of BG's childish negligent running of a football club (ably assisted by Scott 'ask no questions' Duxbury and Nick 'finance not my job' Igoe)
User avatar
cockney hammer
Resident badge expert
Posts: 108461
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 12:52 pm
Location: http://boleynbadges.com
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 143 likes
Contact:

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by cockney hammer »

hammer1975 wrote:cheers CH

can we re-name this - hammers count the cost of BG's childish negligent running of a football club (ably assisted by Scott 'ask no questions' Duxbury and Nick 'finance not my job' Igoe)

could not fit it all in the box :wink:
User avatar
Denbighammer
Posts: 12871
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:53 pm
Location: Dodging, Dipping, Diving, Ducking and Dodging.
Has liked: 697 likes
Total likes: 431 likes

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by Denbighammer »

Mr Cockney Hammer, sterling detective-type work as ever. Thanks. :thup:

cockney hammer wrote:As of May 2008, Arsenal owed £416m, Fulham £197m, Manchester United £699m, Manchester City £147m and Liverpool around £300m.
What have Fulham been spending their dough on then? I know they renovated Craven Cottage but it can't of cost them that much can it? They've not spent massively on players or (I assume) wages so have I missed something?
cockney hammer wrote: Allegedly, Magnusson and chief executive Scott Duxbury would check with Gudmundsson as to whether they could afford to continue spending and the owner gave them the all clear, suggesting he was funding it with his own money, when in reality he was doing it via bank loans.
Only West Ham could end up with a pillock like this. How did someone who is clearly so thick end up so minted? Makes me sick.
cockney hammer wrote: "West Ham purchased three high-profile players in 2007-08 at a combined cost of £20m with total annual wages in excess of £12m. The players concerned were Freddie Ljungberg, Craig Bellamy and Kieron Dyer,
Bellamy 8m, Dyer 6m and Freddie 3m I thought. Thats 17mil. Shirley the 'missing' 3million isn't in signing on fees?
User avatar
student_hammer
Posts: 561
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:47 pm
Location: London
Has liked: 41 likes
Total likes: 41 likes

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by student_hammer »

cockney hammer wrote:The sales of Bellamy, Anton Ferdinand, George McCartney, Bobby Zamora, Hayden Mullins, Matty Etherington, James Collins and Savio have helped to recoup some money and slash the wage bill, but at what cost to the first team?
It has improved

apart from the sale of bellamy, all the others have been replaced in the first team by much better players and i wouldn't want any of them back.
User avatar
smuts
Posts: 33753
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 9:28 am
Location: East, East, East London
Has liked: 1500 likes
Total likes: 1440 likes

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by smuts »

Denbighammer wrote: Only West Ham could end up with a pillock like this. How did someone who is clearly so thick end up so minted? Makes me sick.
Thick? A f*cking lying crook more like.

I still don't buy that Duckers and Igoe didn't know that the players were funded via loans in the clubs name.
User avatar
wayneo1974
Posts: 3092
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:12 pm
Location: The swingers club

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by wayneo1974 »

smuts wrote: I still don't buy that Duckers and Igoe didn't know that the players were funded via loans in the clubs name.
I agree they must have known. But they probably thought the loans were guaranteed by a billionaire who owns the bank. Of course he turned out to be skint and so was the bank. Who would have predicted that!
Apples an Pairs
Posts: 89
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:48 am

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by Apples an Pairs »

QuintonNimoy wrote: You'll have to elaborate on the TV revenues bit. Our single home game in the PL so far was attended reasonably well, how would you quanitify plummetting?
Spurs didnt sell out
Liverpool hasnt sold out
Millwall was half empty
What do you think we are going to get for the Wigans of this world?

As for TV we will get half of what we got for every PPV game under Setanta.

No one is going to take us on because we are geared to the hilt. Barring a crazy minted arab, we're in admin.
User avatar
hammer
Strangely fascinated with Bonehead's arse.
Posts: 24487
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 11:05 pm

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by hammer »

AlfieG wrote:Yep, It was all eggys AND CURBISHLEY'S fault
:arry:
User avatar
AlfieG
Posts: 4792
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:20 am
Location: London
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 4 likes

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by AlfieG »

hammer wrote:Yep, It was all eggys AND CURBISHLEY'S fault :arry:
Lets get the quotes right eh! :wink:
User avatar
Albie Beck
Posts: 9649
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:42 am
Has liked: 618 likes
Total likes: 639 likes

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by Albie Beck »

smuts wrote:I still don't buy that Duckers and Igoe didn't know that the players were funded via loans in the clubs name.
wayneo1974 wrote:I agree they must have known. But they probably thought the loans were guaranteed by a billionaire who owns the bank. Of course he turned out to be skint and so was the bank. Who would have predicted that!
Duckers is quoted as saying that he & Igoe thought it was BG's money. I still don't understand how, if that is actually true, the club came to "own" loans that BG had taken out himself. Even if as the owner he was the final decision-maker, BG couldn't impose this without the knowledge of his CEO and his FD without breaching Company Law. There's still a strong aroma of Grimsby about this...
User avatar
hammer1975
Posts: 16642
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:16 pm
Has liked: 934 likes
Total likes: 1089 likes

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by hammer1975 »

something grimsby about it.... you're not allowed to question dux albie....

....clearly we acted like no other company where a finance director countersigns any loan agreements, clearly also BG must have arranged for the cash for these players to be paid straight from landesbanki, straumer etc straight to brum, l'arse, newcastle etc as dux thought it was BG's money so if it had come into a west ham bank account from any of those banks he would have questioned it..if BG signed and organised those loans etc without consultation with the rest of the board they'd be able to sue him - ok he may not have any money left, but dux did say he felt sorry for him despite BG undermining dux's role by agreeing loans in secret without his knowledge and allowing dux's reputation to be forever tarnished with almost bringing west ham to the brink.....utter rubbish and stinks to the heavens...would have more respect for the bloke if he said 'we knew it was coming from the banks and not BG but BG was running the banks atthe time and whoever thought the whole icelandic banking system would go under'....i know that he has to tell some porkies in order to protect west ham but I'd be interested in his truth to bull**** ratio because my money would be on close to full on bull****....
QuintonNimoy
Posts: 8167
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by QuintonNimoy »

Apples an Pairs wrote:Sp*rs didnt sell out
Liverpool hasnt sold out
Millwall was half empty
What do you think we are going to get for the Wigans of this world?

As for TV we will get half of what we got for every PPV game under Setanta.

No one is going to take us on because we are geared to the hilt. Barring a crazy minted arab, we're in admin.
So you wouldn't quantify it then, just rely on panicking?
QuintonNimoy
Posts: 8167
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: £100m - Hammers count the cost of Eggy’s big splurge

Post by QuintonNimoy »

Albie Beck wrote:....BG couldn't impose this without the knowledge of his CEO and his FD without breaching Company Law.
He's never done that before obviously!
User avatar
bristolhammerfc
Posts: 10209
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: In the city of Brunel, balloons and banksy
Has liked: 197 likes
Total likes: 609 likes

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by bristolhammerfc »

:lol: :thup:
Damn Yankee
Posts: 970
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:14 am
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by Damn Yankee »

Club's accounts still overdue?


Edit: Appears they are now available...on the Companies House Website...
User avatar
mano-obe
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 4:27 am
Location: Essex

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by mano-obe »

Paying the likes of Neill 60k a week, Dyer 70k, Ljungberg 70k a week, while being in debt is stupid. Even Spurs have a stricter wager bill and know how to run a club properly
User avatar
MrBen
Posts: 276
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:48 am
Location: Our side of Millwall
Total likes: 1 like

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by MrBen »

So the Accounts are in - Pnl highlights for the period ended 28 May 2008 are;

£(37m) before tax is the headline but there are a couple of key numbers which pique ones interest…

Turnover up £24m to £81m from the £57m during the Tevez season.

Wages & Salaries up £21m to £63m from £42m reflecting the Magmusson Galactico's coming on-board (According to the accounts we were the sixth highest spenders on player wages).

Other admin up £5m to £22.8m from £17.8m.

An astonishing figure of £27m exceptional expenses vs. the £9m in the previous accounts which were attributable to the Premier League fine and associated legal costs as well as compo for Curbs.

We settled with Sheffield United for £21m payable over four-and-a-half years.

The auditors have not added any qualifications to their audit opinion.

So, without the Exceptional expenses we would have lost £5m before interest and player amortisation.

Let's have a look at that exceptional figure…ah, it's the settlement of the Blades claim plus £3.7m in associated legal fees and a few other odds and sods. I wonder who got £450k in compo for loss of office - Eggy?

The Balance Sheet

Debtors have jumped massively from £7.5m in 2007 to over £25m - £8m from player transfers and £10m owed by West Ham's parent Company…?

Our total creditors as at 28 May '07 were £124m, up £26m from the previous period. The breakdown is as follows;

Within one year (i.e. before May '09)

Bank loan and overdraft of £43m (£28m was re-negotiated after the accounting period to be paid between 2 and 5 years - interest @ 2.5% over LIBOR - not too penal in this current climate - a positive!)
Amount owing to parent Co £11m
Players bought £17m

Everything else is pretty much on par with the previous periods numbers.

Over one year;

Vultures claim £21m
Players Bought £5m

In short

The accounts reflect the gross-mismanagement of the Icelandic regime in terms of players bought & wages paid in addition to loans taken-out bearing high interest (~ 8%) whose ultimate beneficiary was Gudmundsson as well as the Sheffield United settlement.

Old news

Indeed - the account are drawn up to May '08 and were signed-off in June this year however, can the Post Balance Sheet Events note shed any light as to the current position?

We received £12m from transferred players +£4m contingent on future events.

Property values have dropped by about £12m.

Nothing of real value here…



I'll have another Butcher's later KUMBers to see if I've missed anything pertinent. :think:
Last edited by MrBen on Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
dapablo
Sourpuss, grumpy face
Posts: 4464
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by dapablo »

big thanks sir
User avatar
old fart
Posts: 6835
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 11:31 am
Has liked: 136 likes
Total likes: 355 likes

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by old fart »

MrBen wrote: An astonishing figure of £27m exceptional expenses vs. the £9m in the previous accounts which were attributable to the Premier League fine and associated legal costs as well as compo for Curbs.

ink:
that included the 21m for McCunt 3.7m legals in relation to that. there was also a £750k settlement of litigation ( i wonder what that was) and £458k for loss of office (eggy?)

The prev years 9m included the £5.5m fine plus £1.7 m for loss of office
Last edited by old fart on Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Georgee Paris
Posts: 27162
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:07 pm
Location: The Amazing Adventures of Wicked Willy & Fearless Steve
Has liked: 496 likes
Total likes: 1038 likes
Contact:

Re: West Ham accounts reveal loss of £37m

Post by Georgee Paris »

Is this what you might call a damp squid?
Post Reply