The Partick Thistle thread

[Hammer Jag]

Another statement, another prosecco-fuelled dig at the fans.

Absolutely pathetic.

[oneteaminglasgow]

Quote

These accounts prove that we remain a Board and Club that is financially aware and responsible, funded to meet all its obligations on and off the pitch.

I don’t read statements like this from other clubs, but this sort of self-congratulatory pish isn’t normal, surely? 

[Pie Of The Month]

Is there oil under the bing since club assets have increased by £9.3m this year?

[jagsfan57]

57 minutes ago, Pie Of The Month said:

Is there oil under the bing since club assets have increased by £9.3m this year?

Looks like the Colin Weir Stand is valued at £7.8M

[chattyman]

So am i getting this right, Firhill or the land it is on is suppposedly £14-£15 million worth? Think someone is taking the piss there!  If we can get that for it then sell sell sell.

[Fuctifano]

If Firhill is worth North of £10m then we should cash in on Cammy Smith for seven figures. Even if all seven of those figures are zero. 

[Ad Lib]

Revaluation of the land/stadium based on what it would cost to provide a modern like-for-like replacement. Original valuation based on the open market value. This explains the £7.8 million discrepancy. The value of the assets hasn’t increased from £5 million to £14.3 million; £7.8 million is attributable to the “book” value being calculated differently.

Absolutely no lender would let you borrow on the basis of such a valuation. Absolutely no one would pay that for the land and buildings on it.

 

City End and Main Stand represents £1.7 million donation to the Club by 3BC.

Strip out the PropCo tidy-up, and the wild revaluation, and the Club lost £215k last season, despite receiving money from Queen’s Park for ground-sharing.

 

Turnover is down £190k versus the 2019-20 season, when we were last in this league.

The accounts, by their very nature, do not disclose whether or to what extent 3BC made financial commitments to the Club by other means (e.g. that might be covered by the turnover or operating income items). We know for a fact that 3BC committed £560k to its only subsidiary (the Club) in 2020-21 because it says so in their own accounts.

Cash in the bank was down £300k, but debtors is up £360k (we’re not yet 100% sure why this is so high) or so and creditors are up £280k or so. The eagle-eyed among you will see this shakes out to a worsening situation of £220k, i.e. the operating loss, give or take.

If the Club were to sustain operating losses in the same region for the next two financial years as it has in 2021-22, it would begin to encounter cashflow issues. This would probably mean, in practice, having to ask for an overdraft facility again, after years of having been debt free. If we can get to the bottom of why debtors is so high, that might provide more of a buffer, but realistically no more than a further year or so.

[Smurph]

Student flats on all four sides.

[Jacky1990]

5 hours ago, chattyman said:

So am i getting this right, Firhill or the land it is on is suppposedly £14-£15 million worth? Think someone is taking the piss there!  If we can get that for it then sell sell sell.

Maybe they got it valued the second they announced the mini budget when the pound was worth about 10% of its usual value.

Some insider trading from heir kunt's Tory cronies

[Highlandmagar]

Trumpist style accounting.

[Pie Of The Month]

A club with a £215k loss said they didn't want any fundraising from an organisation which could very feasibly have raised a high 5 or low 6 figure sum for them every year. Completely normal behaviour.

[Nightmare]

11 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

Revaluation of the land/stadium based on what it would cost to provide a modern like-for-like replacement. Original valuation based on the open market value. This explains the £7.8 million discrepancy. The value of the assets hasn’t increased from £5 million to £14.3 million; £7.8 million is attributable to the “book” value being calculated differently.

Absolutely no lender would let you borrow on the basis of such a valuation. Absolutely no one would pay that for the land and buildings on it.
 

Re: the bolded, surely this can’t be a normal accounting practice, right? I mean surely nobody actually reports their assets in this way? By not actually declaring the assets you physically have, but instead reporting them as a value that is essentially “this land will be worth x amount if you bought the land and then stuck a brand new facility on it”.

I mean, not much coming out of the club is particularly normal right now, as this ongoing saga demonstrates, but this highlighted above seems particularly batshit.

 

[jagfox]

I welcome the coming announcement of our £15million super stadium.

Bagz first on the monorail!

[Ad Lib]

3 hours ago, Nightmare said:

Re: the bolded, surely this can’t be a normal accounting practice, right? I mean surely nobody actually reports their assets in this way? By not actually declaring the assets you physically have, but instead reporting them as a value that is essentially “this land will be worth x amount if you bought the land and then stuck a brand new facility on it”.

I mean, not much coming out of the club is particularly normal right now, as this ongoing saga demonstrates, but this highlighted above seems particularly batshit.

 

As I understand it, it is technically a permissible form of accounting for land and buildings, but it has severe limitations. It’s not a viable basis for commercial lending, for example.

I looked at a handful of Scottish Clubs’ last set of accounts last night and I couldn’t find one, where this method of accounting was used for their fixed assets (at least in relation to a stadium).

Edit to add: as I understand it, Hibs used it in 2014 to revalue Easter Road. But this was at a time when construction costs weren’t utterly crazy, and subsequent accounts work on the basis that the asset will depreciate year on year.

By carrying out the revaluation specifically now, the Club has very possibly picked it at its absolute peak. This is because if material costs are higher, the replacement method would say the ground is more valuable (which is a nonsense). If iron becomes more expensive to procure, the stadium becomes more valuable on the rationale that “a replacement stadium would need iron and that would cost more” and vice versa.

There is now an incentive not to revalue the stadium for as long as possible, because when construction costs settle down, it would lead to the asset being worth less, paradoxically, because it’s less expensive to replace!

Edited November 3, 2022 by Ad Lib

[jagsfan57]

12 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

Revaluation of the land/stadium based on what it would cost to provide a modern like-for-like replacement. Original valuation based on the open market value. This explains the £7.8 million discrepancy. The value of the assets hasn’t increased from £5 million to £14.3 million; £7.8 million is attributable to the “book” value being calculated differently.

Absolutely no lender would let you borrow on the basis of such a valuation. Absolutely no one would pay that for the land and buildings on it.

 

City End and Main Stand represents £1.7 million donation to the Club by 3BC.

Strip out the PropCo tidy-up, and the wild revaluation, and the Club lost £215k last season, despite receiving money from Queen’s Park for ground-sharing.

 

Turnover is down £190k versus the 2019-20 season, when we were last in this league.

The accounts, by their very nature, do not disclose whether or to what extent 3BC made financial commitments to the Club by other means (e.g. that might be covered by the turnover or operating income items). We know for a fact that 3BC committed £560k to its only subsidiary (the Club) in 2020-21 because it says so in their own accounts.

Cash in the bank was down £300k, but debtors is up £360k (we’re not yet 100% sure why this is so high) or so and creditors are up £280k or so. The eagle-eyed among you will see this shakes out to a worsening situation of £220k, i.e. the operating loss, give or take.

If the Club were to sustain operating losses in the same region for the next two financial years as it has in 2021-22, it would begin to encounter cashflow issues. This would probably mean, in practice, having to ask for an overdraft facility again, after years of having been debt free. If we can get to the bottom of why debtors is so high, that might provide more of a buffer, but realistically no more than a further year or so.

It looks like the increase in debtors is almost matched by a similar increase in creditors. Do the notes give any further indication as to what makes up these two figures ? 

[Ad Lib]

1 hour ago, jagsfan57 said:

It looks like the increase in debtors is almost matched by a similar increase in creditors. Do the notes give any further indication as to what makes up these two figures ? 

We think there is possibly a VAT anomaly inflating both figures.

[Skyline Drifter]

3 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

We think there is possibly a VAT anomaly inflating both figures.

These accounts available anywhere to actually look at (other than the snippets in your post above)? They haven't been filed at Companies House yet.  Notes 8 and 10 should rule out or in whether it's anything to do with VAT. I'd be more inclined to think the debtor increase is due to the significant extra prize money you'd have been due at 31 May 2022 (4th in Championship) compared to 2021 (top of League 1). That's going to be 6 figures of it for sure I'd think. Perhaps more than £200k of it.

[jagsfan57]

2 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

These accounts available anywhere to actually look at (other than the snippets in your post above)? They haven't been filed at Companies House yet.  Notes 8 and 10 should rule out or in whether it's anything to do with VAT. I'd be more inclined to think the debtor increase is due to the significant extra prize money you'd have been due at 31 May 2022 (4th in Championship) compared to 2021 (top of League 1). That's going to be 6 figures of it for sure I'd think. Perhaps more than £200k of it.

The AGM hasn’t been held yet. Can they be filed before being accepted by the shareholders?

[The Thistle Archive]

We discovered two new games vs. Partick in May 1882. Our rivals had a head start on us by almost 2 years, but it was Thistle who comprehensively came out on top, taking over Inchview in 1885. Ruthless perhaps, but it's PTFC live to tell the tale of how the burgh was won. Access the new match hubs via season 1881-82 →

[Skyline Drifter]

2 hours ago, jagsfan57 said:

The AGM hasn’t been held yet. Can they be filed before being accepted by the shareholders?

They could be. But it's certainly safer not to.