We clearly are not signing anyone in January

[Sir Rodger Doyle]

What is BGP in Bicester?[/quote]

Its JM printing company thats cost him the fat side of £100,000,000 million in the last few years[/quote]

[prostak]

Its JM printing company thats cost him the fat side of £100,000,000 million in the last few years

Uhh... You sure about that?

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Its JM printing company thats cost him the fat side of £100,000,000 million in the last few years

Uhh... You sure about that?

Easy to find, but as always the figures are disputed by JM.

Your investment in BGP is enormous – it was put at £86m in a recent Telegraph article. Yet your expectation is that this company can be profitable at a level that will service both your debt and the external debt?
I don’t think it’s that much, I don’t know where they got that number from. [David Holland says it is £62m]. It’s all about success at the end of the day in my book, and it’s about keeping jobs and keeping people going. We’ve got close to 600 people working there so it’s essential that we are successful for their benefit and for everybody that’s involved with it. I appreciate it’s going to take a very long time before I get my money back, but once you get into the black you’re motoring along and it’s a different ballpark altogether. I believe in positivity and getting things right. Sometimes they take longer than people expect and sometimes you have to have an act of faith. We are definitely rowing in the right direction and we’re going to get there.

http://www.printweek.com/indepth/1011897/

So you can carry on funding the businesses that need funding?
Absolutely, yes. We’ve got many assets that are still producing revenue. Malaysian Motor Trader is one of them, this [Madejski Stadium] is another

Quoted yet again, when asked if JM can continue to fund his businesses losing money he says that the Madejski Stadium is producing money to help, it is there in print from him, so how does it help, I would assume he would say the Stadium helps the Football Club if asked.

[Northern Git]

As Harpers So Solid Crew correctly points out JM disputed the figures, and could possibly be correct as he had converted £35,000,000 of his loans into his shares during that financial year (similar to what he has done at RFC? - which would make it pretty impossible to sell)

However this year's figures are out and he had put in a further £10,000,000 up to May and had provided further financial support since.

Latest link here. My £100,000,000 figure is based on the discussion at the bottom of the article. Its a figure I think is reasonably accurate.

http://www.printweek.com/News/1042995/BGP-full-year-results-new-contracts-kick/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH

[Wycombe Royal]

As Harpers So Solid Crew correctly points out JM disputed the figures, and could possibly be correct as he had converted £35,000,000 of his loans into his shares during that financial year (similar to what he has done at RFC? - which would make it pretty impossible to sell)

However this year's figures are out and he had put in a further £10,000,000 up to May and had provided further financial support since.

Latest link here. My £100,000,000 figure is based on the discussion at the bottom of the article. Its a figure I think is reasonably accurate.

http://www.printweek.com/News/1042995/BGP-full-year-results-new-contracts-kick/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH

I think the issue was that you wrote "£100,000,000 MILLION", not just £100,000,000.

[Northern Git]

As Harpers So Solid Crew correctly points out JM disputed the figures, and could possibly be correct as he had converted £35,000,000 of his loans into his shares during that financial year (similar to what he has done at RFC? - which would make it pretty impossible to sell)

However this year's figures are out and he had put in a further £10,000,000 up to May and had provided further financial support since.

Latest link here. My £100,000,000 figure is based on the discussion at the bottom of the article. Its a figure I think is reasonably accurate.

http://www.printweek.com/News/1042995/BGP-full-year-results-new-contracts-kick/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH

I think the issue was that you wrote "£100,000,000 MILLION", not just £100,000,000.

DOH!

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

I ignored the typo and worked on 100mill, and JM reckons closer to 70mill, whats £30Mill between businesses?? Possibly the difference competing for RFC at a higher level, whether it would be worth pumping it into RFC is another question, my answer would be no.

[Wycombe Royal]

RFC is/was not in dnager of going out of business, his printing company was.

I think his decision to invest in the printing business one is a good one, especially if he feels he can turn it around.

Saving 600 jobs is more important that trying to appease some football fans who will never be happy.

[St Pauli]

RFC is/was not in dnager of going out of business, his printing company was.

I think his decision to invest in the printing business one is a good one, especially if he feels he can turn it around.

Saving 600 jobs is more important that trying to appease some football fans who will never be happy.

+1!

[Mike Hunt]

Saving 600 jobs is more important that trying to appease some football fans who will never be happy.

Good point.

[Royal Lady]

I think the point is, that we'd rather he didn't make out WE (as in RFC) had a black hole of £12m or whatever he says it is, giving the impression that the club is still losing money, despite the transfer money/saving on wages of highest paid players/parachute payments received, and that it is because the money has been taken from the RFC side of his business to prop up one of his struggling businesses. It's his money I suppose, so he can do as he likes with it and transfer between businesses as he so wishes, but don't take us for fools that RFC are haemorraging money when, in reality, we're ok and will have to do without a new striker or whatever because, at the moment, his priorities lie with another of his businesses.

[Wycombe Royal]

I think the point is, that we'd rather he didn't make out WE (as in RFC) had a black hole of £12m or whatever he says it is, giving the impression that the club is still losing money, despite the transfer money/saving on wages of highest paid players/parachute payments received, and that it is because the money has been taken from the RFC side of his business to prop up one of his struggling businesses. It's his money I suppose, so he can do as he likes with it and transfer between businesses as he so wishes, but don't take us for fools that RFC are haemorraging money when, in reality, we're ok and will have to do without a new striker or whatever because, at the moment, his priorities lie with another of his businesses.

He has taken no money from the club to prop up any of his other businesses and the accounts will show that. The sooner people stop trotting out this line the better. He is investing money elsewhere but it isn't money the club has made.

[Royal Lady]

Good - so we can afford to buy a player or two come January then.

[Wycombe Royal]

Good - so we can afford to buy a player or two come January then.

They have already said there are limited funds available for January but your view of the finances is too simplistic. Our cost base is still higher than our revenue and therefore there will be a black hole again next season, however if they can retain some of the surplus from this season and allocate it to next season then the black hole is smaller next season.

Stop thinking of one season at a time and think longer term. Thankfully this is what the club do.

[Royal Lady]

Well I don't believe they gave future seasons much thought whilst in the Prem - otherwise why we were so badly off when we came back down - obv didn't plan for us to relegated at any point.

[Wycombe Royal]

Well I don't believe they gave future seasons much thought whilst in the Prem - otherwise why we were so badly off when we came back down - obv didn't plan for us to relegated at any point.

They didn't overspend in the Premiership - that is beacuse they always thought relegation was a possibility. I think the simple fact that we haven't ended up in any financial difficulties since being relegated (like many others who have come down) shows that they did plan ahead.

If you think we were badly off when we got relegated then you obviously have your head in a bucket of sand.

[DOYLERSAROYALER]

I think the point is, that we'd rather he didn't make out WE (as in RFC) had a black hole of £12m or whatever he says it is, giving the impression that the club is still losing money, despite the transfer money/saving on wages of highest paid players/parachute payments received, and that it is because the money has been taken from the RFC side of his business to prop up one of his struggling businesses. It's his money I suppose, so he can do as he likes with it and transfer between businesses as he so wishes, but don't take us for fools that RFC are haemorraging money when, in reality, we're ok and will have to do without a new striker or whatever because, at the moment, his priorities lie with another of his businesses.

He has taken no money from the club to prop up any of his other businesses and the accounts will show that. The sooner people stop trotting out this line the better. He is investing money elsewhere but it isn't money the club has made.

Wycombe - do you believe everything you read on a balance sheet? ......Clever accounting and anything is possible....just ask the yanks about that!

[Royal Lady]

I thought for the past couple of years we've been in debt? How else do you account for the figures bandied about by the club about how we have to cut our cloth, season upon season?

This season alone, we've had £7 million for gylfi, plus a small bit of transfer fees, plus saved wages on those players and we've spent, what, £100k? Yet we can't afford any more players? Surely, we didn't actually PLAN to sell Gylfi at the beginning of this season and had already allocated the money on the debts we have incurred?

[Wycombe Royal]

I think the point is, that we'd rather he didn't make out WE (as in RFC) had a black hole of £12m or whatever he says it is, giving the impression that the club is still losing money, despite the transfer money/saving on wages of highest paid players/parachute payments received, and that it is because the money has been taken from the RFC side of his business to prop up one of his struggling businesses. It's his money I suppose, so he can do as he likes with it and transfer between businesses as he so wishes, but don't take us for fools that RFC are haemorraging money when, in reality, we're ok and will have to do without a new striker or whatever because, at the moment, his priorities lie with another of his businesses.

He has taken no money from the club to prop up any of his other businesses and the accounts will show that. The sooner people stop trotting out this line the better. He is investing money elsewhere but it isn't money the club has made.

Wycombe - do you believe everything you read on a balance sheet? ......Clever accounting and anything is possible....just ask the yanks about that!

I'll forward your comments on to the club, I'm sure they would be very interested in accusations like that.

And in case you didn't know, I am an accountant, so I know quite a lot about this subject.

[Wycombe Royal]

I thought for the past couple of years we've been in debt? How else do you account for the figures bandied about by the club about how we have to cut our cloth, season upon season?

This season alone, we've had £7 million for gylfi, plus a small bit of transfer fees, plus saved wages on those players and we've spent, what, £100k? Yet we can't afford any more players? Surely, we didn't actually PLAN to sell Gylfi at the beginning of this season and had already allocated the money on the debts we have incurred?

That is the result of relegation. Revenues fall far quicker than costs due to the length of contracts. It is how you manage that mismatch and RFC did it very well. They attempted to hold on to their better players for one season after relegation in an attempt to bounce straight back and came very close. Then they had to start getting rid of them all.

We could always have taken the Sheffield Utd approach and kept the higher earners for longer and made even bigger losses.

I'm beginning to realise that you just don't understand finances at all and that maybe you just shouldn't bother either. Have a nice afternoon.