OK so we've not had a published AGM since 2011 and the links to those AGMs are now extinct.

All we know for sure is:

Less than 55% of revenue is spent on wages.

So what are the other costs?

For comparison there's not a lot of info around but in 2010 Manchester United's (obviously very different to Pools) percentage of operating costs were:

56% Players wages, 2% directors, 3% coaching staff, 10% other staff, 1% Man U TV, 12% matchday costs, fixed costs: 14%, other costs: 1% other costs. (Just for clarification this doesn't mean 56% of Man U's revenue goes on wages, these are purely for operating costs)

If *LESS* than 55% of our revenue is spent on wages per FFP rules... what are we spending significantly more than 35% of our revenue on for us to make a loss? We've got, matchday costs, coaching staff, directors, fixed costs (ground rent, heating etc)...

Nick Loughlin said on BBC Tees we're making £1.2 million loss a year...this was true in 2011 but is it true now? For this to be true our none wage costs need to be comparitably very high.... so what are we spending it on?

It's not a dig at IOR, it's a genuine question. One thing I would say towards IOR - why haven't we not had an AGM since 2011? The fans deserve to know what the finances of our club are like.

No we don't it IORs ( ask any IOR apologist) club they can do what they want.. And they do.

Your first mistake is quoting anything Nick Loughlin says as possibly being correct.

Remember the time Loughlin said we got away with liddlegate...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another thing to point out... according to Companies House we had 2 directors. Ken Hodcroft and Ian William Prescott.

Ian William Prescott is no longer a director as of 1st August 2014 so that just leaves Ken Hodcroft.

With hindsight, the introduction of the £100 season tickets seems to have backfired. It would appear that in order to subsidise the discounted tickets the budget for players wages was possibly reduced, which was reflected in the subsequent squads.

Given the disastrous sequence of results that have followed the cheap ticket promotion, (which I was 100% in support of btw) there was no way Pools could put tickets back to full price, and I honestly think it's the worst thing we could have done!

This in no way a dig at Russ, far from it. I thought it was a fantastic offer, admittedly a bit of a gamble, but ultimately, it hasn't worked.

I still think we made as much from the season tickets as we would have for full priced ones. It gave us inflated attendances when if it was pay on the day we'd have been down to 2000 or even less.

But it made a fantastic elite. The Ste has came on leaps and bounds.

And we've virtually killed off the floating fan.

I foolishly fancied yesterday's game at about 12ish, but at £25, no chance. I had a much better afternoon on greyfields anyway n it only cost me £2.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't have a link, but I've read Russ's article again and what he implies (by comparing Pools with clubs that are spending) is that there is no investment "i.e. non-recoverable loans or sponsorship" going into Pools. In the absence of any published accounts, who knows whether IOR are still putting money into helping with running costs, but not writing it off? Not that any of that is needed right at the minute with the income (paid over 18 months!) from the sale of Baldwin and James.

Incidentally, what is HUFC's legal status? If they are a company limited by guarantee they are obliged to file annual accounts with Companies House, and would be in deep shit by now if they haven't filed any since 2011.

They have an imminent filing due, but they will give little away should you obtain a copy. Like getting a letter off your ex wife a few months after a divorce telling you why, will will be light on detail and too late and you already know the headline.

Has copies and you are correct.

Like I said only interesting part is one of the two directors has left in August.