Quote ="soss"It is strange mate... Rugby league clubs qualify for exemption from VAT!!!!! customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPort ... P529_37394 As you will see no VAT charged by clubs on entry fees....maybe you should have known what you were signing? Just for the record VAT is a form of tax not a Governing Body...that would be the HM Revenue and Customs...'" Amatuer clubs are excempt on certain things Vat registered businesses are not I put VAT for your benefit , I thought HMRC would have confused you HTH

Quote ="soss"It is strange mate... Rugby league clubs qualify for exemption from VAT!!!!! customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPort ... P529_37394 As you will see no VAT charged by clubs on entry fees....maybe you should have known what you were signing? Just for the record VAT is a form of tax not a Governing Body...that would be the HM Revenue and Customs...'" Amatuer clubs are excempt on certain things Vat registered businesses are not I put VAT for your benefit , I thought HMRC would have confused you HTH

As a VAT registered company you only pay VAT on supplies/services with a VAT rating, if you read the regulations you will see that ALL gate receipts are VAT excempt. Please dont reply to this as your going to dig yourself deeper as you have no idea of what I do in this small world of yours.

I notice you have changed your post , maybe you should read things properly , including VAT on sports tickets

I have no interest what you do , but you are still wrong , VAT is chargeable on tickets for professional sporting events

I know one thing...I am man enough to stand corrected. Just re-read sec 4.

starbugs right on that, the link you posted to me seems to have no relevence to a pro sports club in terms of revenue. it refers to a sports club having to pay fees to enter compititions.

so if the rfl take money from all clubs to enter the challenge cup, then this money would be exempt from vat.

if you don't believe it, just watch how many teams advertise the fact season tickets bought before january can beat the vat rise.

Liquidity is the best indicator on anyones books.

Some players must be on awful Wages at Widnes to achieve that profit. Your gates have dropped around 1k this season !

Starbugs right about the ticket element too.

Starbug

I have to say I share your surprise about these accounts. I cannot say whether these have been audited or reviewed by a reputable accounting firm - does anyone know?

But, given that I am a Chartered Accountant myself, let me make a few comments:

1) Spending money on plasma screens and the stadium should have had little impact on last years results. These items should be capitalized on the balance sheet and the expense recognized over the next few years - so if anything you would expect this years results to be WORSE as you start to see the effect of the depreciation.

2) Clearing debt should have no effect on the profitability of the company. If you have a debt, you pay it off with cash, it has nothing to do with profit or loss, except that of course you are saving interest on the debt you have. Its simply a balance sheet issue.

3) $1M profit on $2.5M turnover is a 40% net profit rate - in this economic climate and in the sporting sector it is simply remarkable. Without looking at the accounts I cannot really start to assess how this was achieved, but based on the stats discussed in this thread, it doesn't seem to be coming through the turnstiles...whether it is sustainable remains to be seen..

mapleyther

The salary cap is £300K. If you believe the revenue figure of £2.5M, the players wages are a fairly minor expense overall.

The CEO of Widnes (until a week or so back) was financial controller at O'Connor and then Stobart. The results are AFAIK unaudited, but no doubt that will follow in due course and you'll be able to obtain a copy from company house. The new CEO (Julia Gaskell) worked on sponsorship management of the Commonwealth games and Liverpool 08, among other things. Suspect we're going to find a significant level of undisclosed sponsorship payments in the detailed accounts.

These are the figures for 2009, when Widnes averaged nearly 4000 and won the NRC. Not convinced the spending on the stadium would be accounted for as depreciating assets - the money spent on new seats is perhaps treated as a simple expense, given that the stadium is not owned by the club?

the club will own a lease to use the stadium, the expenses paid on the stadium would be treated as improvements to leasehold and capitalised and then depreciated over there useful economic life

Perhaps the club would have shown a profit in the 2009 figures, were it not for the restructuring, which took place?



As we are dealing with a tax year which runs from April 2009 – April 2010, this means that the majority of the figures will be made up from the 2009 season.

It was a light hearted joke and you all seem so jealous.How do you all know how much Stobarts,JST nutrition,Land Rover,Oneills,Tetleys,Riverside College,Halton Borough Council,Halton Buses,Halton Housing Trust, and viqi are putting in each month?Ste oconnor could be putting £10,000 each month towards viqi so it is all possible.Merchandise from 2 rail finals and gate receipts.So jog on and congratulate the next super league team.

I'm not surprised at all by those fantastic results. It's great for the fans of Widnes who must love reading a set of financial results like that. What the club fails to deliver on the pitch they certainly make up for it with a sexy balance sheet and P&L.

It's all good. It's all Super League. (Well, apart from the massive profit of course - that's very un-super leaguey)

absolutely correct griff.

And by the way, this has nothing to do with Widnes getting a franchise - they fully deserve it in my opinion...just not overly convinced by these figures..thats all....

if anyone can get hold of a copy of the accounts let me know..its a bit hard to get them from Canada.,..

Companies house shortly like Every business figures will be... Why lie and risk all the hard work done?

Widnes made a loss of £950k in the year ended 30th November 2008 on turnover of close to £1m. This was the first year of the new regime and included significant costs incurred in re-structuring many of the clubs activities. The expenditure (close to £2m) was funded by the £1m turnover and the remainder by money put in by SOC which in those accounts, was not included as turnover.

The results reported yesterday would be for the year ended 30th November 2009, when Widnes average crowd was still 3,900. In addition to this the club shop (and relationship with O'Niells) was fully functioning. The Dream ticket lottery had had a full year running and new sponsorships had been obtained. Costs were cut by the release of several head office staff (Mike Banks, Pat Cluskey etc) aswell as a reduction in first team costs.

It is entirely feasible that Widnes could have achieved a break-even/small profit position on ordinary trading in the twelve month period.

The headline results of £2.5 million "Turnover" and £1 million profit will almost certainly have been achieved by the inclusion in the Turnover of funds injected by SOC (in years one and two) previously carried as Directors loans but now written off as no longer requiring repayment. This would be an "extraordinary" item in the accounts and , though included as "income" in the accounts would not be included as "turnover". However in press releases and reports such as those we have seen in the last day or two, the term "turnover" will have been used disingenuously to "spin" the figures for License bid purposes.

I would suggest the accounts are not incorrect but that the reporting of them is purposefully designed to make the club look better for the forthcoming bid. Not unusual in these days of "Artists impressions" of new stadiums and 5,000 crowds for meaningless games against Batley Bulldogs!

The above post is pretty much what we have all been saying , let's hope some people calm down a bit now

i actually have a copy of the submitted accounts with me at the moment, and the related parties note is rather telling,

while theres not enough information to either prove or disprove whats written above, given the in theory material amount of 1 million pound being written off, i'd expect that to have been disclosed in order to give a "true and fair" view to anyone reading them. given the lack of disclosure i'd still conclude the press release is correct until concrete evidence to suggest overwise

Reply to ' trash ' not me

Starbug, to descibe your recent postings to be tedious would be an understatement greater than saying the Pope is slightly catholic. It's all well and good picking apart this one press release but to do it with the volume you have says the following. One, you can't claim it doesn't bother you or that you are quite the neutral in this matter. You've been posting about this every place there has been a post, and often. You haven't really added anything since the first post, just repeating the exact same speculation and suspicions you have. Two, you have about the same evidence as anyone else at this point. One press release. You are going over old ground and your initial ground is flimsy. Whether we made one million in profit is largely irrelevant anyway. We have hit the target required and also cleared our debts, debts which recently kept us in dire straits might I add. Anything over that is a bonus.

Stop moaning, stop repeating the same old guff and get over it. You have been attempting to douse a very positive financial statement ever since it has been released and like I said, TEDIOUS.

Chris

Sorry but I am with Starbug on this one! When Halifax came out with a comedy crowd figure - we questioned it. When Widnes come out with a surprising financial report - we question it.

It isn't going to effect the Franchise bid one way or another - as has been stated by other posters the most significant fact emerging here is that the club is debt free.

But if there is a significant difference between the actual accounts and the press release (i.e. reporting non-existent turnover) then that does no credit to the club in my book, and it should also be of concern to the fans of Widnes because what it tells me at least is that their "sustainable business plan" merely turns out to be continuing to rely on SOC to put his hand in his pocket and keep writing off director loans, rather than underlying strength of the "franchise".

A positive press release regarding profit and debt free status should be a concern?

I don't feel concerned.

Show me a single scrap of evidence to back up your accusations.

Heres something I posted on the VT:


It is good advice.

I, as a Widnes fan, will stand by the integrity of my club until it has been proven beyond doubt that there has been falsification of the accounts. Why the wouldn’t we stand by our club?

Why should we bow down to the conjecture of fans from a rival club?

anyways.....................the fact remains WE ARE SUPERLEAGUE! i for one cannot wait for big greg inglis wearing a widnes shirt and putting ryan bailey well and truley in his immature, tantrum throwing, cowardly place

well i can dream