Page 1 of 1
Sports network interim profits down....
Posted: 29 Sep 2006, 15:39
by beagleboy
to just £40,000.
no wonder boxingchat is bitter about Hatton
maybe we'll see some job cuts
Re: Sports network interim profits down....
Posted: 29 Sep 2006, 16:34
by DG.
beagleboy wrote:to just £40,000.
no wonder boxingchat is bitter about Hatton
maybe we'll see some job cuts
£40,000,00?.
Do not believe that.
£40K profitt means that Fwank may as well get a 9-5!
Source?.
Posted: 29 Sep 2006, 17:58
by Old bones Ian
LONDON (AFX) - Sports Network first half profits were down at 40,000 stg
from 216,000 in 2005.
Revenues were slightly down at 6,516 stg, from 6,824 stg a year earlier.
Chairman David Elstein blamed "higher overheads, as they now include fees
paid by the Company to allegedly that were previously paid directly by
broadcasters, and exceptional legal costs," for the slight downturn in profits.
He said the group would "continue to look at other ways of diversifying (our)
earnings."
Re: Sports network interim profits down....
Posted: 29 Sep 2006, 18:18
by jamesmcdonnell
DG. wrote:beagleboy wrote:to just £40,000.
no wonder boxingchat is bitter about Hatton
maybe we'll see some job cuts
£40,000,00?.
Do not believe that.
£40K profitt means that Fwank may as well get a 9-5!
Source?.
That's SN, not Warren, Warren is going to ensure he is paid whatever the company profits.
Posted: 29 Sep 2006, 18:21
by Max Molyneux
Thats 2005, 2006 is surely different.
Posted: 29 Sep 2006, 19:52
by leforge
if someone post link to result i will anlayse, qualified accountant who deals mainly with quoted companies. How main shares does FW own i bet he is majority shareholder
Re: Sports network interim profits down....
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 05:18
by Phenomenal-Nutrition
DG. wrote:beagleboy wrote:to just £40,000.
no wonder boxingchat is bitter about Hatton
maybe we'll see some job cuts
£40,000,00?.
Do not believe that.
£40K profitt means that Fwank may as well get a 9-5!
Source?.
Thats after Franks £10m salary mate
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 05:37
by Old bones Ian
leforge wrote:if someone post link to result i will anlayse, qualified accountant who deals mainly with quoted companies. How main shares does FW own i bet he is majority shareholder
This might help
http://www.hemscott.com/news/rna/item.d ... 3599696906
http://www.hemscott.com/companies/compa ... anyId=3976
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 05:41
by leforge
Cheers will look at later, just from glancing Sky paid him a fee by the looks of it.
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 06:58
by josh fg
Anything to do with the big shows which went down the shitter cos of Joe C
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 07:28
by leforge
They not promoting as many fights as before. I notice no fights due for November at the moment.
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 08:59
by E
leforge wrote:if someone post link to result i will anlayse, qualified accountant who deals mainly with quoted companies. How main shares does FW own i bet he is majority shareholder
According to the Sun City section (yes there really is one) FW is a 68% shareholder.
Can't see on the Hemscott report the salaries (I thought CEO's had to have their salies detailed on company reports.) Would be very interested to know.
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 09:35
by KO Artist
leforge wrote:if someone post link to result i will anlayse, qualified accountant who deals mainly with quoted companies. How main shares does FW own i bet he is majority shareholder
Warren owns about 73%. The increase in legal costs relate mainly to the Hatton proceedings.
Also SN pay Warrens fees as boxing consultant, wheras SKy paid these in the past.
This may be an indication why SN stopped legal action against Hatton. I reckon they have spent over £200k on legal fees.
If they went the whole way, the legal costs would have turned a deficit for the half year.
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 09:35
by E
FOund this, though it is from 2000:
As a partner Mr Warren was paid an annual
salary of £500,000 and enjoyed 85 per cent of the profits.
In addition he received a £1 million-a-year consultancy
fee from BSkyB.
A £1M a year 'consultancy' fee...? What to tell SKY to televise all his shows? Weird....
Posted: 30 Sep 2006, 09:47
by KO Artist
E wrote:FOund this, though it is from 2000:
As a partner Mr Warren was paid an annual
salary of £500,000 and enjoyed 85 per cent of the profits.
In addition he received a £1 million-a-year consultancy
fee from BSkyB.
A £1M a year 'consultancy' fee...? What to tell SKY to televise all his shows? Weird....
£500,000 is a massive salary for a company with such a low capitalisation. Particularly when Warren owns over 70%. If the company was making a significant amount he could live of the divi and take no salary.
I know of property companies (the sector where I am) where the chairman of companies with £150m capitalisation, take a salary of just £120k, or no salary and just dividends.
It seems that the excercise he is doing is getting as much money out as quickly as possible.