Flybe sponsorship?

rightwing

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
5,848
Location
Plymouth
For ECFC I would like to think that we could produce the full detailed accounts, but not publish them via Companies House, and instead have these reported internally to the club and trust board, and thus relevant information from those detailed accounts could be shared with the wider trust membership via the Trust AGM.

I do agree that as a local brand which is nationally recognised (and perhaps also internationally to a degree), Flybe is a great sponsor for us to have on board, and also that naming rights for the new stand should be a sensible point for the club to consider improving or negotiating the deal.
Full accounts have always be shown to the Trust Board BUT then collected up immediately after the meeting (often in the past copies were numbered) to ensure that Trustees don't spread some of the detail.

Flybe have stated in the past that they are not interested in a naming rights deal. They did have one with Southampton for a short period of time but quickly opted out of it.

Our deal with Flybe varies according to which league we're in and the exposure from cup runs. I think that this operates off a base figure of about £100k p.a.
 

Edward

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Messages
736
Any business that meets two of the following three criteria is entitled to publish abbreviated accounts:
• a turnover of £6.5 million or less
• £3.26 million or less on its balance sheet
• 50 employees or less

Abbreviated accounts merely require a copy of the balance sheet. ECFC has been submitting abbreviated accounts to Companies House: as such, the club is meeting its statutory obligations. Of course, it could choose to release more detail (see below) although this is rarely done until it becomes a requirement.

Larger companies (which do not meet the above criteria) are required to publish full accounts: this would include a copy of the profit and loss account. That said, a profit and loss account would not provide huge detail and wouldn’t ordinarily isolate the revenue linked to an individual sponsorship deal.

Away from the public domain, most detail should be contained in the monthly management accounts which should be reviewed by the Trust Board at each and every meeting. I suspect this happens in the confidential part: it certainly should take place. And every Trustee should be able to understand what is presented otherwise it is hard to see how they can perform their role.

Any accounting software package would allow for any level of detail to be presented in the monthly management accounts and it would be for the Trust Board to determine what they needed to see. As the major shareholder, I cannot see that the club would have any basis for refusing to provide the information although they might reasonably request that some remain confidential.

And, I suppose, it is possible that some of the commercial partners might impose a confidentiality clause so precise details cannot emerge. There are plenty of companies who sponsor sports teams on the whim of a senior executive even when there is a less than compelling commercial case. They may wish to shield their own shareholders from such largesse.
 

Colesman Ballz

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 28, 2014
Messages
7,047
I believe the original deal was arranged by the lady employed by R and L ... Not popular I'm sure, but a reality....
They were brought "on board" by a member of the Trust who had business links with them , in the summer of 2003 following R & L's exit. Annie Bassett who had been appointed by the terrible twosome remained in her position for some months after their departure and I believe negotiated the initial contract. Think the first year it was worth about £40k, but was built upon very successfully over the next few seasons to reach six figures. It subsequently was very nearly scuppered when the then Commercial Director took over negotiations, and started publicly boasting of the deal he had negiotiated ! To say that they were not amused when this emerged in the Echo is a massive understatement. Especially when it appeared in advance of the planned agreed Media announcement date. It took a great deal of effort from other key figures to smooth things over.
 

Antony Moxey

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
40,334
Location
Exmuff
They were brought "on board" by a member of the Trust who had business links with them , in the summer of 2003 following R & L's exit. Annie Bassett who had been appointed by the terrible twosome remained in her position for some months after their departure and I believe negotiated the initial contract. Think the first year it was worth about £40k, but was built upon very successfully over the next few seasons to reach six figures. It subsequently was very nearly scuppered when the then Commercial Director took over negotiations, and started publicly boasting of the deal he had negiotiated ! To say that they were not amused when this emerged in the Echo is a massive understatement. Especially when it appeared in advance of the planned agreed Media announcement date. It took a great deal of effort from other key figures to smooth things over.
'Six figures' is such a cop out - it could be £100,000, it could be ten times that at £999,999.
 

Colesman Ballz

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 28, 2014
Messages
7,047
'Six figures' is such a cop out - it could be £100,000, it could be ten times that at £999,999.
If you had managed to read or even quote my post correctly, it read TO REACH six figures. Did I say approach seven figures ? You always show a thirst for the knowledge, but your reaction completely removes any incentives for anybody to provide you with any further facts whatsoever ! (facepalm)
 
Top