1CarltonC
The FS August 2021 accounts have been submitted to Companies House
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01015675/fili...
Great to see the company increasing in profitability with increased sales in both UK and North America (page 19).
The tax credit (pages 9 and 22) is unusual due to a significant reduction in the estimated US tax provision from 2020 and the little UK Corporation Tax paid (due to losses brought forward).
The change in ownership is after the August year end, but is mentioned on page 29 as a sale for £10 million to the Employee Ownership Trust.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01015675/fili...
Great to see the company increasing in profitability with increased sales in both UK and North America (page 19).
The tax credit (pages 9 and 22) is unusual due to a significant reduction in the estimated US tax provision from 2020 and the little UK Corporation Tax paid (due to losses brought forward).
The change in ownership is after the August year end, but is mentioned on page 29 as a sale for £10 million to the Employee Ownership Trust.
2LondonLawyer
An excellent set of results. Hats off to the team there. It's been a long and painful turnaround journey to get the company back onto a sound financial footing.
3wcarter
>1 CarltonC:
Thank you for posting this information again. Very interesting to see how well the FS is going at present.
Thank you for posting this information again. Very interesting to see how well the FS is going at present.
6jsg1976
>5 Forthwith: probably because of the high markup on all the titles we buy…
(I didn’t see it in the accounts, but I’d be curious to know whether North America unit volume is growing as fast as revenues - 20% YOY is a pretty impressive growth rate)
(I didn’t see it in the accounts, but I’d be curious to know whether North America unit volume is growing as fast as revenues - 20% YOY is a pretty impressive growth rate)
7RickFlair
Change in ownership? What do we know about the change in ownership? Do we like this change?
9cronshaw
>8 NLNils: I hadn't heard about this, what fantastic news about the creation of an EOT. I'm very pleased for the staff at Folio. It's also good news that the Folio Society has become more profitable and thus more financially stable now. Bravo!
10ThisLifeIrl
I'm not that familiar with the contents of statutory accounts. Is it a requirement for companies to provide a breakdown of their turnover from territories outside the UK if this makes up a material amount?
11CobbsGhost
It's really strange to look through all these years and compare. Folio's turnover was much higher in prior years, i.e. spent more in 1998 than this year and with inflation that is a ridiculous thought. It looks like the company took a dive in 2007/2008.
Someone should really study all of these financial reports. One of the issues Folio had, I believe, was that they were producing too many selections for a while there. I think in some ways, they were having too much fun trying to return to the glory days. We need a spreadsheet!
Breakdown costs and production by year.
Someone should really study all of these financial reports. One of the issues Folio had, I believe, was that they were producing too many selections for a while there. I think in some ways, they were having too much fun trying to return to the glory days. We need a spreadsheet!
Breakdown costs and production by year.
12English-bookseller
There is nothing duller in this world than accountancy so let’s leave such soulless matters alone.
After all we have so many fascinating books to read - and so little time to read them.
After all we have so many fascinating books to read - and so little time to read them.
13cronshaw
>11 CobbsGhost: Folio had a far higher turnover years ago, but was often less profitable. Under the membership model, FS used to sell at a loss to attract members for the first year, relying on membership renewals in subsequent years to begin to turn a profit. Unfortunately, in latter years it appears that too many people joined only for the very generous member offer and didn't renew; renewal offers were never near as generous. Some customers reportedly joined multiple times using different names and addresses to benefit from the enticing joining offers, eroding Folio's profit margin further. It was a model that may have suited the genteel mid-20th century, but it didn't age well, or it didn't allow FS's accountants to age well.
Folio used to have far higher print runs too in the past, evidenced in both the heavily discounted regular sales of past years and a secondary market that used to boast a steady supply of cheaper copies of publications from only a few years prior. Although Folio's prices per volume, and presumably margin per volume, are higher now than they used to be (particularly considering that there are no longer joining or renewal offers), the print runs are notably shorter and publications since the mid 2010s have held their secondary market values far better than was previously the case.
Folio used to have far higher print runs too in the past, evidenced in both the heavily discounted regular sales of past years and a secondary market that used to boast a steady supply of cheaper copies of publications from only a few years prior. Although Folio's prices per volume, and presumably margin per volume, are higher now than they used to be (particularly considering that there are no longer joining or renewal offers), the print runs are notably shorter and publications since the mid 2010s have held their secondary market values far better than was previously the case.
14CobbsGhost
I wanted to take a pause here and paste the numbers in, because I haven't fully studied them. Folio made some major changes, undoubtedly in a few of the major upticks. But, barring some continual results, I daresay the profit of the last two years might be solely the upcharge in cost during the pandemic.
Anyway, here's a break in the search to simply get the numbers down. The missing number is derived from distribution, administrative and tax cost. (means negative)
YEAR- TURNOVER- COST/SALES- PROFIT
1994- 09,820,832 (2,559,756) 3,073
1995- 09,685,932 (2,536,826) 203,155
1996- 12,263,621 (2,744,970) 601,849
1997- 15,298,717 (3,538,963) 691,567
1998- 17,761,284 (4,083,178) 524,050
1999- 20,003,397 (4,763,179) 606,040
2000- 19,897,219 (4,643,072) 718,847
2001- 21,570,443 (5,134,731) 477,577
2002- 21,967,016 (5,253,019) 792,887
2003- 23,172,001 (5,733,181) 479,588
2004- 24,280,433 (5,921,415) 634,729
2005- 21,814,876 (5,114,744) 375,569
2006- 22,426,452 (5,593,297) 510,726
2007- 24,115,352 (7,214,553) (980,044)
2008- 30,603,866 (9,611,715) (1,951,155)
2009- 23,032,530 (7,184,583) 1,243,471
2010- 24,813,169 (6,424,635) 1,722,151
2011- 23,943,001 (6,189,848) 516,720
2012- 21,488,272 (5,370,712) (11,012)
2013- 19,294,269 (5,728,209) (2,757,515)
2014- 14,763,069 (5,152,487) 27,740
2015- 11,640,615 (4,316,407) (1,536,787)
2016- 10,321,394 (3,697,406) (357,980)
2017- 10,002,806 (4,029,162) *7,979,171
2018- 09,961,373 (3,349,030) (320,497)
2019- 10,229,735 (3,480,521) (213,242)
2020- 11,549,967 (3,714,252) 285,882
2021- 13,570,898 (4,180,729) 2,725,569
2022- 15,261,467 (4,887,286) 1,498,744
*Sold property for 11.3m - killed membership model
Anyway, here's a break in the search to simply get the numbers down. The missing number is derived from distribution, administrative and tax cost. (means negative)
YEAR- TURNOVER- COST/SALES- PROFIT
1994- 09,820,832 (2,559,756) 3,073
1995- 09,685,932 (2,536,826) 203,155
1996- 12,263,621 (2,744,970) 601,849
1997- 15,298,717 (3,538,963) 691,567
1998- 17,761,284 (4,083,178) 524,050
1999- 20,003,397 (4,763,179) 606,040
2000- 19,897,219 (4,643,072) 718,847
2001- 21,570,443 (5,134,731) 477,577
2002- 21,967,016 (5,253,019) 792,887
2003- 23,172,001 (5,733,181) 479,588
2004- 24,280,433 (5,921,415) 634,729
2005- 21,814,876 (5,114,744) 375,569
2006- 22,426,452 (5,593,297) 510,726
2007- 24,115,352 (7,214,553) (980,044)
2008- 30,603,866 (9,611,715) (1,951,155)
2009- 23,032,530 (7,184,583) 1,243,471
2010- 24,813,169 (6,424,635) 1,722,151
2011- 23,943,001 (6,189,848) 516,720
2012- 21,488,272 (5,370,712) (11,012)
2013- 19,294,269 (5,728,209) (2,757,515)
2014- 14,763,069 (5,152,487) 27,740
2015- 11,640,615 (4,316,407) (1,536,787)
2016- 10,321,394 (3,697,406) (357,980)
2017- 10,002,806 (4,029,162) *7,979,171
2018- 09,961,373 (3,349,030) (320,497)
2019- 10,229,735 (3,480,521) (213,242)
2020- 11,549,967 (3,714,252) 285,882
2021- 13,570,898 (4,180,729) 2,725,569
2022- 15,261,467 (4,887,286) 1,498,744
*Sold property for 11.3m - killed membership model
15English-bookseller
The Covid lock-downs were a busy time for online bookshops so no surprise that 2021 and some of 2022 saw record profits.
Those years also saw the move to selling some different sorts of books to some different sorts of buyers.
I assume The Folio Society will by now have some good evidence of the financial implications of the new business strategy. I imagine these will be positive, but energy and other prices in the UK have been sharply higher recently.
Those years also saw the move to selling some different sorts of books to some different sorts of buyers.
I assume The Folio Society will by now have some good evidence of the financial implications of the new business strategy. I imagine these will be positive, but energy and other prices in the UK have been sharply higher recently.
16Hamwick
>14 CobbsGhost: that is interesting, thanks. They certainly seemed to be having a few tough years from 2013, really up until Covid. Hopefully they can maintain making a profit now Covid and lockdowns are not a significant factor.
17CobbsGhost
>16 Hamwick:
There was a steady business model rolling, then something happened around 2006. It also seems like there's a sweet spot in the number of books published. I feel like Folio tried to bite a bit more off than it could chew in '05 & '06 and it continued for a while. Without researching the reason behind the catastrophe in 2013, I'd guess they gave away all they could for new members as mentioned in >13 cronshaw: and ran out of goodies from the excess printing from 05-12... Interestingly enough, I became a member then! They probably took an initial blow by discarding membership and my guess is they have a chance or sort of reset button here to regulate themselves and return to stability.
1994 - 34 books
1995 - 34 books
1996 - 36 books
1997 - 48 books
1998 - 53 books
1999 - 48 books
2000 - 51 books
2001 - 47 books
2002 - 43 books
2003 - 56 books
2004 - 52 books
2005 - 72 books
2006 - 72 books
2007 - 83 books
2008 - 110 books
2009 - 81 books
2010 - 70 books
2011 - 88 books
2012 - 73 books
2013 - 63 books
2015 - 64 books
2015 - 76 books
2016 - 66 books
2017 - 72 books
2018 - 69 books
2019 - 56 books
2020 - 50 books
2021 - 51 books
2022 - 54 books
There was a steady business model rolling, then something happened around 2006. It also seems like there's a sweet spot in the number of books published. I feel like Folio tried to bite a bit more off than it could chew in '05 & '06 and it continued for a while. Without researching the reason behind the catastrophe in 2013, I'd guess they gave away all they could for new members as mentioned in >13 cronshaw: and ran out of goodies from the excess printing from 05-12... Interestingly enough, I became a member then! They probably took an initial blow by discarding membership and my guess is they have a chance or sort of reset button here to regulate themselves and return to stability.
1994 - 34 books
1995 - 34 books
1996 - 36 books
1997 - 48 books
1998 - 53 books
1999 - 48 books
2000 - 51 books
2001 - 47 books
2002 - 43 books
2003 - 56 books
2004 - 52 books
2005 - 72 books
2006 - 72 books
2007 - 83 books
2008 - 110 books
2009 - 81 books
2010 - 70 books
2011 - 88 books
2012 - 73 books
2013 - 63 books
2015 - 64 books
2015 - 76 books
2016 - 66 books
2017 - 72 books
2018 - 69 books
2019 - 56 books
2020 - 50 books
2021 - 51 books
2022 - 54 books
