Well quite clearly they have done something about it, because if they had had negative cashflow of £2.6M in the last twelve months they wouldn't still be running!
Publishing actual figures for y/e 29/2/24 would have to wait for the audit, surely?
Publishing the definitive figures would. But no reason that figures can't be released in advance, as long as it is made clear that they are draft. Many companies issue profit warnings in advance.
Writing this as a senior finance manager in a university.
I think you misunderstand how the finances of heritage railways work. Whilst the arrangements of the companies differ with a couple of exceptions they are all not for profit organisations. My railway made a loss in 2022, a smaller loss in 2023 as an adjustment and a recovery from the pandemic continues. Our loss in the 2023 season was actually less that the subsequent 2024 reduction in our electricity bills as energy costs have fallen. You generally target to make a small surplus but there are unforeseen unforeseens that you cant allow for. You have to use reserves or borrowing to cover them.
The auditors report wasn't that extraordinary. It accepted the directors decision that the NYMR is a going concern but observed that if things carried on as they were in the aftermath of the pandemic the railway would not be sustainable. That would hardly come as surprise to many other heritage railways and to other businesses in the hospitality sector. The particular problem for heritage railways is that ever more intrusive regulation imposes additional cost burdens coupled with costs such as fuel and utility charges skyrocketing. Fare income and secondary spend has increased considerably as the result of initiatives that have been taken but those increases were way outstripped by rising costs. In common with a number of other heritage railways the NYMR has to adapt its business model. The concept of a member/volunteer reliant operation sustained by the paying public no longer works and those days are not coming back. Different railways are adopting different survival models but the one thing that won't succeed is trusting that what worked in the past must work in the future. As far as railway operations go break even is likely to be a good result. The challenge will be what other activities and sources of income can be realised.
Only NYMR Class 25 D7628 is Whitby registered.
Thank you for the thorough response, however do you about the 26 that is listed on the NYMR website as borrowed from the Bo’ness and Kinniel railway?
The NYMR website loco information was last updated in 2019 !!
Well that’s useful of them! Thanks for letting me know, and for being more accurate than their own website
The Ffestiniog and Severn Valley both reduced their timetables to reduce costs in response to the fall in passenger numbers - but they have the benefit of being self contained operations.
RTT shows the usual 5 Mon-Thur in the summer holidays
A sensible overview - much more measured than the media commentary and some posters here.
If a charity limited by guarantee, such as the NYMR, becomes insolvent an independent administrator would normally be appolnted to recover as much money as possible for its creditors with any secured creditors like a lending bank having priority. The nature of a heritage railway business means its unlikely that the administrator could find a buyer willing to pay enough to take it over at a price that would satisfy the remaining creditors so the assets would probably be sold to raise as much for creditors as possible and the company liquidated. The members of a company limited by guarantee are each liable in that event to contribute the amount specified in the company's articles ( usually £1). In practice dependence on non transferable railway essentials like statutory permission to operate means there would be little prospect of a new entity taking over even assuming that enough assets remained for viable operation. In accordance with charity law any assets after payment of creditors would have to be transferred to another charity with similar public benefit purposes.
I doubt it loses them much money really. many people wont be in a position to visit more than once or twice a year. If you are not local how often will you drive over to Grosmont or Pickering? It is hard "just to be in the area" !
But not everyone travelling will have a pass. I will be up at Easter and my mum ( who IS one of the local people who WILL cane a free pass!) will want to go but I will be paying again. If we take the kids that will be another adult and child pass. If my partner comes that's 4. of those, 2 will be used again in the 12 month window.
if receivers are appointed then assets ( locos, coaches, track equipment , machine tools, shop stock etc etc) are sold to meet outstanding liabilities. Whatever raises the most cash for the least effort. Remember what happened at Llangollen? The company directors are shown the door and staff locked out and believe you me, it's not very nice. If what's left of the business cannot be sold as a going concern then it's sold off in bits to make some recompense to staff and shareholders after the receivers have taken a hefty wedge in fees. However, I don't think for one minute that the NYMR is heading down this road. If this year's trading is not good then unpleasant decisions will have to be made but not involving turning it into a cycleway, yet!
