As far as I can see accounts for 2006 showed wages consisting of ±£500K and consultancy fees of ±£120K and a note that no one person earned more than £50,000 in that year. The hangarage was £222,000, a fair chunk of change from the budget. The annual return for 2007 is overdue and 195 days late and the accounts for 2007 were submitted 152 days late.....
Without wishing to be pedantic, seeing as how this
is a charitable company wholly supported and financed by contributions, both directly and indirectly through The Lottery Commission, would it not be best practice to have a crystal clear view of the financial situation for those who are financing this emotive hunk of metal ?
I'm not at all clear as to why there seems to be an internal culture of 'need to know' and woefully innefective public relations. The more those who would support feel included, rather than excluded, the more they would be inclined to continue their support. The direct contributions are sourced from people's discretionary spending and they might think twice about where they spend it if things don't change. There are many who want to keep the Vulcan flying, it would be wise to include them.
regards
SHJ