ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

[Paul Waine]

No it is not - it is based on the fact that the embargo remains in place

The club have said they have been in dialogue with the EFL for months and I have no reason to believe why this has not continued.



If the club are only just able to put this together then we really should question the way they are managing things

and yes we should find out in time - it still doesn't justify the delays - even last year the information arrived at the PL on March 1st, though the Accounts were actually signed off om April 28th

I'm suggesting that promotion gained on 7th April is the reason why the club needs a little longer to finalise everything - and 3 weeks after promotion was gained is not a long time to ensure all these things are done correctly - and last year's accounts are completed.

[Nori1958]

Chester......the next time you're bored go for a walk, or a drink,anything to keep you away from the keyboard

[Chester Perry]

I'm suggesting that promotion gained on 7th April is the reason why the club needs a little longer to finalise everything - and 3 weeks after promotion was gained is not a long time to ensure all these things are done correctly - and last year's accounts are completed.

and I am saying that it is unreasonable to suggest that such information was not known prior to March 1st of this year it should have formed part of a variation of assessment/estimate for the current year accounts.

the benefit of early promotion for observers is that the costs should be indicated in post event date notes in the 2021/22 accounts given the likely sign off date

[Quickenthetempo]

Chester......the next time you're bored go for a walk, or a drink,anything to keep you away from the keyboard

Just keep off the thread if you don't like it.

And don't post to bump it up if you don't want others to read it.

[ClaretInLeeds]

Chester......the next time you're bored go for a walk, or a drink,anything to keep you away from the keyboard

The irony of this dinosaur who has no life commenting on what someone else should do!

[dsr]

I'm suggesting that promotion gained on 7th April is the reason why the club needs a little longer to finalise everything - and 3 weeks after promotion was gained is not a long time to ensure all these things are done correctly - and last year's accounts are completed.

Promotion is irrelevant. It is totally irrelevant ot the year end July 2022 accounts, obviously, and it is also irrelevant for the purpose of the estimated 2022-23 accounts due to be filed (after approval by the auditors) by March 2023. The FL know that 3 of the 24 clubs will get promoted, and they know that no-one knows which ones. Besides, promotion bonuses aren't relevant for financial fair play until the following year when the income comes in (and they wouldn't be put in the accounts until next year if the accounting standards boards weren't filled with jobsworths who want to change things just so it looks like they are doing a relevant job. But that's an accountancy rant, nothing to do with football.)

[Nori1958]

Just keep off the thread if you don't like it.

And don't post to bump it up if you don't want others to read it.

I don't think posting 4 minutes after the previous post can be classed as " bumping"

If the only posters allowed to comment are those that agree with what is being said, it would lead to a very one sided discussion, which is perhaps want you want.

[123EasyasBFC]

Hell of a lot of waffle on this thread without any substance, when we get to May at the end of next week I’m sure the EFL will update one way or another until then everything being said on here is hearsay

[Duffer_]

If the only posters allowed to comment are those that agree with what is being said, it would lead to a very one sided discussion, which is perhaps want you want.

Whereas you seem to want no discussion. 'Stop speculating, wait and see' appears to be the extent of your "contribution".

[Nori1958]

Whereas you seem to want no discussion. 'Stop speculating, wait and see' appears to be the extent of your "contribution".

What I said was around certain posts that were just guessing, and suggested they wait for the official version

There are other posters, who are better informed, less biased, whose posts and responses I enjoy reading, I tend not to reply to those posts as they are far more educated in the subject matter than I am.

[boyyanno]

What I said was around certain posts that were just guessing, and suggested they wait for the official version

There are other posters, who are better informed, less biased, whose posts and responses I enjoy reading, I tend not to reply to those posts as they are far more educated in the subject matter than I am.

If you think there's a bias then take it into consideration? You know that thing most educated people do...

Having a "bias" doesn't make the information meaningless. You're just having a pop at Chester for no reason.

[Foshiznik]

If you don't think the official version is going to be full of smoke and mirrors that those of us uneducated in this field of expertise won't be able to see through then it would make sense arguing those who do understand shouldn't speculate, but that's not how the world works. Unfortunately we can't take the official line as factual and transparent, particularly in business and finances involving people who's first priority isn't the football club over their personal fortune.

As someone who doesn't have a clue how these sort of things work, i am eternally grateful for posters like Chester spending so much time explaining this.

[Nori1958]

If you think there's a bias then take it into consideration? You know that thing most educated people do...

Having a "bias" doesn't make the information meaningless. You're just having a pop at Chester for no reason.

So, I wasn't the first poster to mention the length of the post that prompted the initial response, but never mind, you think it's having a pop...I call it disagreeing, which is what we can all do, as you have shown.

[aggi]

...

You note that EFL requires estimated accounts for the current year, i.e. for the accounting period from 1st August 2022 to 31st July 2023. I wouldn't expect this current year estimate to be completed until the accounts for the period up to 31st July 2022 have also been completed. The end point for the 31st July 2022 accounts is the starting point for the 31st July 2023 estimated accounts.

...

If we still don't have materially correct finalised opening balances for 1 August 22 then you've got to wonder what is in the accounts that is so contentious.

[Big Vinny K]

The change of auditors is the reported reason for the delay.
But the question is really is why has the change of auditors delayed this ?
If the accounts were straight forward and there was little or nothing to query or substantiate or obtain further detail on then not really sure why it would cause such a delay.
And yes I am ‘guessing’ here but I’ve been involved in changing auditors for large organisations and some happen quickly and smoothly and some don’t and the latter is because of the queries, issues etc

[Paul Waine]

If we still don't have materially correct finalised opening balances for 1 August 22 then you've got to wonder what is in the accounts that is so contentious.

I'm suggesting that the auditor hadn't signed off the accounts as at 31st July 2022 - and that for the purpose of submitting estimates for the current period to 31st July 2023 the EFL would want the whole package.

As the Championship season kicked-off before the end of July it would be interesting to see how the club has handled the first game of the 2022/23 season being part of the accounts for the period ended 31st July 2022. How much of revenue and expenses for the new season would become part of the accounts for 1-Aug-2021 to 31-Jul-2022?

[Paul Waine]

Promotion is irrelevant. It is totally irrelevant ot the year end July 2022 accounts, obviously, and it is also irrelevant for the purpose of the estimated 2022-23 accounts due to be filed (after approval by the auditors) by March 2023. The FL know that 3 of the 24 clubs will get promoted, and they know that no-one knows which ones. Besides, promotion bonuses aren't relevant for financial fair play until the following year when the income comes in (and they wouldn't be put in the accounts until next year if the accounting standards boards weren't filled with jobsworths who want to change things just so it looks like they are doing a relevant job. But that's an accountancy rant, nothing to do with football.)

Hi dsr, no promotion isn't irrelevant. Vincent Kompany, his coaching staff and the players have gained promotion this season. They have earned bonuses as a result. These bonuses are part of the accounts for the period ended 31st July 2023. Ashley Barnes, as an example, has earned is bonus for this season and he will receive his bonus. He won't forgo the bonus if, as he has announced, he won't be with the club next season.

All the stuff you quote about 3 of the 24 clubs being promoted is irrelevant. No club can submit their estimates and say they will pay bonuses or anything esle by arranging a whip round or gofundme collection from the other 23 clubs. Every club and the finances of every club are separate.

The accounting concept of matching income with expenses, often called the accruals basis, is perhaps the foundation of all accounting. Many of the accounting standards are written to reinforce and restate this principle when "creative types" seek to stray away from it.

[Paul Waine]

and I am saying that it is unreasonable to suggest that such information was not known prior to March 1st of this year it should have formed part of a variation of assessment/estimate for the current year accounts.

the benefit of early promotion for observers is that the costs should be indicated in post event date notes in the 2021/22 accounts given the likely sign off date

It will be interesting to how much detail is included re this season. If the accounts are signed off by end of April the club will still have a game to play on 8th May. I wouldn't expect the accounting note "events after the balance sheet date" to include a figure for how much has been spent on wages and salaries since 1st August 2022. Promotion bonuses won't be payable until the end of the season. I'd expect them to be paid in June. I guess we can take a look at what has happened in previous years accounts.

[dsr]

Hi dsr, no promotion isn't irrelevant. Vincent Kompany, his coaching staff and the players have gained promotion this season. They have earned bonuses as a result. These bonuses are part of the accounts for the period ended 31st July 2023. Ashley Barnes, as an example, has earned is bonus for this season and he will receive his bonus. He won't forgo the bonus if, as he has announced, he won't be with the club next season.

All the stuff you quote about 3 of the 24 clubs being promoted is irrelevant. No club can submit their estimates and say they will pay bonuses or anything esle by arranging a whip round or gofundme collection from the other 23 clubs. Every club and the finances of every club are separate.

The accounting concept of matching income with expenses, often called the accruals basis, is perhaps the foundation of all accounting. Many of the accounting standards are written to reinforce and restate this principle when "creative types" seek to stray away from it.

Promotion is irrelevant for the purposes of preparation of estimated accounts for 2022-23. Those estimated accounts are due to be submitted in March 2023 and no club is expected to put the costs of promotion into those estimates. Ashley Barnes' bonus will not be on those estimates and wouldn't have been expected to be on the estimates if they were on time.

It's also irrelevant because for fair play purposes, the promotion bonus costs aren't part of this year's expenses.

As for the accruals basis, matching income with expenses, it is no longer the basis of accounting. Under the old accruals basis, the players have earned bonuses because of the income they have generated that comes in next year; a promotion bonus expense would be charged in next year's accounts to offset the promotion bonus income. Now, the powers that be have decreed that if someone earns a big bonus this year that generates profits next year, it is correct to show the big cost this year and create a loss. Under accounting rules, a club that wins the play-off final has a worse year financially than if they had lost it. It's a nonsense.

[Chester Perry]

If the only posters allowed to comment are those that agree with what is being said, it would lead to a very one sided discussion...

Completely agree with this

As I have posted several times before, overlaying nuanced and opposing views is the best way to achieve not only a deeper and broader understanding of the topic under discussion but also empathy for other positions. In a better world it would lead to greater tolerance.

[dsr]

I'm suggesting that the auditor hadn't signed off the accounts as at 31st July 2022 - and that for the purpose of submitting estimates for the current period to 31st July 2023 the EFL would want the whole package.

As the Championship season kicked-off before the end of July it would be interesting to see how the club has handled the first game of the 2022/23 season being part of the accounts for the period ended 31st July 2022. How much of revenue and expenses for the new season would become part of the accounts for 1-Aug-2021 to 31-Jul-2022?

What they could do is prepare the accounts to any date within a week of 31st July (say 25th July, ie. before the new season) without officially changing the company accounting date.

Or they could officially change the accounting date to 30th July and (assuming they do it before the end of this month) gain an extra 3 months from Companies house for filing the accounts. A strange loophole that they ought to have closed years ago. Not that the £100 late filing penalty is of any great relevance.

[Chester Perry]

It will be interesting to how much detail is included re this season. If the accounts are signed off by end of April the club will still have a game to play on 8th May. I wouldn't expect the accounting note "events after the balance sheet date" to include a figure for how much has been spent on wages and salaries since 1st August 2022. Promotion bonuses won't be payable until the end of the season. I'd expect them to be paid in June. I guess we can take a look at what has happened in previous years accounts.

I too expect bonuses to be paid in June along with the conditional transfer payments triggered by the promotion. The reason I expressed hope that the costs of promotion would be included in the post date events is that they are exceptional costs written into contracts (which is also why they should have been long known and easy to include in estimates of this years accounts) which have been triggered by a known promotion.

I also believe dsr is correct about promotion bonuses not figuring in the Profit and Sustainability calculations

[Paul Waine]

I too expect bonuses to be paid in June along with the conditional transfer payments triggered by the promotion. The reason I expressed hope that the costs of promotion would be included in the post date events is that they are exceptional costs written into contracts (which is also why they should have been long known and easy to include in estimates of this years accounts) which have been triggered by a known promotion.

I also believe dsr is correct about promotion bonuses not figuring in the Profit and Sustainability calculations

I'm pretty sure the club achieved promotion on Friday 7th April. I've prepared a lot of "what if..." estimates and budget variations through my time as an accountant. Yes, all sorts of contingency figures could be prepared. However, I doubt the EFL is interested in or would accept these types of provisional figures. Don't the rules say that the estimates for the current accounting period should be prepared on the same basis as the audited accounts for the previous accounting period. I don't think this is the same Profit and Sustainability calculations.

[Quickenthetempo]

I don't think posting 4 minutes after the previous post can be classed as " bumping"

If the only posters allowed to comment are those that agree with what is being said, it would lead to a very one sided discussion, which is perhaps want you want.

Not at all. I would love to see you join in with the topic discussion.

Just not any posts, telling one of the main contributers to stay away from his keyboard.

[dsr]

the benefit of early promotion for observers is that the costs should be indicated in post event date notes in the 2021/22 accounts given the likely sign off date

They won't, except perhaps by the vaguest of notes. Post-date events that affect the accounts are only those events that affect the position at the time of the balance sheet date. Promotion in April 2023 does not affect the position as at July 2022.

[Nori1958]

Not at all. I would love to see you join in with the topic discussion.

Just not any posts, telling one of the main contributers to stay away from his keyboard.

You did spot the laughing emoji, didn't you? As already stated I wasn't the first to mention the length of the post in question.
The poster in question doesn't seemed to have been offended by the post, just others getting offended on his behalf ..

[Paul Waine]

The club's accounts for 1st July 2015 to 30th June 2016 - the last time the club was in the Championship - reported Promotion costs, including additional payroll costs of £13 million. These accounts were signed by the Board and signed by Auditors (Cassons at that time) on 20th December 2016. They were filed at Companies House on 5th April 2017. (Don't forget year end was changed to 31st July in 2020 when the season was extended by lockdown).

The accounts for the previous season, 2014/2015 were signed by Board and Auditors on 15th December 2015. Of course, there was no discussion that the club may (or may not) gain promotion in the current season.

[dsr]

The club's accounts for 1st July 2015 to 30th June 2016 - the last time the club was in the Championship - reported Promotion costs, including additional payroll costs of £13 million. These accounts were signed by the Board and signed by Auditors (Cassons at that time) on 20th December 2016. They were filed at Companies House on 5th April 2017. (Don't forget year end was changed to 31st July in 2020 when the season was extended by lockdown).

The accounts for the previous season, 2014/2015 were signed by Board and Auditors on 15th December 2015. Of course, there was no discussion that the club may (or may not) gain promotion in the current season.

The accounts for 2015-16 included the promotion costs for 2015-16. The accounts for 2022-23 will include the promotion costs for 2022-23. The accounts for 2021-22 will not include any promotion costs for 2022-23 and I would be surprised if they make any report at all on what happens in 2022-23.

The effect of post balance sheet events is very limited. If your year end is 31st July and your factory burns down on 1st August, the figures for year end 31st July won't be affected unless the building was on fire before midnight (though there will be an extensive note).

[boyyanno]

You did spot the laughing emoji, didn't you? As already stated I wasn't the first to mention the length of the post in question.
The poster in question doesn't seemed to have been offended by the post, just others getting offended on his behalf ..

Your first post was actually this: "I've said it before...guessing, whether or not it's informed or not, does not help, it's best just to wait for official news"

No one is getting offended on Chester's behalf, it's just that some people appreciate his contributions to this thread. It would be far more interesting if you actually offered an opinion on the subject instead of just taking the attitude that his posts "do not help".

[Nori1958]

Your first post was actually this: "I've said it before...guessing, whether or not it's informed or not, does not help, it's best just to wait for official news"

No one is getting offended on Chester's behalf, it's just that some people appreciate his contributions to this thread. It would be far more interesting if you actually offered an opinion on the subject instead of just taking the attitude that his posts "do not help".

Ok, thanks I'll take your instructions on board

[Big Vinny K]

We seem to get this every few months where someone with little or no understanding of finance comes on this thread and decides to have a dig at CP or a dig at the detailed financial content of the thread.
Bit weird really - just stay off the thread if you don’t understand it or have no interest in the finances.

[Nori1958]

We seem to get this every few months where someone with little or no understanding of finance comes on this thread and decides to have a dig at CP or a dig at the detailed financial content of the thread.
Bit weird really - just stay off the thread if you don’t understand it or have no interest in the finances.

I might not understand the finer financial details, which is why I don't comment on it
I can however see when someone is guessing, or assuming what may or may not happen, which in my opinion doesn't help.
I enjoy reading the factual posts which explain how the systems work, without making any judgement one way or the other.

[arise_sir_charge]

I can only speak for myself but I looked at the post thinking that maybe it was an update about the transfer embargo.

It wasn’t, it was more speculation and conjecture.

I don’t mind Chester’s posts, my only concern is that they tend to come down on the side of worst case scenario and that some people take them as fact rather than what they are.

I try to make sure that people are aware it’s not fact by posting things n response.

[Big Vinny K]

I don’t think CP or other posters post things as facts unless they are facts,
One of the reasons why some of the posts are long on this thread is CP and others are providing rationale and evidence to support their views.
Some of this evidence can be lengthy and quite technical to those without this background and for whatever reason this seems to wind up some posters who then invariably reference CP as being “negative” because he is raising concerns. Yet they don’t tend to criticise Paul W for example for one of his lengthy posts because he is being more positive.

At the end of the day this Paul W and CP do disagree on a few things but it’s done very respectfully and that’s a trait that is missing on of this message board on most other threads. Personally I don’t think we need those kind of digs on this thread either.

The debate about the takeover and our finances in general is a pretty mild one really when you see some of the other threads on this board. It’s informative too for those like me who have always taken an interest in the finances of the club.

There is tendency for some fans to confuse raising genuine concerns with tearing into the club. CP doesn’t do that ever and is very measured and like I say tends to back every viewpoint up. I still share some of his concerns too.

None of this means we don’t love VK or this fantastic season or think Alan Pace has not made anything other than an inspired appointment in VK.

As for waiting for the facts and not speculating or making assumptions - really ? 99% of the posts on this message board would be completely wiped out if we stuck to that !

[aggi]

I'm suggesting that the auditor hadn't signed off the accounts as at 31st July 2022 - and that for the purpose of submitting estimates for the current period to 31st July 2023 the EFL would want the whole package.

As the Championship season kicked-off before the end of July it would be interesting to see how the club has handled the first game of the 2022/23 season being part of the accounts for the period ended 31st July 2022. How much of revenue and expenses for the new season would become part of the accounts for 1-Aug-2021 to 31-Jul-2022?

Other clubs (including Burnley in prior years) have managed OK to file accounts with the league even if audited accounts for the prior year aren't signed off. You'd hope that after four months (and a couple of weeks before the statutory deadline) an auditor would be pretty comfortable on the opening figures to allow a non-statutory set of estimates to be produced (and, if not, going back to my original point you've got to wonder what is so contentious).

[Chester Perry]

I can only speak for myself but I looked at the post thinking that maybe it was an update about the transfer embargo.

It wasn’t, it was more speculation and conjecture.

I don’t mind Chester’s posts, my only concern is that they tend to come down on the side of worst case scenario and that some people take them as fact rather than what they are.

I try to make sure that people are aware it’s not fact by posting things n response.

Speculation - not really in the post we are talking about.
Conjecture - possibly, though as always I have laid out the path of reasoning and supplied supporting information so that I (as an acknowledged amateur in these matters) can be corrected where appropriate by those with a professional experience and skillset.

Sometimes the combination can run to a length which some find tedious, but it allows for:
- myself to be detailed and nuanced in expressing my understanding, I prefer to avoid ambiguity if possible.
- corrections on specific points so as to increase the learning and understanding of all (I at least find that greatly beneficial).

Of course such an approach leaves me open to occasional ridicule, but I have got off rather lightly overall in comparison to some, The reasons for that I feel are partly because I have been so forthcoming with information I have gathered, partly because I have invited correction and thanked those who have developed my understanding and partly because I have regularly expressed a hope to be wrong in the worst of my estimations.

The original post came about after re-reading the original Transfer Embargo thread http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... =2&t=68196 for other activity which led to the desire to express detail about the 2nd charge from the EFL and to relate that back to the statements in the last published accounts *which is how I came to reread the embargo thread. The list of days since relates directly to that while also providing a clear and up to date picture of the the employed without resolution to the embargo situation.

I appreciate the patience people give to my posts
-

[dsr]

Other clubs (including Burnley in prior years) have managed OK to file accounts with the league even if audited accounts for the prior year aren't signed off. You'd hope that after four months (and a couple of weeks before the statutory deadline) an auditor would be pretty comfortable on the opening figures to allow a non-statutory set of estimates to be produced (and, if not, going back to my original point you've got to wonder what is so contentious).

The rules say the accounts have to have an auditor's report attached. I understand the club has already submitted a set of unaudited accounts, which they can do with or without auditor's permission because the auditor isn't responsible to anyone for any of the figures, but until the audit report is attached, it's a breach of rule.

[aggi]

The rules say the accounts have to have an auditor's report attached. I understand the club has already submitted a set of unaudited accounts, which they can do with or without auditor's permission because the auditor isn't responsible to anyone for any of the figures, but until the audit report is attached, it's a breach of rule.

Ah, that wasn't clear with my reference to accounts. I was referring to the current year estimates which obviously wouldn't have an Audit report:

2.1.3 its estimated profit and loss account and balance sheet for T which shall:

(a) be prepared in all material respects in a format similar to the Club’s Annual Accounts; and

(b) be based on the latest information available to the Club and be, to the best of the Club’s knowledge and belief, an accurate estimate as at the time of preparation of future financial performance; and

[scouseclaret]

I've long since lost touch with this thread but I'm currently wondering, now that we appear to have missed the Companies House deadline as well as various EFL deadlines, at what point do we become seriously concerned over our current owners' inability to file a set of accounts?

[eastcoastclaret]

I've long since lost touch with this thread but I'm currently wondering, now that we appear to have missed the Companies House deadline as well as various EFL deadlines, at what point do we become seriously concerned over our current owners' inability to file a set of accounts?

Just because it's not been reported, doesn't mean the deadline was missed.

[RVclaret]

I've long since lost touch with this thread but I'm currently wondering, now that we appear to have missed the Companies House deadline as well as various EFL deadlines, at what point do we become seriously concerned over our current owners' inability to file a set of accounts?

The last set of accounts appeared on May 4th. We are currently on the 2nd, doesn't mean the deadline was missed, albeit we are still listed as having the transfer embargo on the EFL website so that does make you wonder as surely the EFL would receive the accounts too. I was monitoring the release of Rovers accounts recently with the 31st March deadline but they didn't appear on Companies House until April 8th.

[arise_sir_charge]

Have we missed the companies house deadline or is it more likely that the filings haven’t been posted online as it’s a bank holiday?

[HistoricalClaret]

Have we missed the companies house deadline or is it more likely that the filings haven’t been posted online as it’s a bank holiday?

more likely they haven't been posted due to bank holiday.

[Quickenthetempo]

It's a strange one as Alan Pace is far too much in the public eye to be hiding something.

[arise_sir_charge]

The chairman is very much in the public eye, the club are announcing new investment invoking major US sports stars etc.

The likelihood is that there is nothing to see here, I would prefer that it was done and dusted though, stop all the guesswork and speculation.

[aggi]

It's a strange one as Alan Pace is far too much in the public eye to be hiding something.

I wonder if Oxford fans were saying that in the 80s?

(Just to be clear, as I know some on here can get excited, the above is a joke. I am more towards the cock-up than conspiracy side on this and Companies House is definitely operating with a backlog at the moment.)

[NewClaret]

The chairman is very much in the public eye, the club are announcing new investment invoking major US sports stars etc.

The likelihood is that there is nothing to see here, I would prefer that it was done and dusted though, stop all the guesswork and speculation.

Just how I feel - get them posted and all this speculation put to bed. Or if they haven’t been posted, communicate that and why/what needs to happen to conclude it.

Although you’d have expected JJ’s lawyers to have done the DD on issues like this prior to investing, so I’m hopeful this is close to being resolved.

[Nonayforever]

I wonder if Oxford fans were saying that in the 80s?

(Just to be clear, as I know some on here can get excited, the above is a joke. I am more towards the cock-up than conspiracy side on this and Companies House is definitely operating with a backlog at the moment.)

Surprised to hear you say that.
If cock ups occur in companies such as ours, where the structure is clearly designed to obfuscate the picture, then it really is a major cock up.

[scouseclaret]

Much complacency on here. If the accounts have been filed, they’d also have been published, so we’d all be able to see them.

[Paul Waine]

Much complacency on here. If the accounts have been filed, they’d also have been published, so we’d all be able to see them.

Last year the 31st July 2021 accounts were signed on 28th April 2022. Deadline to file at Companies House was 30th April 2022. Just as this year, the first weekend of May was a bank holiday. The accounts were then available on Companies House website on 4th May 2022.

There's always a few days delay between filing at being available on the website.

Everything is following the same pattern this year.

UTC