Re: Transfer embargo
 

Surely these accountants are being paid a tidy sum for undertaking this task ?? If so, why are they taking so long??? Or have they uncovered yet another as yet unpublicised financial irregularity / impending crisis that will take longer to resolve ???:confused:

Im not casting doubts or aspersions, but somehow this last statement doesn't smell right to me. If so, why did the tax bill go unpaid for so long ?? A tax bill of over £300k didn't just appear overnight now did it !!! Surely that was "important financial information" that should have flagged up what was an impending disaster,thankfully averted, thanks to Messrs Khan & Marsden and the goodwill of a lot of folk who dug deep in their own pockets.

Why did it get to the point that the club was a matter of hours away from being wound up a little over 8 months ago ???:confused:

All I can see is that we've lost players, as yet not replaced. The club is under yet another embargo, meaning Coley & Bells hands (which have, as yet, not managed to put pen to paper on their long promised contracts,a situation probably connected to the embargo situation ) are at the moment tied well and truly behind their backs.:mad:

Other clubs are now well and truly into the business of signing players, left, right and centre in every sense of the words' meaning. All the better players are likely to have been snapped up by other clubs by the time all this is eventually sorted; and O'Neill comes out with:

"sorted in good time to enable the club to sign players ahead of the start of the season.":enough:

A little over four weeks till kick off and counting Mr O'Neill. Not giving Coley much time to assemble the squad he wants is it now??? And given his (O'Neill's past track record with deadlines and press releases / statements) I for one am worried.

Again.:(

Re: Transfer embargo
 

we had this discussion before carpon, as far as the accountants are concerned, as far as i know they can only submit accounts if they got the "Full Information" its probably a blood out of a stone syndrome.:confused:

Re: Transfer embargo
 

Without going to far into the accounts discussion Cashy is correct in what he is saying, Pierce will not produce a set of accounts unless they are fully happy with everything they have seen. I would imagine they will need to go back a good few years to make sure that everything previous that has been reported actually stacks up. I dont know if the accounts will have been independently audited therefore this may be part of the issue as well ie, not being signed off properly previously.

As far the quote about a new package being introduced two years ago from what I can gauge this may not be correct. The reason I dont think this is correct is due to the fact that Pierce are trying to put a picture of the accounts together due to there being so many holes in the accounts. Therefore how can you have correct up to date information if that is currently being investigated by accountants? There is also the fact there was no control over cashflow which helped to contribute the winding up order so if they had the information available they would've realised that they owed £300k in tax and would put money towards that as a preferred creditor through contingency planning and put off trade creditors due to a reduced risk of further action. This would've also helped to create a contingency plan for cashflow to know when they needed to keep a pot of money for the summer and for rainy days. If the system was in place two years ago then they obviously weren't using it correctly!

I would also question the statement the other day about being to break even without needing help from Ilyas as stated by Rob Heys. The club is not self-sufficient and it is naive to expect the club to overnight become profitable. The club needs a sound business plan to get the club to start increasing revenue and keeping costs stable to help reduce losses obtained year on year. There are obvious tweaks that can be made to increase profitability such as gaining a ground sponsor and increasing usage of the executive boxes on matchdays. This would in turn bring in a better cashflow for the club and keep HMRC happier!

As for the ownership issue I personally dont think DON will ever takeover the club I just wish that Ilyas was still involved and therefore we would be kept informed of developments at the club, whether good or bad. It is quite annoying that we only ever seem to read quotes about things that are meant to happen but are never actually put into practice. There are a number of serious issues affecting the club and there really seems to be a lack of action being taken, including Coley's contract, the stadium not being up to league standard, the transfer embargo and outstanding accounts for last year.

It may sound like I am ranting but it is just how I see the current situation!

Re: Transfer embargo
 

Not a rant at all bdc, I think thats how most of us see the situation - there is a question about what is going on with Coley & Jimmy's contracts - O'Neil's answer is :
'Both John & Jimmy are totally committed to the club and, as a board, we believe in them as being more than capable of continuing to take the club forward on the pitch. They still have in place a verbal 12 month rolling contract which, for every day that goes by, they still have 365 to go'

At least he doesn't use the excuse that it's still being typed this time!

Nearly forgot, the title at the top of the page :

FUTURE IS BRIGHT WITH REDS

Re: Transfer embargo
 

"It's very important we resolve the issue when he returns to work on Monday morning."

So....was it resolved?:confused:

Or was the reference to another Monday morning in some future unspecified week?

Re: Transfer embargo
 

Re: Transfer embargo
 

Have just read the observer Question @ Answer, can someone please tell me, which one of em is a straight answer?:confused::(

Re: Transfer embargo
 

As far as the Government is concerned EW legally owns the majority share and will do until it is registered differently at Companies House.

Re: Transfer embargo
 

The accounts for the year ended 31st May 2008 were signed off by Accountants, accepted by the Directors and submitted to Companies House earlier this year, so I cannot understand why the opening balances for year ended 31st May 2009 are in doubt.

I think that the money owed to the taxman was a result of an Inland Revenue audit that was carried out and as the Club didn't have the necessary records for payroll, etc. the amount was an assessment of around £500k.

Re: Transfer embargo
 

"...if you ask Eric he would say I do."
Is that I as in you, or I as in him, Don?
This reminds me of Slick Willie Clinton's famous quote "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is."

For a short man the cardboard millionaire casts a long shadow.

Re: Transfer embargo
 

I think that we fans should compile a list of questions and ask the Observer to ask them either directly or via their letters page. I don't think for one second that the Don will answer them truthfully.

I'll start with:-

1) Can you please give us mere mortals your definition of 'the next two weeks', as stupidly we were under the assumption that you meant 14 days.

Re: Transfer embargo
 

I don't think there are any surprises from O'Neil regarding the accounts (namely the balance sheet) of the club; there have been numerous prior postings on here on this topic and everyone must now know that EW will not be transferring his shares until he gets back what he has put in as 'loans'.

However, on a slightly different note, I see that Mr O'Neil talks about the new sprinkler system at the ground. I don't know much about ground maintenance but I would assume that as the new pitch needs bedding in then plenty of water is necessary and is subsequently crucial in keeping quality. I wonder, therefore, what effect the hosepipe/sprinkler ban will now have?

Re: Transfer embargo
 

Apparently you can still use watering cans!!:rolleyes:

Re: Transfer embargo
 

Re: Transfer embargo
 

Pendle Red posted a link a couple of weeks ago regarding the levels of drought orders. 1st level is only domestic ban.

BBC NEWS | UK | Levels of drought restrictions