Guest mkowl Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 The monies due to Allen, his cohorts and the Coop were shown in the accounts as contingent liabilities but only disclosed as a note, the figures themselves did not include this as a debt. Therefore on paper we could be debt free and still have this to clear should promotion arise Still got a professional curiousity how the deal sits together and how the loans were cleared by Swfc Limited. But may have to wait 12 months for the next accounts to come out to work that one out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Sl-OWL-ly Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 An't we just let players go to Chessy ? Don't you think that might have been a way of settling the debt without payin' cash ? C'mon, Mandy ain't that daft and I deffo don't think DC would have taken us on with the debt in place.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Johnbloodaxe Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) Are these the companies linked to TUF? If so, doesn't it mean that all the theories about TUF sponsorship being a way around FFP are moot as Dejphon can be directly linked to them? Linked only as suppliers to TU and some same directors listed BUT not subsidiaries or in the same group etc. a good portion of the ones listed have no Chansari family links just links to other directors of TU, but I had to copy and paste the lot and didn't have chance to check them all out. So shouldn't affect FFP. I just showed them as a reflection of business interests and other wealth source. They aren't a one trick pony at all. Edited March 2, 2015 by Johnbloodaxe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I don't know the answer but it wouldn't surprise me if this potential liability is still outstanding but was factored into the purchase price If you buy a company then in theory you acquire all its assets and liabilities in existence including ones not yet crystallised but it is common for this to be tidied up as part of the sale Still not 100% sure what debt free means in this scenario. Is this just 3rd party debt ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronio Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Surely debt free as in we have no more debt and that all outstanding payments have been paid. Whether this was part of the sale of the club and the debt was factored in, or they are 2 separate issues. Have no idea which. Surely though, this has to be a huge step in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredmciverslovechild Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 TUF way farers I missed out on Tuf Wayfarers, the shoes with animal track soles and a compass in the heal, and was a little too old for Clark's Commandos. However, for most of the time at school and college I had Tuf shoes. I was bought a pair at about thirteen. They were the typical "mudguard" Tuf style school shoes with a six month guarnatee against fair wear and tear. They greatly exceeded the guarantee period, try as I might, so when they eventually wore out I was bought another pair and then another. Actually they were a great shoe. They were a bit stiff to start with but became very flexible and comfortable with a little bit of use. They were easy to polish up and, if you didn't bother, turned a quite distinctive grey colour. You mean Wayfinders..... https://www.flickr.com/photos/22326055@N06/3611153831/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/22326055@N06/3611966260/in/photostream/ They were great; remember wearing them to school for yonks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davylowe Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) You mean Wayfinders..... https://www.flickr.com/photos/22326055@N06/3611153831/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/22326055@N06/3611966260/in/photostream/ They were great; remember wearing them to school for yonks. Pathfinders I think they were called Edited March 2, 2015 by davylowe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Surely debt free as in we have no more debt and that all outstanding payments have been paid. Whether this was part of the sale of the club and the debt was factored in, or they are 2 separate issues. Have no idea which. Surely though, this has to be a huge step in the right direction. My point is that part of the Chansari money may have been put directly into Swfc ltd to then repay the 3rd party loans and ukfi inter company loans. There may thus be a debt due to Chansari. The phrasing today may be to simply say he has not borrowed the money to do the overall deal This latter point is the most important - how the deal is reflected in the accounts is as an accountant a bit of professional curiousity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Sl-OWL-ly Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 My point is that part of the Chansari money may have been put directly into Swfc ltd to then repay the 3rd party loans and ukfi inter company loans. There may thus be a debt due to Chansari. The phrasing today may be to simply say he has not borrowed the money to do the overall deal This latter point is the most important - how the deal is reflected in the accounts is as an accountant a bit of professional curiousity Do you think we will see the accounts going forward ? Serious question.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Do you think we will see the accounts going forward ? Serious question.. Yes - i believe ( but stand to be corrected) that the football club operation has to be in a uk entity even if that is then owned by an overseas company. We should still get most of the detail as the accounts have to follow uk accounting standards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel Walker Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I hope we do spend quite a bit or it seems as if we might aswell still have Milan really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Sl-OWL-ly Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Yes - i believe ( but stand to be corrected) that the football club operation has to be in a uk entity even if that is then owned by an overseas company. We should still get most of the detail as the accounts have to follow uk accounting standards Thanks for your response, But if it's "family owned" do they have to report them publicly ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S36 OWL Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Has Dave Allen been paid off? Who cares, horrible little man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themaskedowl Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 You mean Wayfinders..... https://www.flickr.com/photos/22326055@N06/3611153831/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/22326055@N06/3611966260/in/photostream/ They were great; remember wearing them to school for yonks. Pathfinders I think they were called Starting to sound like bands from the '60s now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Thanks for your response, But if it's "family owned" do they have to report them publicly ? Yes all uk companies accounts are disclosed at Companies House. What we get to see is based on the financial size of the company not the ownership structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jowl Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Are people still banging on about FFP? It was a convenient excuse to roll out when we didn't have the cash. With enough money it's irrelevant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essix Blue Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 He doesn't have to splash millions on a player. Just increasing our wage budget by 50% would give us significantly greater strength in acquiring a squad capable of promotion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modboy Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) He doesn't have to splash millions on a player. Just increasing our wage budget by 50% would give us significantly greater strength in acquiring a squad capable of promotion. as we did when we thought we had the HM money with Westwood, Lees and Hutchinson. Get the same quality up front, with a winger and add McGugan and i would be happy enough. Always add the bit more quality like Derby have done with Ince if needed Edited March 3, 2015 by modboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogerwyldesmullet Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Was intensely jealous of classmate with Clarkes Commando shoes since he was far and away the least likely kid to go nesting down Maltby crags without his mum. Pretty sure we tried to nick the shoe compass during PE when we were all wearing our "plimsoles" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrodie2002 Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Thing I've noticed is that Mr Chansiri has stated he bought the club with his own money but TUF is plastered all over the boarding behind the press conference (not even sondico were on there interestingly either). Does this mean that TUF are officially our new sponsors if this deal was seperate from TUF or was Mr Chansiri just using this as free advertising for his company? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now