EFL Statement

[Birley Owl 1867]

2 minutes ago, sonofbert2 said:

I normally get stuck into the doom addicts in these types of threads but this time I’m going to stay away, leave ‘em to it and hope we carry on doing alright on the pitch and can cover ourselves off of the pitch.

 

The usual suspects can all wankeach other off over howshit the club is and how they were right all along...

 

We’re going up anyway!

Yeah it better to let them tug into a I told you so coma than argue.

 

We all know Chansiri has done some quite a lot of things st the club quite badly, he seems to have remedied it with cutting back spending and hiring 2 good managers recently, but still we have some claiming we're gonna end up like Coventry or even go bust. It's laughable.

 

Worst that will happen is we'll get s points deduction and relegated because of it, that's all, and we would walk Legaue 1 cos we all know Chansiri wouldn't sell anybody.

[Earlsfieldowl]

2 hours ago, StudentOwl said:

In this instance, "ambition" is synonymous with "remortaging the house to pay for your day trip to London and subsequent attempts to repeat the experience but winning a prize at the end of it". 

Well it worked for Wolves and to a lesser degree Villa.

 

But not for us!

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

1 minute ago, room0035 said:

How can a transaction happen today for a company that does not exist. Surely the transaction can only happen when the company exists.

 

If the transaction for us happened between SWFC and DC then when this new company was set up has no baring on the transaction but what has been reported today is the company that bought us according the the records the club have given the EFL did not exist at the time of the reported transaction.

 

So basically the new owner could not have purchased the club at the time the records say.

 

 

 

Not looking at it from newco perspective looking at it from SWFC ltd.

 

At 28/7/18 they have a commitment to sell and a binding agreement.

 

Then you have to apply accounting standards to that agreement to see if it satisfs criteria to recognise

 

Like buying a house off plan how can you own a house that doesn't exist yet? But in tax law you do when you exchange contracts

[sonofbert2]

3 minutes ago, 2roland2 said:

 

Tesla, now this isnt for this thread mate, i actually have looked at many case studies on elon musk and they have a very structured business plan and have from minute 1, including multi products and failsafes within company portfolios so business failures and success props up the core company.  like i said not s discussion for here thats for certain.

Uber i dont know enough about so cant comment, fact is and i will reiterate gambles and reckless spending in almost every case doesnt end well in any business. 

 

Both companies run at huge losses with a future plan for huge profitability.

 

Both rely on their investors and punters buying that future.

Edited November 15, 2019 by sonofbert2

[room0035]

5 minutes ago, wellbeaten-the-owl said:

Not looking at it from newco perspective looking at it from SWFC ltd.

 

At 28/7/18 they have a commitment to sell and a binding agreement.

 

Then you have to apply accounting standards to that agreement to see if it satisfs criteria to recognise

 

Like buying a house off plan how can you own a house that doesn't exist yet? But in tax law you do when you exchange contracts

I know how a contract works but to have a contract you need two people or entities to sign it if one of those entities does not exist for another 12 months then they cannot sign the contract surely I don't need to explain this again.

 

Adding to you idea when you buy a house of plan do you pay anything for it or wait until your house is built, as every deal I have know you pay up front, something you won't be able to do if you DON'T EXIST

Edited November 15, 2019 by room0035

[Birley Owl 1867]

Just now, room0035 said:

I know how a contract works but to have a contract you need two people or entities to sign it if one of those entities does not exist for another 12 months then they cannot sign the contract surely I don't need to explain this again.

Can you not read what the fella put?

 

Chansiri would sign for he, setting up a company to complete the purchase in the year. It doesnt matter, in this instance he would have signed for on behalf of his future holdings company.

[billyblack]

5 minutes ago, wellbeaten-the-owl said:

Not looking at it from newco perspective looking at it from SWFC ltd.

 

At 28/7/18 they have a commitment to sell and a binding agreement.

 

Then you have to apply accounting standards to that agreement to see if it satisfs criteria to recognise

 

Like buying a house off plan how can you own a house that doesn't exist yet? But in tax law you do when you exchange contracts

I have no doubt we sold the ground.

 

When and for how much is something else. Do i believe we sold 18 months ago to count in that years accounting period. No i dont. How you value something to sell to yourself is another story.

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

2 minutes ago, Birley Owl 1867 said:

Can you not read what the fella put?

 

Chansiri would sign for he, setting up a company to complete the purchase in the year. It doesnt matter, in this instance he would have signed for on behalf of his future holdings company.

This.... 

 

Does matter if it's Sheffield 3 4 5 6 or whatever limited.  Other side of contract is chansiri (the ultimate owner of newco)

 

SWFC have in that case a guarantee from DC / commitment and SWFC have a non commitment to sell at a fixed price they cannot renage on.

 

It's recognising the substance of the transaction at the date of contract not at date of invoice or completion.

Edited November 15, 2019 by wellbeaten-the-owl

[Hookowl]

17 hours ago, ka58 said:

expect complete radio silence from the club to allow for mass fan speculation over next few months as well.

 

standard.

Yep...........................the club should broadcast to the nation what we intend to reply so that EFL have a chance to get their counter in place

[Buddy Repperton]

5 hours ago, billyblack said:

What advisors?? Maybe thats the issue. Maybe he doesnt listen to them. 

If you haven't heard of Doyen/Paxo etc then there's plenty about it on here.

Ultimately he's responsible for this either way.

[room0035]

1 minute ago, Birley Owl 1867 said:

Can you not read what the fella put?

 

Chansiri would sign for he, setting up a company to complete the purchase in the year. It doesnt matter, in this instance he would have signed for on behalf of his future holdings company.

As I have said god knows how many times now if DC bought the club we are fine.

 

But if the paperwork reads that a company owned by DC set up in 2019 owns the club then it is impossible for the company to have existed at the time of the contract without the use of a time machine to go back in time and sign the contract. But if the time machine existed surely they would go back and make sure Jos never got taken on as manager.

[VBQ24]

Wonder if he'll reduce ticket prices in League One 

[sonofbert2]

5 minutes ago, 2roland2 said:

 

Like i said havent got any background on uber, but im guessing that will collapse then if what you are saying is true.

 

Like i said delve into tesla and elon musk, and his other business, its quite intriguing, mind im not sure anyone else could get away with running like that on such a scale but again even with that his R+D could see that part of his business fail. I doubt it though because even if 10% of his products work he will be by far the richest man alive in 10 years..... between him and jeff bezos they pretty much have the world wrapped up.

 

anyway like i said lets not get too deep into this on this thread  

 

I’m just responding to the general point you made which isn’t true with current examples.

 

Many companies are set up, loss making but with the intention of a huge payoff.  That’s investment, risk and profit.

 

Wednesday are the same under DC - the only difference being that the losses are restricted.  This is for the right reason in my opinion but the amounts allowed to be lost have not kept up with the rising costs of running the business.

 

 

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

8 minutes ago, room0035 said:

As I have said god knows how many times now if DC bought the club we are fine.

 

But if the paperwork reads that a company owned by DC set up in 2019 owns the club then it is impossible for the company to have existed at the time of the contract without the use of a time machine to go back in time and sign the contract. But if the time machine existed surely they would go back and make sure Jos never got taken on as manager.

Not anything of sort.

 

Question is at the point SWFC ltd enter into the contract do they stand to lose or gain from any future economic benefits suffer from any future risk of ownership? If not then it goes in accounts at that date

 

Your confusing this with do newco have a liability at that date which is obviously no

 

At 28/7/18 the liability is with DC meet terms of contract, set up newco and complete purchase

Edited November 15, 2019 by wellbeaten-the-owl

[billyblack]

7 minutes ago, Buddy Repperton said:

If you haven't heard of Doyen/Paxo etc then there's plenty about it on here.

Ultimately he's responsible for this either way.

Yes sorry. Have heard of them. Agree he is responsible as well. 

[sonofbert2]

Just now, wellbeaten-the-owl said:

Not anything of sort.

 

Question is at the point SWFC ltd enter into the contract do they stand to lose or gain from any future economic benefits suffer from any future risk of ownership? If not then it goes in accounts at that date

 

Your confusing this with do newco have a liability at that date which is obviously no

 

No point responding - he’ll be in here for weeks, talking totalbollocks on his 3rd username.

[striker]

1 hour ago, billyblack said:

Thats because we spent what we couldnt afford.

I disagree, we could afford it.

 

The EFL intend to restrict spending to an arbitrary amount, disregarding the solvency of the individual owners.

 

[Frazzlebeak]

I doubt the Inland Revenue will be too chuffed either. If the auditors signed it off and knew, they'll be up to the neck as well.

[TommyCraig]

We need to protest the EFL about this with the aim of reminding them not to keep on punishing the supporters. We need to ask the Tories and Labour what they will do to redress the imbalance between between the premier League and the rest. 

I don't blame the owner in his efforts to guide us through the minefield that EFL currently is. I blame the EFL and Premier League for overseeing this corrupt system and the football players themselves for demanding huge wages. 

[BowOwl]

46 minutes ago, 2roland2 said:

 

 

Interested to know what businesses these were that were runnign at losses for years then made profit.

 

I get that smaller companies have to take small mitigated risk to grow, even larger companies to some extent but not many companies in the world are spunking 40 million plus in 3 years and standing still and expecting to survive. if you spunk large amounts of cash in any business with risk ventures expansion or whatever the likes most of the time it catches up. Ask Thomas Cook, they had the great idea of buying 500 strong retail shops 2 year into the digital boom of online shopping. you make enough bad decisions and no matter how strong your business and brand is and you end up busto.

Investment firm, and a start up bank, and a small retailer.

Investment firm now valued more than Hillsborough and they were making £17-24 million loss in their first 4 years spending investors money to build up. 
Bank now breaking even and fully staffed
Retailer small profit (small company from a family)

Not saying DC is right, he's clearly broken rules, just they are such harsh rules in place in one of the most competitive industries in the world.