Accounts imminent

[room0035]

4 hours ago, Rotherham Owl said:

a) How do you know when the accounts were filed with the EFL - there is no record.

 

b) There is only 1 time that the accounts have not been filed before 31 March at Companies House not 4. 

 

c) We are not under an Embargo because we havent broken any rules, the accounts arent due yet.

 

d) The reason we havent signed anyone yet is because most clubs dont sign anyone until after 30 June that is why other local clubs like the pigs and Rotherham havent signed anyone and the same reason Man U, Man City and Liverpool havent.

Look on the EFL rules and regulations I believe all football league clubs have to file current season financial information with them by the 31 March, they also have to adhere to the laws of the land, yes the government did give an extension of 3 months but only about 10 of 92 took this up and most were in the championship. But and here the kicker all of the 24 chairman in the championship including DC signed off on these rules, but for what ever reason he decides to only follow some of the rules.

 

As for transfer I am sick of hearing this excuse every single year when we are always behind the curve ball. We have been under prepared since DC arrived but for Glenn Roeder the first season preparing a team in 6 weeks we could have been a lot different that first season but luckily we had a good backbone to the team that Stuart Gray left us.

 

We have not started preseason with a settled team and more often than not are scrabbling around on transfer deadline day or loan deadline day for the dross no one else wants, remember the striker from West Brom last season on £50k a week that managed just 1 goal last season before getting injured. Or the rubbish we signed Flint and Marriott with Brown cost us the best part of £2m to barely ever play for the team. 

 

We need a team to be fit and ready to go for the first game of the season, we need players that are not just fit but match fit, we do not have the finances to be carrying players that can barely play 20 games we need them to play 40+.

 

How many of Sheff U, Rotherham, Man U and Man C only have 12 first team players, how many of the have not enough players for their development squads, how many of them have not paid they players in full for the last 4 months (not including June will be due tomorrow), no none of these club are in the dire position we are in.

[kobayashi]

6 minutes ago, room0035 said:

No if they go under the ground will either be sold to pay off the debt or if they have not finished paying for the ground in full the legal ownership could pass back to the club.

 

We do not know the terms of the contract but normally there is something in there that legal ownership will not pass until the final instalment is paid. Which in this deal terms is another 5 or 6 years

Given that Sheffield 3 has secured £6.5m of borrowing with a full title guarantee to the land, I think we can be fairly confident that the title has passed.

Would the lender have entered into the contract if Sheffield 3-Chansiri could just decide not to pay SWFC-Chansiri with the consequence being that title reverted to SWFC and the lenders were left high and dry seeking to enforce their Charge against Sheffield 3?

[room0035]

Just now, kobayashi said:

Given that Sheffield 3 has secured £6.5m of borrowing with a full title guarantee to the land, I think we can be fairly confident that the title has passed.

Would the lender have entered into the contract if Sheffield 3-Chansiri could just decide not to pay SWFC-Chansiri with the consequence being that title reverted to SWFC and the lenders were left high and dry seeking to enforce their Charge against Sheffield 3?

No idea but presumable if Sheffield 3 miss any of the payment instalment they will be in breach of the contract, and presumable there is some clause in there that SWFC can reclaim the asset back if this happens.

 

I don't know the in and outs of the contract but presumable there will be something in there the make sure SWFC receive £60m.

[Animis]

3 minutes ago, kobayashi said:

Given that Sheffield 3 has secured £6.5m of borrowing with a full title guarantee to the land, I think we can be fairly confident that the title has passed.

Would the lender have entered into the contract if Sheffield 3-Chansiri could just decide not to pay SWFC-Chansiri with the consequence being that title reverted to SWFC and the lenders were left high and dry seeking to enforce their Charge against Sheffield 3?

 

S3 (DC/his wife?) would have also paid SDLT on the sale - and SWFC would pay it on the lease/rent payment.

[kobayashi]

10 minutes ago, room0035 said:

No idea but presumable if Sheffield 3 miss any of the payment instalment they will be in breach of the contract, and presumable there is some clause in there that SWFC can reclaim the asset back if this happens.

 

I don't know the in and outs of the contract but presumable there will be something in there the make sure SWFC receive £60m.

Sheffield 3 has borrowed money with a charge against the title - if there was any question about the title then that would not be possible.

If they are in breach then SWFC will have to bring a claim against them for breach of contract.

[Dick_Turpin]

2 minutes ago, kobayashi said:

Sheffield 3 has borrowed money with a charge against the title - if there was any question about the title then that would not be possible.

If they are in breach then SWFC will have to bring a claim against them for breach of contract.

And Wednesday owe Chansiri shedloads of cash that is more than the club is owed for the ground. If the various contracts allow for that debt to be offset against what he owes for the ground then....... 

[Guest Mcguigan]

33 minutes ago, Hornsby said:

So, clubs gets back cheap or rich fan buys.

You like your rich fan option don't ya? 

[kobayashi]

30 minutes ago, Animis said:

 

S3 (DC/his wife?) would have also paid SDLT on the sale - and SWFC would pay it on the lease/rent payment.

Surely he didn't pay SDLT of £3m or £3.7m (if they opted to tax)? That would be real money for a "pretend" sale...which would be crazy. He must have structured it so that group relief could be claimed somehow.

[Guest Hornsby]

16 hours ago, Mcguigan said:

You like your rich fan option don't ya? 

Or anyone sane really.

 

Just looking at what Bees fan Benning's achieved with Brentford.

[Guest Hornsby]

21 hours ago, kobayashi said:

Given that Sheffield 3 has secured £6.5m of borrowing with a full title guarantee to the land, I think we can be fairly confident that the title has passed.

Would the lender have entered into the contract if Sheffield 3-Chansiri could just decide not to pay SWFC-Chansiri with the consequence being that title reverted to SWFC and the lenders were left high and dry seeking to enforce their Charge against Sheffield 3?

How do you know Sheff 3 borrowed?

 

My guess is club got money, using stadium as fixed security, plus floating charge over Chansiri assets. 

 

Land Reg have loan agreement but you can't buy on line, only via paper request.

 

Rest assured, that £7 million payment missed in September, we will all be at Keepmoat for home games.

 

This vulture lender crashed Watford years ago.

[0742]

On 29/06/2021 at 12:44, Rotherham Owl said:

So clubs like Port Vale https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08876768  are allowed to sign players (4 this week) despite not filing their accounts but we are not - sorry the rules arent written like that. Read them follow them and we cant be under an embargo.

 

Try to interpret them in a way that they are not actually written and you can get whatever answer you want. 

 

 

 

Are you Chansiri?

 

[Guest wilyfox]

Any someday now, you’ll see..

[Guest Grandad]

22 hours ago, kobayashi said:

Normally better to get the accounts signed and filed as soon as possible. Not only is it one less thing to do but the longer it takes then the greater the risk of something adverse happening which has to be accounted for. The going concern review is always 12 months from date of signing, so again the longer you leave it the greater the scope of the accounts in terms of time and what may be brought into them. 

 

Like relegation?

[pahowl]

On 28/06/2021 at 18:37, Grandad said:

My understanding is there is no requirement for these to be audited accounts, merely a forecast

The accounts due by 1 March have to be audited( unless the company is audit exempt - per efl rules) - you also have to submit forecasts for the current year by 31 March . So swfc should let efl have finalised signed off accounts for y/e 31/7/20 by 1/3/21 and forecast accounts for y/e 31/7/21

[Guest Grandad]

Just now, pahowl said:

The accounts due by 1 March have to be audited( unless the company is audit exempt - per efl rules) - you also have to submit forecasts for the current year by 31 March . So swfc should let efl have finalised signed off accounts for y/e 31/7/20 by 1/3/21 and forecast accounts for y/e 31/7/21

Ahhh its the current year accounts I'm mixing up

[pahowl]

On 28/06/2021 at 20:00, kirksandallowl said:

I think up until the stadium sale & subsequent EFL charge they were essentially on time (give or take a few days)

 

 

I think this year we and the other dozen or so clubs were caught out thinking the EFL would reciprocate the government’s 3 month extension, after all they took advantage of it themselves.

 

I have no idea why it takes 9 months anyway, our accountant sorted ours in a month, admittedly no where near the same size company and no need for auditors but still. I suppose the rules are designed as a one size fits all. 

Do you have your accounts audited? or just prepared form the records?

[kirksandallowl]

46 minutes ago, pahowl said:

Do you have your accounts audited? or just prepared form the records?

No not audited as I said

[kobayashi]

2 hours ago, Grandad said:

 

Like relegation?

Yes like relegation - assuming that they were not signed before May the Directors on top of everything else now have to explain to the auditors how the business will remain a going concern with significantly lower income over the coming 12 months.

The "complication" of SWFC accounts ae the losses and therefore how to satisfy the going concern - the business and the accounting numbers are relatively simple, so the accounts shouldn't take months/years to prepare. Assuming that they weren't because they weren't filed,  it doesn't make sense why in March when he got his 2019 accounts signed because he managed to satisfy the auditors that the business was a going concern until March 2022, that he just didn't take the opportunity to get the 2020 accounts signed at the same time.

[room0035]

5 minutes ago, kobayashi said:

Yes like relegation - assuming that they were not signed before May the Directors on top of everything else now have to explain to the auditors how the business will remain a going concern with significantly lower income over the coming 12 months.

The "complication" of SWFC accounts ae the losses and therefore how to satisfy the going concern - the business and the accounting numbers are relatively simple, so the accounts shouldn't take months/years to prepare. Assuming that they weren't because they weren't filed,  it doesn't make sense why in March when he got his 2019 accounts signed because he managed to satisfy the auditors that the business was a going concern until March 2022, that he just didn't take the opportunity to get the 2020 accounts signed at the same time.

The simple answer is in 6 years plus DC has never used any common sense that why the 2 years worth of account were not filed.

 

 

[kobayashi]

4 hours ago, Hornsby said:

How do you know Sheff 3 borrowed?

 

My guess is club got money, using stadium as fixed security, plus floating charge over Chansiri assets. 

 

Land Reg have loan agreement but you can't buy on line, only via paper request.

 

Rest assured, that £7 million payment missed in September, we will all be at Keepmoat for home games.

 

This vulture lender crashed Watford years ago.

How? It isn’t so complicated, the charge was filed by Sheffield 3 at Co House and is free to view.