Why

[harry]

Last year the club sent in it's accounts in September although they had until December to do so.

How come this year they have not yet sent them in.

Even though we are going through Due Diligence they are still required by law to submit their accounts. I guess they did not want anyone to see what MM has seen...................

 

[alex]

Because we are deep in it.

 

[Melton Fox]

I don't know the answer to the question, nor do I care anymore. I'm hibernating

 

[Real Sharapova]

Last year the club sent in it's accounts in September although they had until December to do so.

How come this year they have not yet sent them in.

Even though we are going through Due Diligence they are still required by law to submit their accounts. I guess they did not want anyone to see what MM has seen...................

As far as I am aware, the accounts have been finalised and have been submitted to the relevant authorities some time ago - LCFC even posted details of them on the OS, mentioning the effect the sale of Connolly had on them.

 

[Hazzman]

As far as I am aware, the accounts have been finalised and have been submitted to the relevant authorities some time ago - LCFC even posted details of them on the OS, mentioning the effect the sale of Connolly had on them.

We actually made a profit, didn't we....I remember discussing that the next season's accounts should show a big loss.

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

think you could be right hazz

 

[Dour]

Last year the club sent in it's accounts in September although they had until December to do so.

How come this year they have not yet sent them in.

Even though we are going through Due Diligence they are still required by law to submit their accounts. I guess they did not want anyone to see what MM has seen...................

They have:

Accounting Reference Date: 31/05
Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/05/2006 (FULL)
Next Accounts Due: 31/12/2007

And I've seen them. There's nothing obviously odd about them.

 

[OldGit]

Published accounts simply give public information, certified as a fair representation by the auditor. The whole point of DD is to look at the detail behind the accounts, plus non-accounting issues relating to the structure & activities of the company not look at the accounts themselves, which anyone can do anyway. Things in that detail might be of concern to a potential buyer, but it doesn't follow that anything has been deliberately concealed that should be in the public domain

 

[harry]

Sorry guys

Yes they have been sent in since I last looked. (Must do better)

Q. for the accountants out there.

What are accurals and deferred income amounting to £6M+

In a total figure of £8.2M for Creditors falling due within one year. This has nothing to do with the stadium payment.

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

Published accounts simply give public information, certified as a fair representation by the auditor. The whole point of DD is to look at the detail behind the accounts, plus non-accounting issues relating to the structure & activities of the company not look at the accounts themselves, which anyone can do anyway. Things in that detail might be of concern to a potential buyer, but it doesn't follow that anything has been deliberately concealed that should be in the public domain

Exactly, I have quite a heavy involvement in producing accounts for the company that I work for and I can assure you all that whilst on paper all seems well and have even gone through the audit process, but it can hide a multitude of sins and this will be the case with many companies.

I would imagine that the DD process will have identified a number of concerns to Mandaric, mainly in the interpretation and assumptions taken.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Sorry guys

Yes they have been sent in since I last looked. (Must do better)

Q. for the accountants out there.

What are accurals and deferred income amounting to £6M+

In a total figure of £8.2M for Creditors falling due within one year. This has nothing to do with the stadium payment.

Amongst other things it could include;
Ticket sales received in advance
Transfer fees ( some are paid over a long period ).
Agents fees ( they are often not paid in one hit, but paid over the length of a players contract )
Bonuses to be paid to staff
Pension payments accrued to the date of the accounts
All sorts of expenses accrued to the date of the accounts ( electricity, rates, telephone, etc. )
Sponsorship and advertising relating to the period after the accounts

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

Amongst other things it could include;
Ticket sales received in advance
Transfer fees ( some are paid over a long period ).
Agents fees ( they are often not paid in one hit, but paid over the length of a players contract )
Bonuses to be paid to staff
Pension payments accrued to the date of the accounts
All sorts of expenses accrued to the date of the accounts ( electricity, rates, telephone, etc. )
Sponsorship and advertising relating to the period after the accounts

god help coventry citys accountants..

 

[newtonfox]

god help coventry citys accountants..

 

[harry]

Amongst other things it could include;
Ticket sales received in advance
Transfer fees ( some are paid over a long period ).
Agents fees ( they are often not paid in one hit, but paid over the length of a players contract )
Bonuses to be paid to staff
Pension payments accrued to the date of the accounts
All sorts of expenses accrued to the date of the accounts ( electricity, rates, telephone, etc. )
Sponsorship and advertising relating to the period after the accounts

Did we ever pay all those deferred wages to the players when we went into administration?

£6.4M for the shareholders, plus a possible £8M at some too not distant future. I can't see the club producing an income to meet the £8M required to meet the creditors so does this mean that MM would have to commit to paying it at some stage.

I can't help thinking that although we show a small profit, reading beyond the creative accounting has shown us to be in deep do do. TNBD should be sacked over this.

 

[Ox Fox]

He should also be sacked for appointing Jo Bucci, allowing one year shirt deals and the Teamcard fiasco.

 

[homer]

He should also be sacked for appointing Jo Bucci, allowing one year shirt deals and the Teamcard fiasco.

Hardly going to sack himself, is he ?

 

[Real Sharapova]

Did we ever pay all those deferred wages to the players when we went into administration?

£6.4M for the shareholders, plus a possible £8M at some too not distant future. I can't see the club producing an income to meet the £8M required to meet the creditors so does this mean that MM would have to commit to paying it at some stage.

I can't help thinking that although we show a small profit, reading beyond the creative accounting has shown us to be in deep do do. TNBD should be sacked over this.

I believe the deferred wages were paid. I don't know what you mean about creative accounting, the accounts were subject to an outside audit, plus I believe Teacher's insisted another firm of accountants assist with the general accounts production. The £6.4 million is not a sum that fell due on 1st June 2006, much of it is provisions that would be met in the day to day running of the club. The amount, to me ( a boring accountant ) would imply the accounts were prepared on a conservative and prudent basis. Of course I do not have access to the underlying books of account, but it is a feeling I get born out of doing this job for 28 ( count 'em ) years.:icon_redf

 

[Joe_Fox]

Time for a revolution.

 

[1966]

Did we ever pay all those deferred wages to the players when we went into administration?

£6.4M for the shareholders, plus a possible £8M at some too not distant future. I can't see the club producing an income to meet the £8M required to meet the creditors so does this mean that MM would have to commit to paying it at some stage.

I can't help thinking that although we show a small profit, reading beyond the creative accounting has shown us to be in deep do do. TNBD should be sacked over this.

What are you on about?

 

[Real Sharapova]

What are you on about?

I had a go at trying to explain , but I think Harry has got hold of the wrong end of the stick re a figure in the last accounts of £6.4 million relating to accrued expenses and monies received in advance.