OAFC Latest Accounts

[rudemedic]

2 hours ago, Andy b said:

For the avoidance of doubt, the trust is wholly independent of the FLG. None the the aforementioned group sit on the trust board. 

So presumably the Trust has been told who all the anonymous members of the FLG are? 

[yarddog73]

4 hours ago, rudemedic said:

So presumably the Trust has been told who all the anonymous members of the FLG are? 

Can't say 

[deyres42]

6 hours ago, Lags said:

Am sure the club keep saying that we are nearly debt free. The accounts come out and sure enough they reflect a better footing. 

 

It can't be right it's not what we want to see say some. Look the club have published some figures, if they prove utterly fake then the powers that be will be slapped by the proper authorities. Not this board. 

 

Its clear from all the evidence of disgruntled ex staff that stuff isn't being done by convention. So the question is, are we where we are by convention or the mismanagement of the previous 20 years? So could non convention by the answer. 

 

Until someone stumps up the readies it's AL's club to run, nothing changes for us who just support the club. So support. Long live the King till the new King cometh 

I can't support it at the moment Lags, for various reasons (Scholes thing was final straw), but fair play to anyone still keeping the faith.

[laticsmarra]

8 hours ago, leeslover said:

You expect them to publish every transaction?

No,the point is that  the full accounts will show the picture without a major investigation. In that case every transaction won't be published.

[tGWB]

10 hours ago, Andy b said:

For the avoidance of doubt, the trust is wholly independent of the FLG. None the the aforementioned group sit on the trust board. 

 

Andy, thats good news, thanks for clearing that up 

[leeslover]

31 minutes ago, laticsmarra said:

No,the point is that  the full accounts will show the picture without a major investigation. In that case every transaction won't be published.

But there won't have been an audit to produce, "full accounts," you can't hide what you don't have 

[UsedtobeWozzer]

30 minutes ago, leeslover said:

But there won't have been an audit to produce, "full accounts," you can't hide what you don't have 

It would be a bit odd given our precarious financial state to pay for an audit when legally it’s not required. Would put paying for Tom Hamer’s shirt in the shade. 

[Dave_Og]

1 hour ago, leeslover said:

But there won't have been an audit to produce, "full accounts," you can't hide what you don't have 

There must be a P&l, surely. 

[leeslover]

38 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

There must be a P&l, surely. 

I would have thought so although I'm not sure what the minimum requirements are. It wouldn't answer most of the questions though (like where the £5m of debt went to)

[HarryBosch]

10 hours ago, Lags said:

Am sure the club keep saying that we are nearly debt free. The accounts come out and sure enough they reflect a better footing. 

 

It can't be right it's not what we want to see say some.  

 

Or "It can't be wrong it is what we want to see say some"? 

[Londonboy]

I'm no expert in this but surely if false accounts had been formally submitted then AL would be in a whole load of shit??

 

Like him (which I don't) or not what he submits on the clubs behalf is his responsibility and I guess he will be personally liable for any misgivings...

 

He is not at liberty to publish a detailed P&L into the public domain, as most business' refrain from doing so.

 

There's plenty of other important things to discus like are we actually in a position to put out a reasonably competitive team at FGR next week and beyond.

 

I'll be at FGR to support the team and am curious to see what the new coach can get out of what looks currently a bang average League 2 squad.

 

KTF.

 

 

[Dave_Og]

Presumably there is a requirement to send something more detailed than the abridged accounts to the EFL.  Whatever that involves might be of more interest. 

[Londonboy]

Just now, Dave_Og said:

Presumably there is a requirement to send something more detailed than the abridged accounts to the EFL.  Whatever that involves might be of more interest. 

 

You'd imagine so Dave, but I dont know what bits can be made public?

[boundaryblue80]

4 hours ago, deyres42 said:

I can't support it at the moment Lags, for various reasons (Scholes thing was final straw), but fair play to anyone still keeping the faith.

 

See that post is a perfect snapshot of what bugs the shit out of me about the pissboil...

 

Last night on Twitter I'm getting tagged in stuff about the Pensions. Now yes, I agree, it's proper shit he isn't paying them. He needs to get it resolved. It is one of the shit things I've agreed AL has got up to......BUT......apart from a few murmurings, nobody really gave too much of a toss about the pensions but now it's all-important. Simply put, it was Scholes and his leaving that sent folk into orbit. Scholes...FFS...a chap that really found himself totally clueless as to what life as a League Two manager would entail. Watching games eh  And that is what was a tipping point (which it was) for a lot of folk? Not for me...and I'd imagine not for plenty of others that think the same as I do.

 

Also, for me, it isn't about keeping the faith. I've no issue with folk like Paddy (Lee Sinnott) pushing the Trust to ask AL to sort his ways. I fully support that. He needs to but let's remember, even Pete Wild stated there was no interference after Scholes left so fingers crossed that shows he has started to and continues to do so. I'm fully supportive of the questions being asked about the accounts. I've sat inside the walls of BP and done the same many moons ago. What I'm not supportive of is this "smoke the fucker out" and the "he won't be around long enough to see the Edmundson money" etc. Folk can mock that I've labelled it an agenda. But it is one...

 

Now if the FLG tomorrow show something decent with a clear viable plan, then great. I'd love nothing more than to see the club back whole as one...the land, the badge, the fans even. There will be shades of grey tho...like who these people are. And whether they want to act appropriately or if they just simply want to "smoke the fucker out." Yet more fingers crossed that it's the former rather than the latter.

[deyres42]

5 minutes ago, boundaryblue80 said:

 

See that post is a perfect snapshot of what bugs the shit out of me about the pissboil...

 

Last night on Twitter I'm getting tagged in stuff about the Pensions. Now yes, I agree, it's proper shit he isn't paying them. He needs to get it resolved. It is one of the shit things I've agreed AL has got up to......BUT......apart from a few murmurings, nobody really gave too much of a toss about the pensions but now it's all-important. Simply put, it was Scholes and his leaving that sent folk into orbit. Scholes...FFS...a chap that really found himself totally clueless as to what life as a League Two manager would entail. Watching games eh  And that is what was a tipping point? Not for me...and I'd imagine not for plenty of others that think the same as I do.

 

Also, for me, it isn't about keeping the faith. I've no issue with folk like Paddy (Lee Sinnott) pushing the Trust to ask AL to sort his ways. I fully support that. He needs to but let's remember, even Pete Wild stated there was no interference after Scholes left so fingers crossed that shows he has started to and continues to do so. I'm fully supportive of the questions being asked that they are about the accounts. I've sat inside the walls of BP and done that same many moons ago. What I'm not supportive of is this "smoke the fucker out" and the "he won't be around long enough to see the Edmundson money" etc. Folk can mock that I've labelled it an agenda. But it is one...

 

Now if the FLG tomorrow show something decent with a clear viable plan, then great. I'd love nothing more than to see the club back whole as one...the land, the badge, the fans even. There will be shades of grey tho...like who these people are. And whether they want to act appropriately or if they just simply want to "smoke the fucker out." Yet more fingers crossed that it's the former rather than the latter.

Scholes could potentially have been the best thing to happen for the club for a long time, alas the Lemsagams had no intention in finding out.

 

The signings and 'head coach' appointment indicate greater and more blatent interference to come.

 

Nobody who has left has had a good word to say about them.

[underdog]

Dear all.

 

Just to let you know that the Football Supporters Association ( Was Supporters Direct) are pushing the EFL on reform on how Club's publish their yearly accounts in all leagues.

 

They want consistancy throughout and have examples of good and bad practice. We will be in one of those groups as they have already reviewed what was published this week at Companies house.

 

Thanks

 

 

[OAFC1984]

2 hours ago, leeslover said:

But there won't have been an audit to produce, "full accounts," you can't hide what you don't have 

 

Saddam got bombed for exactly that 

[disjointed]

50 minutes ago, boundaryblue80 said:

 

See that post is a perfect snapshot of what bugs the shit out of me about the pissboil...

 

Last night on Twitter I'm getting tagged in stuff about the Pensions. Now yes, I agree, it's proper shit he isn't paying them. He needs to get it resolved. It is one of the shit things I've agreed AL has got up to......BUT......apart from a few murmurings, nobody really gave too much of a toss about the pensions but now it's all-important. Simply put, it was Scholes and his leaving that sent folk into orbit. Scholes...FFS...a chap that really found himself totally clueless as to what life as a League Two manager would entail. Watching games eh  And that is what was a tipping point (which it was) for a lot of folk? Not for me...and I'd imagine not for plenty of others that think the same as I do.

 

Also, for me, it isn't about keeping the faith. I've no issue with folk like Paddy (Lee Sinnott) pushing the Trust to ask AL to sort his ways. I fully support that. He needs to but let's remember, even Pete Wild stated there was no interference after Scholes left so fingers crossed that shows he has started to and continues to do so. I'm fully supportive of the questions being asked about the accounts. I've sat inside the walls of BP and done the same many moons ago. What I'm not supportive of is this "smoke the fucker out" and the "he won't be around long enough to see the Edmundson money" etc. Folk can mock that I've labelled it an agenda. But it is one...

 

Now if the FLG tomorrow show something decent with a clear viable plan, then great. I'd love nothing more than to see the club back whole as one...the land, the badge, the fans even. There will be shades of grey tho...like who these people are. And whether they want to act appropriately or if they just simply want to "smoke the fucker out." Yet more fingers crossed that it's the former rather than the latter.

How many managers do we have to go through until it becomes a tipping point for others. Scholes tipped it for me, I think managers should be given a fair crack of the whip, I know Scholes walked but that was down to the owner and his interference, perhaps it is just my age and my tolerance levels have gotten lower. 

[OAFC1984]

24 minutes ago, underdog said:

Dear all.

 

Just to let you know that the Football Supporters Association ( Was Supporters Direct) are pushing the EFL on reform on how Club's publish their yearly accounts in all leagues.

 

They want consistancy throughout and have examples of good and bad practice. We will be in one of those groups as they have already reviewed what was published this week at Companies house.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

Wonder which group we fall into??

[leeslover]

I wasn't even that keen on getting Scholes, and not because he's a Red either. The whole farce of it did finally confirm that the running of the club is beyond farcical. If that wasn't enough there's been plenty of sense. They just don't have a fucking clue what they're doing, even if they are working with the best of intentions 

[HarryBosch]

10 hours ago, rudemedic said:

So presumably the Trust has been told who all the anonymous members of the FLG are? 

 

You'd assume so considering they were the first people to inform us of their existence.

 

Do people (who want to) seriously still not know who's involved or are they just pretending not to know in the interests of an (sorry, I can't think of any other word) agenda... ?

[laticsmarra]

3 hours ago, leeslover said:

But there won't have been an audit to produce, "full accounts," you can't hide what you don't have 

OAFC are below the threshold for an audit.Nevertheless,Accountants preparing accounts on behalf of clients have to comply with accounting regulations and are subject to checks on their files by their relevant accounting institutes.This applies to ATS OAFC's new accountants

[singe]

53 minutes ago, underdog said:

Dear all.

 

Just to let you know that the Football Supporters Association ( Was Supporters Direct) are pushing the EFL on reform on how Club's publish their yearly accounts in all leagues.

 

They want consistancy throughout and have examples of good and bad practice. We will be in one of those groups as they have already reviewed what was published this week at Companies house.

 

Thanks

 

 

I didn't realise or recall that Supporters Direct and Footballs Supperters Federation merged to becoem the Football Supporters' Association. That seems like it will be a much stronger body.

[singe]

1 hour ago, boundaryblue80 said:

 

See that post is a perfect snapshot of what bugs the shit out of me about the pissboil...

 

Last night on Twitter I'm getting tagged in stuff about the Pensions. Now yes, I agree, it's proper shit he isn't paying them. He needs to get it resolved. It is one of the shit things I've agreed AL has got up to......BUT......apart from a few murmurings, nobody really gave too much of a toss about the pensions but now it's all-important. Simply put, it was Scholes and his leaving that sent folk into orbit. Scholes...FFS...a chap that really found himself totally clueless as to what life as a League Two manager would entail. Watching games eh  And that is what was a tipping point (which it was) for a lot of folk? Not for me...and I'd imagine not for plenty of others that think the same as I do.

 

Also, for me, it isn't about keeping the faith. I've no issue with folk like Paddy (Lee Sinnott) pushing the Trust to ask AL to sort his ways. I fully support that. He needs to but let's remember, even Pete Wild stated there was no interference after Scholes left so fingers crossed that shows he has started to and continues to do so. I'm fully supportive of the questions being asked about the accounts. I've sat inside the walls of BP and done the same many moons ago. What I'm not supportive of is this "smoke the fucker out" and the "he won't be around long enough to see the Edmundson money" etc. Folk can mock that I've labelled it an agenda. But it is one...

 

Now if the FLG tomorrow show something decent with a clear viable plan, then great. I'd love nothing more than to see the club back whole as one...the land, the badge, the fans even. There will be shades of grey tho...like who these people are. And whether they want to act appropriately or if they just simply want to "smoke the fucker out." Yet more fingers crossed that it's the former rather than the latter.

The pension issue has been raised around 50 time on here. I tihnk it is important because it looked like it had been sorted, finally having been paid. I think it right that an individual highlight how long and the fforts required for this simple thing, and the fact it got as far as reporting it to the regulator.
It has taken on a new twist because the new company taking over pensions has also reported OAFc to the regulator. Astonishing.

A light needs to be continued to be shone on these actions because they are either actions of malice, or incompetence. Or both.
 

[kowenicki]

1 hour ago, HarryBosch said:

 

You'd assume so considering they were the first people to inform us of their existence.

 

Do people (who want to) seriously still not know who's involved or are they just pretending not to know in the interests of an (sorry, I can't think of any other word) agenda... ?

 

Brooke, Wood (“what a bunch of wankers” his latest tweet regarding AL and kin), Ward and the builder bloke. But I don’t know if these are just employees/consultants or the ‘money’ men (I sincerely hope they aren’t the only ‘money’ men!)

 

Thats all I know (probably more than most fans that don’t frequent here) through putting 2 and 2 together.  If people on here know better and don’t want to share through some weird power trip then that’s up to them.