Jump to content

Trust Letter to AL


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

If they had been told to sign an NDA then I would hope they would have said so.  Signing an NDA doesn’t prevent you from saying “we are subject to an NDA”

 

“Only” seeing statutory accounts is sufficient isn’t it? 

 

 

Apparently they don’t show  a full picture ? I’m not an account. On twitter someone asked if he could have a refund on his trust membership, the trust director, said yes I’ll draw it out of my own bank account in pennies and give it you 👌

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, latics22 said:

Apparently they don’t show  a full picture ? I’m not an account. On twitter someone asked if he could have a refund on his trust membership, the trust director, said yes I’ll draw it out of my own bank account in pennies and give it you 👌

 

Im not sure if statutory accounts are the same as the abbreviated accounts that would usually be sent to companies house.  I was under the impression that statutory accounts included full info. But I’m not an accountant. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

Im not sure if statutory accounts are the same as the abbreviated accounts that would usually be sent to companies house.  I was under the impression that statutory accounts included full info. But I’m not an accountant. 

 

 

I think the club may be classed as small enough to only have to provide an 'abridged' balance sheet to fulfil its stat accounts obligation.  This will contain very little detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Stevie_J said:

I think the club may be classed as small enough to only have to provide an 'abridged' balance sheet to fulfil its stat accounts obligation.  This will contain very little detail.

So will the next accounts filed , have the same details of more? If more, why is he only sharing these ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kowenicki said:

 

If they had been told to sign an NDA then I would hope they would have said so.  Signing an NDA doesn’t prevent you from saying “we are subject to an NDA”

 

“Only” seeing statutory accounts is sufficient isn’t it? 

 

 

I asked the direct question on here to underdog. Ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mickjagger said:

I thought we were debt free now with all the cost cutting?

There seems to have been statements from AL about being debt free.  However, Companies House still shows one of the debts to Necarcu, for £350k, as outstanding.  It also shows a Brassbank charge which cross-refers to a loan agreement, under which Brassbank has made a loan to the company.  The amount is unspecified and the loan agreement is not appended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stevie_J said:

There seems to have been statements from AL about being debt free.  However, Companies House still shows one of the debts to Necarcu, for £350k, as outstanding.  It also shows a Brassbank charge which cross-refers to a loan agreement, under which Brassbank has made a loan to the company.  The amount is unspecified and the loan agreement is not appended.

 

….and this is exactly the kind of thing that makes looking at a set of accounts only part of the story.

 

Full accounts contain notes which supposedly explain things but they are often only the headline...the real facts are elsewhere...not necessarily hidden deliberately but just not explained in full.

 

If you are assessing a business you use the accounts as a starting point, not the end game. P&L' and Balance sheets give you a picture and a few pointers to the real questions to be asked.

 

Sadly the real picture for Latics could be very murky (as with most football clubs it seems) and the fact that an nda is required suggests there is something to hide. It seems to me the Trust has got itself in to an impossible position and conflict of interests...it should be acting as an outside, independent force answerable to the supporters (not just its paid up members) rather than a part of the current owner' team. 

 

If an owner doesn't believe he/she should be transparent with his "customer base" (and football is unique whatever anyone says) then I think it tells you everything you need to know about them or the people they associate with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mickjagger said:

I thought we were debt free now with all the cost cutting?

 

Cost cutting wouldn't get rid of the long term debts.  I think he was referring to short term debts such as ongoing bills etc. There is no way we are debt free. That would be a minor miracle. 

 

 

Edited by kowenicki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mcfluff1985 said:

As much of a wind-up as that Twitter account is, the trust are a joke

Wind up is being very generous.  "The Executioner" opens new accounts quicker than I can block them to troll on the #oafc.  I'd be surprised if he was actually a trust member in the first place.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mcfluff1985 said:

As much of a wind-up as that Twitter account is, the trust are a joke

A good answer.  What makes anyone think they are entitled to their money back.  I'd post it back in pennies - but without stamps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, latics22 said:

Apparently they don’t show  a full picture ? I’m not an account. On twitter someone asked if he could have a refund on his trust membership, the trust director, said yes I’ll draw it out of my own bank account in pennies and give it you 👌

 

1 hour ago, mcfluff1985 said:

As much of a wind-up as that Twitter account is, the trust are a joke

 

1 hour ago, dannyboy55555 said:

That's absolutely disgraceful.

 

Not really. The Executioner (and his many other accounts) is an absolute dickhead(s)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Kusunga_Is_God said:

NDA. Pissing. Trust should fold immediately. The ego-trip for those involved who like to feel better by knowing more than the normal fan is becoming incredibly tiresome especially when the club is in the state it is.

The NDA was apparently signed because specifics regarding staff were discussed which obviously can’t be allowed out in the public domain 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...