brendywendy you run a business.thats why i asked you
Cheers for clearing up any ambiguity
Clearly, it's all easily understandable and available at everyone's fingertips.
by Schards#2 » 06 Sep 2010 11:33
brendywendy you run a business.thats why i asked you
by ZacNaloen » 06 Sep 2010 11:57
by Schards#2 » 06 Sep 2010 12:15
ZacNaloen So there isn't a years delay in the publication of your businesses accounts? Or you don't pay any attention and just let your accountant do what he wants?
That was the question he asked you.
by brendywendy » 06 Sep 2010 12:17
Schards#2brendywendy you run a business.thats why i asked you
Cheers for clearing up any ambiguity
Clearly, it's all easily understandable and available at everyone's fingertips.
by brendywendy » 06 Sep 2010 12:21
Schards#2ZacNaloen So there isn't a years delay in the publication of your businesses accounts? Or you don't pay any attention and just let your accountant do what he wants?
That was the question he asked you.
There is a delay in the publishing of my company's accounts.
I would have no difficulty in establishing into what accounting year a significant lump sum payment fell.
The question I asked him was about when parachute payments were made, he answered, firstly, by saying this was all unambiguous in the accounts and, secondly by asking an irrelevent question about my own company.
What he did not do was answer my question so, presumably, it's not as unambiguous as he would have us believe.
It's relevent in that, if the last set of accounts show a black hole of £4m but don't take account of a multi million pound parachute payment received shortly afetr the accounting date, then people may view the sale of a major player without adequately replacing him in a different light even though what the club is saying may be born out by the last set of accounts.
by Royal Lady » 06 Sep 2010 12:24
by brendywendy » 06 Sep 2010 12:29
Royal Lady I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.
by Royal Lady » 06 Sep 2010 12:30
brendywendyRoyal Lady I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.
and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too
and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc
by Schards#2 » 06 Sep 2010 12:34
brendywendyRoyal Lady I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.
and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too
and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc
by brendywendy » 06 Sep 2010 12:37
by brendywendy » 06 Sep 2010 12:37
Schards#2brendywendyRoyal Lady I'm pretty sure that last year, someone said the "wages" section in the accounts also included those of the hotel staff. Hence my comments previously about the hotel and football club being lumped together in the accounts.
and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too
and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc
So, if the wages are included, and the profits are included, is it reasonable to assume that the cost of extending the hotel is also included?
by Hoop Blah » 06 Sep 2010 13:10
by Schards#2 » 06 Sep 2010 13:10
brendywendySchards#2brendywendy
and the profits from the hotel are lumped in too
and lol at the idea that the hotel wages make anything but the teeniest dent on our multimillion pound wage bill for overpayedprimadonnafootballers etc
So, if the wages are included, and the profits are included, is it reasonable to assume that the cost of extending the hotel is also included?
id assume so wouldnt you?
but what exactly is the problem here?
if you honestly think the chairman is robbing money from the club and laundering it through the hotel?
or do you just think that hes spent club money on the hotel expansion?
if thats the case i dont see a problem with that since the hotel has funded the club in the previous years, and the expansion will only help bring in more money.
all i know is that these accusations were made before and rebuffed totally and fully by the club
by brendywendy » 06 Sep 2010 13:14
Schards#2brendywendy
id assume so wouldnt you?
but what exactly is the problem here?
if you honestly think the chairman is robbing money from the club and laundering it through the hotel?
or do you just think that hes spent club money on the hotel expansion?
if thats the case i dont see a problem with that since the hotel has funded the club in the previous years, and the expansion will only help bring in more money.
all i know is that these accusations were made before and rebuffed totally and fully by the club
You appear to have answered the question put in the second line of your post with the last line of your post.
by Schards#2 » 06 Sep 2010 13:20
brendywendySchards#2brendywendy
id assume so wouldnt you?
but what exactly is the problem here?
if you honestly think the chairman is robbing money from the club and laundering it through the hotel?
or do you just think that hes spent club money on the hotel expansion?
if thats the case i dont see a problem with that since the hotel has funded the club in the previous years, and the expansion will only help bring in more money.
all i know is that these accusations were made before and rebuffed totally and fully by the club
You appear to have answered the question put in the second line of your post with the last line of your post.
your problem is that the club has answered these questions before?
im not having a go at you schards, its just the accounts when they come out each year have always made sense, there are no glaring gaps and holes, so i seriously just want you to explain what the problems you percieve are, and why they are such a problem. thats all.
by Royal Lady » 06 Sep 2010 13:20
by ZacNaloen » 06 Sep 2010 13:22
Royal Lady the problem as I perceive it and I may be very wrong, I'll admit, is that if the hotel took £17 million or whatever it was from the football club in order to build the expansion etc, then THAT is why we have had problems in the last couple of years - we (RFC) are having to cut our cloth BECAUSE of the hotel. If we are unable to buy the players we want because of this, then I think it's fair to be slightly annoyed.
by Svlad Cjelli » 06 Sep 2010 13:24
Royal Lady the problem as I perceive it and I may be very wrong, I'll admit, is that if the hotel took £17 million or whatever it was from the football club in order to build the expansion etc, then THAT is why we have had problems in the last couple of years - we (RFC) are having to cut our cloth BECAUSE of the hotel. If we are unable to buy the players we want because of this, then I think it's fair to be slightly annoyed.
by Hoop Blah » 06 Sep 2010 13:24
by Svlad Cjelli » 06 Sep 2010 13:26
Hoop Blah I'd rather we saw more external investment to keep us more competitive, but realistically that's not what we're going to get at the moment.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 198 guests