• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

New buyers put off by £20 million hole in accounts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grumpy Old Man said:
No, addons are usually shown as a contingent liability and only put through the books as and when they are triggered (at which point they'll be in trade creditors until paid. It's shown as a note in the accounts of most football clubs. There was no such note in last year's accounts for the club. I was critical of this, and did mention this to CM last June. I also gave him a copy of Burnley's accounts as a model of how it should be done; they're a shining example of how to communicate with the wide range of stakeholders there are associated with a football club. I am deeply unimpressed with the current auditors; I'm really not sure they understand exactly how wide the range of interested parties is.
Click to expand...
That’s because Burnley is well run club, so I would suggest they aren’t frightened of anything that comes out in there accounts, unlike our club right now.
 
Mary Hinge said:
Thought they had to follow rules Grumpo?
Click to expand...
They're supposed to make sure accounting policies are applied correctly and any judgements are reasonable. If the auditor does not maintain their independence they might let you get away with less disclosure, challenge your assumptions less and allow you to make judgements that are a bit more of a stretch. If those particular accounts are reviewed by the Financial Reporting Council and they think they haven't posed enough challenge, tested appropriately/enough they will get in trouble. But there is wiggle room with judgements, getting cozy means they might be a bit looser than an auditor who hates you.

Edit - I know nothing about the firm who audit SAFC's accounts and I'm not suggesting that they are doing anything unethical or illegal, I'm sure everything they are doing is above board.
 
Last edited:
MickeyV said:
What about the Rodwell and Cattermole settlements? Do we know what is outstanding in those deals?
Click to expand...

I've mentioned this earlier on this thread I think?

Second hand into so not verified, but a few days ago when he was defending the current owners, BOB talked about how bad things really were by saying that both Cattermole and Oviedo were being paid £20K per week each - this season and next season to pay up their contracts.

God help us if that's true.
 
Zak's Dad said:
I've mentioned this earlier on this thread I think?

Second hand into so not verified, but a few days ago when he was defending the current owners, BOB talked about how bad things really were by saying that both Cattermole and Oviedo were being paid £20K per week each - this season and next season to pay up their contracts.

God help us if that's true.
Click to expand...
I would take that with a pinch of salt, he's hardly renowned for his accuracy.
 
Zak's Dad said:
I've mentioned this earlier on this thread I think?

Second hand into so not verified, but a few days ago when he was defending the current owners, BOB talked about how bad things really were by saying that both Cattermole and Oviedo were being paid £20K per week each - this season and next season to pay up their contracts.

God help us if that's true.
Click to expand...
Must admit I know for a fact that cattermole is still being paid by us
 
fyl2u said:
Are you talking about these comments on the radio, where he says categorically that anyone wanting to buy the club could just buy the club but are more likely to buy Madrox?

New buyers put off by £20 million hole in accounts

If so, it seems that you are the one that has been proven to be lying.
Click to expand...

Have you listened to the interview in question? He’s says, and I quote ‘you would acquire the holding company’.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
They are, but most clubs make more than the minimum disclosures required by law to be as informative as possible, and auditors with industry familiarity will know that and push for it. They simply don't have that experience.
Click to expand...
So the auditors appointedby our non-league owners are non-league.
 
No. 1 is Gary Rowell said:
Have you listened to the interview in question? He’s says, and I quote ‘you would acquire the holding company’.
Click to expand...

"Yes. Anybody who wanted to buy the club would likely buy the holding company, and the holding company of Sunderland is Madrox.

"The reality of it is, if somebody buys or wanted to buy Sunderland Football Club they would most likely acquire Madrox.

"You could buy the club from Madrox, but you would have to get approval from all the people who are owed money by Madrox, which is now myself, Juan, Charlie and the guys from America.

"So in practical terms you wouldn't do that. You would just acquire the holding company."'
 
Zak's Dad said:
I've mentioned this earlier on this thread I think?

Second hand into so not verified, but a few days ago when he was defending the current owners, BOB talked about how bad things really were by saying that both Cattermole and Oviedo were being paid £20K per week each - this season and next season to pay up their contracts.

God help us if that's true.
Click to expand...

It is true. I said so the other day. It’s not a bob exclusive though, it was widely spoken of at the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top