Chinese Takeover

How far did those proposed takeovers get though?

 

I get the impression that you're an accountant RR? Looking at that there doesn't appear to be anything relating to turnover i.e. income from gate receipts, Wembley appearances, TV rights, season ticket sales, club shop, transfers and such like nor is there anything regarding players wages. Shouldn't full accounts show a breakdown of income & expenditure? I also noted that there's a called up share capital of a quid. Is that a fiddle factor rather like "k" in a physics calculation.? "Amount due to related party at the balance sheet date" went up by nigh on £5 million from 2015 (Note 17) - why's that in simple layman's terms? Just trying to find out how we lost a million quid in one of our most successful ever seasons. Unless the Wembley receipts were part of the £10 million profit made after the accounts were submitted which would account for it.

 

I saw Mr Lee's car parked up today. He had a Toby Tyke air freshener hanging from his rear view mirror and a BFC tax disc holder attached to his windscreen. Make of that what you will.

You heard it here first.

 

Barnsley FC have taken advantage of rules relating to smaller companies. These allow companies with turnover less than a certain figure (£5m I think) to submit less information than larger companies. With our promotion and the sale of players, we will once again have to submit full unabridged accounts for the year after. You can expect to see these around Christmas. The rules for smaller companies mean that we were not required to file our Profit and Loss account, but even if we had, these do not include a trading section. The sensitivity of trading information is such that even large companies are allowed to keep some things secret.

The ticket sales for our Wembley appearances were conducted on behalf of Wembley and would not count towards turnover. Instead, we would probably have received an agent booking fee, plus appearance money and a winners bonus, all of which would count towards turnover. This is why it was said at the time that we did not make a huge amount of money from our two appearances. The information that you seek about costs is never revealed, but there is information about transfers if you read the notes that accompany the accounts carefully. The Auditors Report, which begins the accounts is your guarantee that the figures have been looked at carefully, and the signature at the end of the report represents a guarantee that they are prepared accurately and that the Balance Sheet represents the true financial position of the company as at that date. Having said that, Alfie Mawson's contract would have had a Balance Sheet value of just two thirds the price that we paid for his services, and as we know, he was sold for £5m in the following September. That and our share of the John Stones fee, when he was sold on by Everton, is no more than a note, right at the end of the accounts. The problem is that a Balance Sheet is a picture in time, and as we all know, pictures can sometimes be deceptive. Balance Sheets do contain some opinions, but those opinions just cannot affect the accounts materially. Regular readers of the information within accounts understand the rules that govern their preparation, and they make their own value judgements on what adjustments to make to those figures. Nevertheless, Balance Sheets are drawn up against a background of accounting standards and laws, which guarantee their accuracy within that framework. But equally, it is why companies are almost never sold for their Balance Sheet value.

It is usual for Share Capital to be more than £1, but when there is just a single shareholder, there is no reason for it. Share Capital is merely another historic cost of buying the company. In this case our owner elected to fund the purchase of the company through a loan rather than through shares. In fact, he also elected to fund it through £3.9m in a share subscription account, probably intending to take this back when the club got back on its feet. This year he appears to have accepted the inevitability that it is a permanent investment and has transferred it to Retained Earnings ( Note 13), thereby reflecting the true figure for losses since trading began in 2002, that is, since the company was formed to take over the football club. The other side of the transaction is reflected in the increased balance of monies due to related party. It leaves a difference, which I presume is other investment by Mr Cryne, over and above the amount he donated to keep the club within the SCMP rules, by lowering the total loss from £1m to £500k.

The note about the £10m profit almost certainly relates to the windfall of the Mawson and Stones transfer fees, which would have been known before the accounts were finally signed off by the auditors. The transactions were not rooted in the previous year and so cannot be included in the Balance Sheet at 31 May, but since the effect is material to any consideration of the accounts, a note has been made. Any transaction that is substantively complete before the year end (31 May 2016) will have been included in the accounts for the year ending on that date, so our Wembley appearances will be included. The fact is that our academy costs the club £1m each year in running costs. Just look at our entry in Wikipedia for the names and job titles of the people we employ. When we get a windfall like the Stones and Holgate transfers, it look like a good investment. In other years, it looks like a white elephant. The club, and specifically the owner, has elected to continue funding it and frankly, that is his judgement to make since he is effectively financing it. Our promotion was funded by the purchase of better players than our competitors could afford. We did to other teams in the lower league exactly what we complain is being done to us in the Championship. We bought promotion.

Sorry that this is long, but I thought it necessary.

 

We bought promotion but it wouldn't have happened had lee Jay not gone to Bristol and hecky not took over.

 

How do you know that? We lost 9 on the trot as Johnson struggled to get the team to gel, but we had won 6 on the trot before he left. It is very hard to get new teams to gel. I stuck with Johnson then, and I will stick with Hecky now.

 

It's just my opinion I don't think Johnson or Wilson would have got us promoted. We were on a good run before he left but would he have been able to keep it going until the end of season like hecky did and guarantee the play offs? He treated players like bree and George Williams like **** both especially Williams played a big part in the play off push under hecky.

 

After reading that, your football posts make a lot more sense now.

 

I'm not a gambling man but I'd say that a manager who took a team to the bottom of Division 3 who's components were later sold for millions wouldn't have got us promoted. Relegated? Probably not but he seems to be a boom or bust manager.

 

Anything new?

 

Yes Chow Mein is now available to pre order for half time.

 

Do not let this thread die, new records to be set, on what could be the biggest event in the history of BFC.

 

We're only a laughing stock when they win.

 

Have to disagree...only one thing puts bums on seats...winning football.

 

I agree. Ticket prices only cause a steady increase in attendance when they're reduced however I feel that if we were in and around the top 6 for a substantial length of time, a bit like Wednesday, we'd be regularly surpassing 15,000, even at £25-£30 a ticket.

 

When I saw the title of this thread, I was really worried, I thought it might have been the one on Furlong Rd, Bolton. They do a mean Me Goreng.

 

I agree. Johnno would have reverted back to sideways-backward-backwards-sideways possession for the sake of possession ***** he was playing for. Conman masquerading as a football intellectual.

 

Latest update on the takeover issued by the Chronicle 2 hours ago.


http://www.barnsleychronicle.com/article/head-coach-says-cryne-will-only-sell-to-the-right-person