[Kosh]

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:24 pm  

snowie wrote:

hull have a bigger supporter base which helps, we are desperate for a new ground and we know it,
if we can ride this out and get Stanley up and moving I will feel better

Oh aye - I'm not suggesting that it's easy, just that it can be done. It took us years to get into profit even after we moved to the KC and crowds increased.

Hope this all gets sorted out and you can move on ASAP.

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:30 pm  

I can understand the panic, but everyone is saying that the bill will be paid and we are not having a fire sale of players.

If it is to do with image rights, then we have been asked to pay a large sum of money that we hadn't expected to pay in a year when our through the gate income has been cut by around 20%. It is no real surprise that we couldn't just dip into the pot, particularly as I expect that keeping the club running competitively on our resources is like plate-spinning.

We have been in worse financial scrapes than this one, but it is a good reason not to increase Brough's money.

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:35 pm  

The Trip wrote:

If only business was that simple, looks great in the text books but believe me real life soon put's a damper on that.

Business is that simple. I run a ltd company and hold back a set % to pay for this stuff. It is very simple, if you use the money for something else your going under.

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:38 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Indeed. Try telling the owner or directors of a business that cannot pay its employees or suppliers AND the taxes it received or deducted on behalf of HMRC that they have to pay the taxes not the employees or suppliers? Regardless of how it got in that state, what would you do if placed in that situation?

And I think "Walrus" might be surprised just how "mormal" it is for (mostly smaller) businesses to be badly behind on paying over the taxes they have collected in the current recession.

Try telling the owner he has to make all his staff redundant because he has not followed simple company rules.

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:52 pm  

Quite frankly this whole thing disgusts me and is distasteful

In the past I have bought shares to help secure the club

I have been offered debentures (remember the West Stand to become a parade of shops! the Ground at Sharlston?)

I paid money after the CVA to assist not one word of thanks

I have pad into the lottery have 4 lots of shares

And still after all the promises that have never been fulfilled I support the club but I am sorry some people couldnt deliver a pizza down at BV.

The article on the front page of the YEP and page 5 of the WE today have made me really annoyed I said before when we had the business bloke who lasted 12 months thats what we needed to continue this is a business and to be frank the club is like someones hobby, everything is on the cheap, programme sellers the stewards everything is just about kept in place by volunteers and oh yes over the years in the wilderness times I have done my share of volunteering.

The way the club is marketed is poor IMHO and the news of the media post is welcome the club really does need to get its act together in its affairs.

Rant over

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:12 pm  

Walrus wrote:

Try telling the owner he has to make all his staff redundant because he has not followed simple company rules.

I've been FD/CFO of decent-sized international trading groups for over 20 years, after 12 years in the profession. I've lost count of the number of times I have had to explain to owners of businesses the probable or potential implications of their failure to follow "the rules". Fortunately, and in every case where trading whilst insolvent was a risk, they usually listened.

The fact that the club (in this case) seemed unable to persuade HMRC to withdraw the petition - or better, not to petition in the first place - is what perplexes me here. That would normally only happen when either a company does not co-operate with HMRC, or puts forward proposals (if any) which HMRC deem unlikely to clear the debt within a reasonable time, or HMRC see some other threat to them getting paid such as fraudulent preference or the owners doing a flit. Unless of course someone was playing brinkmanship and lost, or thought HMRC were bluffing? As I say, perplexed as surely none of these situations can have arisen?

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:28 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

I've been FD/CFO of decent-sized international trading groups for over 20 years, after 12 years in the profession. I've lost count of the number of times I have had to explain to owners of businesses the probable or potential implications of their failure to follow "the rules". Fortunately, and in every case where trading whilst insolvent was a risk, they usually listened.

The fact that the club (in this case) seemed unable to persuade HMRC to withdraw the petition - or better, not to petition in the first place - is what perplexes me here. That would normally only happen when either a company does not co-operate with HMRC, or puts forward proposals (if any) which HMRC deem unlikely to clear the debt within a reasonable time, or HMRC see some other threat to them getting paid such as fraudulent preference or the owners doing a flit. Unless of course someone was playing brinkmanship and lost, or thought HMRC were bluffing? As I say, perplexed as surely none of these situations can have arisen?

Nobody knows the history to this public part obviously but they usually get un-coporative when they believe there is a risk to their money disappearing.

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:34 pm  

Walrus wrote:

Business is that simple. I run a ltd company and hold back a set % to pay for this stuff. It is very simple, if you use the money for something else your going under.

buisness is not that simple i have run 2 limited companies for the best part of 25 years and a sol trader. i have had 2 winding up orders over the last 25 years settled them and carried on trading successfully 180,000 is nothing compared to the turn over of the company all this is just storm in a tea cup don't know why you are all getting worked up and wetting yourselves its a bill big deal the club will pay it in the next couple of month and some of you will be able to sleep lol lets talk about rl this is boring

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:52 pm  

MR BROWN wrote:

buisness is not that simple i have run 2 limited companies for the best part of 25 years and a sol trader. i have had 2 winding up orders over the last 25 years settled them and carried on trading successfully 180,000 is nothing compared to the turn over of the company all this is just storm in a tea cup don't know why you are all getting worked up and wetting yourselves its a bill big deal the club will pay it in the next couple of month and some of you will be able to sleep lol lets talk about rl this is boring

What do you mean by "winding-up order"? If the court orders winding-up, then the company is liquidated.

A winding-up hearing at the High Court - to get to an actual hearing, as opposed to settling beforehand - is a very serious issue. And the hearing was only adjourned for 84 days. That is a serious situation, in that if for any reason the rest of the debt is not paid in that time then liquidation would seem a high probability.

And £180k is suignificant compared with the club;s turnover...but its not turnover that pays the bills, its cash. How significant is it compared with the club's cash resources - and remember, the directors have to satisfy themselves that the company has sufficient cash for its needs for at least the next 12 months to avoid the risk of trading whilst insolvent for which they can be made personally liable.

I'm sure your club WILL settle this and sort it. But be under no illusions about its seriousness.

: Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:27 pm  

I come to this matter late and have not read every post.
I have no doubt they range from sympathy from some through delight from others and disgust from more than a few.
It may be a storm in a teacup though this being Wakefield I doubt it.
Other clubs may be in the same trouble but will probably deal with it better than us.
We only have 2 feet and it's about time we stop shooting ourselves in them.