Thetownend.com

Legal cases stall audit release
           
           


  THE full details of Swindon Town’s recent audit will not be made public until a number of legal cases involving the club are concluded, according to director Sangita Shah.

           

http://www.thisisswindontownfc.co.uk/news/headlines/10950493.Legal_cases_stall_audit_release/?ref=rss
           
           
           

utoh

Just no.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/get-jed-mccrory-back-at-swindon-town-football/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=button

Who started that?

No idea.

Apparently he made an offer to buy the club back.

With what? Pint of guinness and a packet of pork scratchings?

April 1st!!!  If he knew how to tell the truth it would be a start!

What sort of fucking mong thinks a petition is going to force a change of ownership!

Think you answered your own question. A mong.

Still not sure what the point of this audit was, unless it was to prepare the club for sale, but as time goes on and more and more excuses are proffered for the continued deferral of publication, it becomes less of a useful confidence building measure and more of a PR own goal.

I don't think these are excuses I think they're entirely legitimate reasons. I would not want to be publishing a raft of financial detail about a company that I ran whilst I was engaged in a series of legal disputes about money.

"Mr Lee Powers" -

Sign before it is too late, he's already replicated himself.

So Comazzi expects £143k from us?

Guffaw.

The Adver describe it as a forensic audit, so presumably to see if there has been any fraudulent activity that would or could result in legal action by the current owners against any former directors or employees.

And Phil Spencer has a cheek grand designing a way of bringing in a load of guff and us having to pay them off AND then expect more cash?

It stinks, but if we said we'd pay him and haven't...

Exactly, apparently he had a contract with the club which we may have well foreclosed on when PDC walked out . . . taking him with him, although Sunderland wouldn't have anything to do with him I understand!!

Both of which are fine, as is the previous suggestion someone made that it's to get the books up to scratch in preparation for a sale. But none of those things require publishing the results do they? Or, actually, saying you're going to and then repeatedly not doing so.

But, surely, nobody told Spencer to fuck off.

If he walked that's his decision.

Fuck him up the arse!

So Fredi was right (again)?

Yes, but I don't think its anything that wasn't suspected anyway.

The whole PDC era although exciting at the time was a bit of a farce really. There are many culprits including Jeremy Wray, PDC, Spencer and raft of mercenary foreign journeymen but ultimately if Black had taken a bit more of an interest he could have curbed the pissing away of his money earlier which ultimately may have given him longer to sell the club to someone who was fit and proper. I feel a bit sorry for Power as these law suits are fuck all to do with him but I guess he must have known that when he paid Jedward off

I think there were people on here last October that Jed was showing people around the club on a matchday trying to sell, which was around the time Sangita mentioned a full audit.

I'd always assumed (especially considering the subsequent events) that Power commissioned/demanded the audit before commiting to take forward the option that he held to purchase/complete on the purchase of the club.

Taking note of subsequent litigation I imagine that for Black a real bonus of Jed taking the club on in January last year was that he didn't demand any form of indemnity going forward.

On the same subject as the sale of the club. Did anyone ever hear any rumours or know who Black almost sold the club to in the summer of 2012? he said that the deal was sorted and then someone died and it fell through.

Obviously, along with the other hundreds of people who knew, as it has been reported since the takeover, even down to the figure commazi was looking for, no big mystery.

:Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick:  :clap:

Who do we reckon then? The Guitarist?

Jed

Who gives a fuck about the past,more interested in what is going to happen in the future...Power is the chairman so it is his job to sort it out...if he cant let someone in who can.
Personally i havn't got a great deal of time for him....not really put any real investment in and his latest little ego trip with the adver was pathetic.


Only a matter of time before he is on his way and the next instalment will begin...for good or for bad.

Im still baffled by what McCrory would pay with if he offered to buy the club again

The same as Power...dont take a lot to buy a club when it is in debt.
At least Jed tried to keep the fans upbeat,unlike the current bundle of laughs in charge.
If you are reading this Mr Black...have pity on an old fuckwit like me and get your arse with its big wedge in the pocket back here and pronto :D

But Power had money. McCrory didnt did he, hence why Power got involved in the first place.

I'd rather have neither of the fuckers for what its worth.

Gonna go to Dubai and kidnap a sheikh

TLDR: Release the accounts minus the note about contingent liabilities (minor details about legal cases).


Was going to flag this up the other week but forgot, as it would have appeared Shah had reneged on her promise.

I can understand not releasing the full accounts as they would contain details of contingent liabilities which would give a brief description of the legal issue and the estimated cost where possible.

However, contingent liabilities are a separate note in the accounts and do not affect the Profit and Loss Account or Balance Sheet i.e. it's simply a note after the financial statements to state that there is a possible (sometimes remote) outcome which could affect the company in the future. The adver have pretty much told us the details anyway - so unless it's another thing this is just another bullshit excuse.

With this in mind, why doesn't Shah release the Accounts without this note? Sure, it's not the most transparent but a brief explanation as to why a note is omitted would be better than not releasing anything.

Shah thinks the basic numbers are available publicly. I hope that's a statement out of context because this coupled with her assertion that an audit apparently hadn't been done for '10 to 15 years' was way off the mark (despite the 5 year margin of error Shah gave herself). The shoddy knowledge doesn't inspire confidence once a full commentary is released.

Sorry: IF a full commentary is released.

I wonder what the Supporters Trust have received in the way of statutory accounts.

The bring Jed back campaign/petition is laughable!

We've received nothing at the moment!!

I used to know that anything Jed said would have a tangential relationship with the truth at best.

Although I don't trust Power (or any chairman), he at least has a small amount of dosh and a little more knowledge than most about football.

I had been minded to believe there may be good reasons not to publish audited accounts mid-litigation till Si Pie's very helpful comments above showing that provision for possible claims could easily be "held back".

Surely every club (every club like STFC anyway) has one or two claims on the go with agents and players most of the time.  When will it ever end?  The time will never be right to release the audited accounts, will it?  Heaven knows what companies like BP do when they spill a few drops of oil in the Gulf of Mexico.

 

Me too, cheers Si.