2016 ACCOUNTS

[Buncey 1]

Thank you for the excellent summary Purple. Some extra/follow-up thoughts on the accounts:

1. 200 ordinary shares were allotted (i.e. "given out") at £1 on 20 Jan 2016. Immediately after Smith and Balls joined as directors. This is pursuant to resolutions 5 and 6 at last year''s AGM which give the Directors the power to allot an aggregate of £1,000,000 NOMINAL (i.e. potentially as many as 1,000,000 ordinary shares, there are only c.700,000 at present) over the next 5 years.

(As a side note, the Company messed up the statement of capital (by not including the 200 ''new'' shares) and so had to file a restatement)

All these documents can be found at Companies House Beta, for free: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00154044/filing-history

2. I can confirm that the £90,000 Purple has identified. For those who want to follow the maths, this is at note 8 of the accounts subtract the figure of £743,000 (for the highest paid director, Mr McNally) from the total figure of £833,000. This means one of the following: (i) £90,000 was being paid to one of/or together Mr Bowkett and Mr Fry (unlikely, as this didn''t happen the year before); or (ii) 90,000 is being paid to one of/or together Mr Smith and Mr Balls.

As noted above, it is reported that Mr Balls is unpaid (and given he was completely absence on Transfer Deadline day, arguably our most important day of the year), it would appear therefore the payment is to Mr Smith.

A third alternative is that the Company has decided to provide payment to a number/all of the board directors. Regardless, we can only speculate given the limited information in the accounts. I am sure there is a ''simple'' explanation. However, I am disappointed that it is only through ''the entrails'' that we as a collective have become aware of this. Particularly give there is ''sensitivity'' in sections of our supporters on Mr Smith''s and Mr Ball''s elevations to the Board.

3. There was a significant write-off for onerous contracts (£2.5m) and of player registrations (i.e. value of players) (£3.8m). Presumably these relate to RVW and VOO (given the disclosure in post balance sheet events note). I am struggling to think of any other players for which such write-offs could apply. If these write-offs apply to just RVW and VOO they represent a significant amount of the purchase cost of these players (highlighting how much of a dud deal these were).

4. I agree with Purple''s sentiment that the post-balance sheet information is insufficient. Given how critical this is to the operations of the business, I really hoped the Club would have clarified the situation. I can only (like Purple) surmise that the "net" figure is actually what is due to be paid out (the figures make no sense otherwise). What we can know for certain is that we are "owed" some £22m in player debtors (the bulk of which will I assume will be transfer fees) as at 30 June 2016. And £7.6m of this is due more than one year away (likely to be part of the Redmond fee). On the other hand, we "owe" some £24m in player creditors (again the bulk of which will I assume will be transfer fees). [See notes 17 and 18].

During the year we bought around £34.8m in players (note 13) whilst selling around £16.7m (which I think will be just for Redmond and Johnson, although correct me if we sold anybody else!)

In cold hard cash terms last year we paid out £22.6m in fees for players, whilst getting in £11.6m (p17, cash flow statement). This contrasts to the "accounting" sales of £22.4m and £21.2m respectively. As noted above, the vast majority of this will be the deferred amounts we are owed for (I assume) Redmond of £7.6m. The rest will likely be due to getting cash for Redmond after 30 June 2016 (we sold him very close to the year-end).

Apologies for any typos, very difficult to use this message board!

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Buncey!!

Thanks and good to see you[Y][:)]

[Len 74]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]@93vintage

I think your reading of it in your reply to Yankee is very likely correct. I''d imagine the aim is to reveal the longer term thinking at the AGM and that this section in the Accounts is simply a legal-requirement-fulfilling stop gap.

[/quote]It''s more likely that Delia & co have run out of ideas and are making it up as they go along.

[Buncey 1]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Buncey!!

Thanks and good to see you[Y][:)]

[/quote]

You''re welcome Eddie.

To clarify something in my post: the last paragraph should read: "In cold hard cash terms last year we paid out £22.6m in fees for players, whilst getting in £11.6m (p17, cash flow statement). This contrasts to the "accounting" sales of £22.4m and £21.2m respectively. As noted above, the vast majority of this DIFFERENCE will be the deferred amounts we are owed for (I assume) Redmond of £7.6m. The rest will likely be due to getting cash for Redmond after 30 June 2016 (we sold him very close to the year-end)."