Jump to content

Ramleicester

Member
  • Content Count

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ramleicester

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

414 profile views
  1. When a firm of accountants audit a Company they sign off that the records and accounts are reasonable and correct which will include the value of assets. If then an asset is sold at a higher value to conveniently create a profit to avoid serious FFP sanction then it is bound to look odd and questions asked. There is also the issue that selling the ground is a bit 'desperate' and is a one time deal (you cant sell your biggest asset twice) and I am sure the EFL will be keen to see that the underlying financial model is sound. After all that is what 'sustainability' should be about. The EFL's motives are supposed to be to ensure the long term viability of the club for us fans. Sadly it ends up being a thing that just annoys us all. I will try and check the info re the Veladrome and the land behind it but I do understand that there is a plan for a significant development of that area. If there is it will enhance the stadium value a lot.
  2. Hi I agree that is how an independent valuation should work but I guess the efl and that pratt in Muddlesborough are calling into question the level of independence. Remember that the independent Auditors of the Company accounts signed off the value in those accounts so it looks odd from the outside hence them having a look. I still think that Mel will make a good case that it is worth more to the Company that has bought it purely because it adds to the other adjacent land owned by them which makes further development easier. Given it is the EFL though they are more likely to give him a hard time.
  3. Hi I think the Taylor review is a general look at the FFP system following the Bury issue. The Derby / Villa will be by the FFP oversight panel.
  4. As a lawyer I had an arms length involvement in preparing some info on a similar issue two years ago, not dcfc I should add The governance issued by the EFL gives them a fair bit of scope to interpret things as they see fit. I imagine this is being looked at under this bit of the governance: 3.1 Where any element of profit / loss before tax relates to any transaction(s) with Related Party(ies) above or below fair value then, for the purpose of the Fair Play Result, the Championship Club must determine the fair value of any Related Party Transaction(s). If the estimated fair value is different to the recorded value then an appropriate adjustment must be made in calculating the Fair Play Result. In a nutshell all they will want to see is if the amount of the valuation is higher because it was Mel buying (as a related party) rather than someone else. Good news is that It would be worth more to MM than the book value as he has the plan to develop that site and the veladrome / land behind. This could be the saving grace in any investigation as this would create a case for it looking like a good development deal rather than a scam to benefit DCFC. (Good for us that it is both lol). That said the good folk at the EFL are not always known for their foresight and logic.
  5. Very true. It ends up chasing a lot of decent people away. A lot on here seem to have 'untouchable' status.
  6. Hi... well yes I agree it would be both but the income bit is more important to us transfer loving fans....
  7. And the reason why will become clear very soon. If it had of been there before now this would have happened a little sooner which may have improved pre season. In any event it is very positive news
  8. Hi... in peace lol. Spot on. If Mel keeps putting cash in it is capital investment not income so ffp would go backwards. My insight is from dealings with other sports investment and hearing about DCFC interest from active parties looking for a club to invest in. Cant really say any more or I would be shot. Seems to be taking a bit too long though. Good thing is that the club is seen as very attractive mainly due to the strong fan base. All I heard through that and a more direct source was that MM had for whatever reason grown a bit tired of putting cash in just to cover day to day expenses but not being able to create the playing resources to reach the promised land. The stadium thing is clever and created ffp breathing space but was a limited vehicle for overall liquidity. Keep in mind that transfers and the big deals often have a tricky cash lag that has hurt many a club. Sorry for being grumpy.
  9. Not right at all this is a forum of opinions not a trial lol. Ok to call out.....What a load of bull that is. But I will take the hint and not bother again. A lot of people are put off posting on here who would have sensible things to say.
  10. Just looked at that. Must be my eyes but I think it says 12 months from June 2018. No Company Director could be taken seriously taking about more than 12 months forward.
  11. Bored now. Try and have a bit more of an open mind. All I wanted was to give a view not really bothered if anyone agrees or not. People just decide their view is right and have a lot of trouble listening with a view to understanding. Just obsessed with listening with a view to replying. None of us know the full details none of us know the timings etc. Three things I know from a very good source. Mel does not want to keep writing cheques. Why should he. Mel is frustrated he has no options and wants to share the way forward with people who do. There aint no cash at the mo. Now you can say whatever you want about the above but that is the way it is. Blimey I know why Ramblur got pissed off.
  12. Hi yes I see the logic. Right now ffp is a ticking time bomb which is why the new income / profit streams are vital. Oh and promotion would be handy! A new investor is going to have to be rich, brave, imaginative and slightly nuts. However in my experience that is exactly how they are. If you look too far ahead noone would buy a football club.
  13. Those accounts are year ended June 2018 so that statement is true as it covers the 12 months to June 2019. Of course the cash went across. It is a property sale which is a contract that has to have a movement of funds. Mel even withdrew himself from being a person of significant control of dcfc in May (see companies house info)......to avoid tax confusion (a guess but it fits). The rate of loss if you back out the stadium deal, projected forward to now could have no other conclusion than that at this stage cash reserves in the business are low. Any cash from the stadium deal would have been spent on the underlying operating losses June 2018 to July 2019. As I have said time and again the management of the business to keep giving the club the best chance of success year on year has been truly amazing. Lucky to have Mel. From what I understand the investment deal is very close. 7 days?
  14. It is both. Investors such as Mansour at Man City not only take a share and cash inject with a share of ownership but can create the deals and sponsorship through their connections and contacts. Same at Leicester. Combination of buying the club and also developing income streams. Add in the ego and tax perks and it is what really turns these guys on lol. After all none of the big owners do it to make money!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.