Filing our accounts

[Kernow]

The deadline given for this was the 18th August, wasn't it?

It's fast approaching and I've seen very little mention or talk of it since the deadline was announced. I thought at the time that if we left it close to the deadline, then we probably wouldn't be confident of passing it, but I guess we will find out very soon... I'm not sure what the punishment will be if we miss the deadline though, I mean, we're already in a pretty strict transfer embargo.

If the filing is met and all is OK, then hopefully it'll allow us a little more wiggle room to give Rooney a side better prepared for survival this season.

[GenBr]

The EFL have already seen a version haven't they. The two parties don't agree on one aspect. I'm assuming whatever it is must push us one way or the other regarding ffp otherwise why bother arguing.

Who knows though - it may have even been resolved by now

[RadioactiveWaste]

3 minutes ago, Kernow said:

The deadline given for this was the 18th August, wasn't it?

It's fast approaching and I've seen very little mention or talk of it since the deadline was announced. I thought at the time that if we left it close to the deadline, then we probably wouldn't be confident of passing it, but I guess we will find out very soon... I'm not sure what the punishment will be if we miss the deadline though, I mean, we're already in a pretty strict transfer embargo.

If the filing is met and all is OK, then hopefully it'll allow us a little more wiggle room to give Rooney a side better prepared for survival this season.

I do have the nagging feeling that if all was tickety boo, we'd have put them in weeks ago.

The exciting part is are we going to put in the accounts in an uncontroversial fasion and gulp at the incoming points deduction, in which case waiting to the last moment at least has got the season started and Wycombe can go swivel, OR, do we put in accounts that say "can't touch this" and we're within limits and fine, and basically say "Go on then EFL, you say where this isn't FRS102 compliant" - I get the feeling it's the later and they'd tried sweet talking the EFL into it before hand but the EFL are "reluctant".

[duncanjwitham]

Honestly wouldn't surprise me if we're fine with straight-line amortization anyway, but we're insisting on submitting basically what we submitted before because it's a matter of principle now.

[NottsRam77]

8 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Honestly wouldn't surprise me if we're fine with straight-line amortization anyway, but we're insisting on submitting basically what we submitted before because it's a matter of principle now.

I hope your right buddy 

[Ted McMinn Football Genius]

14 minutes ago, GenBr said:

The EFL have already seen a version haven't they. The two parties don't agree on one aspect. I'm assuming whatever it is must push us one way or the other regarding ffp otherwise why bother arguing.

Who knows though - it may have even been resolved by now

Both parties have probably signed a NDA ?????

Sorry couldn’t help it ??

[Rampage]

1 minute ago, Ted McMinn Football Genius said:

Both parties have probably signed a NDA ?????

Sorry couldn’t help it ??

The accounts must have been done quite some time ago. To send those completed accounts in would not be difficult. If not having sent them in when they cannot be changed has slowed us getting out of the embargo then I remain mystified as to what is going on.

[Gringo]

There is a delay between filing accounts at companies house and them being available to view online, in the case of my UK company it was about 10 days, so they could have been filed already, in the case of satisfying the EFL, logic dictates that they the EFL will receive paper copies of the submittal(s) ahead of them being available for viewing on the companies house website.  

[Ambitious]

I struggle to see how amortisation would be able to account for a 31(?) million pound swing in our accounts. I always thought based on the timeline of how things happened, we put in place our amortisation strategy to kick the can down the road with regards to having a real go during the Clement season. We would've hoped at the very least we would be able to sell some players and recoup money, which obviously didn't happen. I think at that point, once we realised we couldn't kick the can far enough down the road to keep us above P&S, we sold the stadium. It kept us very far above P&S as I think the loss over the three years in question was like £7-8m when the limit is £39m. 

When you consider amortisation over three years - of course we would've taken a bigger loss in the first year, but also be better off in others as the overall value of depreciation still remains the same. There is also the news that we apparently have a £30m reserve that we could potentially use which would help. 

I'd be beyond stunned if we fall foul of P&S, although totally understand that I am no accountant and could be talking absolute waffle in my own little bubble. 

[Spanish]

18 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Honestly wouldn't surprise me if we're fine with straight-line amortization anyway, but we're insisting on submitting basically what we submitted before because it's a matter of principle now.

hmm..   straightline accounts compliant but hang it, this is a point of 'principle', so we are happy to stay in embargo land as long as possible

[RadioactiveWaste]

10 minutes ago, Ted McMinn Football Genius said:

Both parties have probably signed a NDA ?????

Sorry couldn’t help it ??

That'd be absolutly burning the EFL....but seeing as we haven't had "things look bad for Derby's accounts" leaking out over twitter and alluded to in the papaers along with "well, you know about Derby's accounts right" comments from other clubs, we can only assume that an NDA is in place.

 

[Gringo]

3 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

That'd be absolutly burning the EFL....but seeing as we haven't had "things look bad for Derby's accounts" leaking out over twitter and alluded to in the papaers along with "well, you know about Derby's accounts right" comments from other clubs, we can only assume that an NDA is in place.

 

As the accounts will very soon be in the public domain, I cannot see how there could be an NDA in place, much more likely is a "Press Embargo" 

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

Perhaps we want to stay in embargo until last minute to negotiate more of these cut price £4.5k/week with the next round of recruits.

[cool_as_custard]

8 minutes ago, Charlotte Ram said:

There is a delay between filing accounts at companies house and them being available to view online, in the case of my UK company it was about 10 days, so they could have been filed already, in the case of satisfying the EFL, logic dictates that they the EFL will receive paper copies of the submittal(s) ahead of them being available for viewing on the companies house website.  

You get a hint when Companies House have received accounts but don't have them ready to view yet, because they change the colour to red to indicate they are in the building.

However, more accounting firms have the facility to submit them electronically these days so the old delays that Charlotte refers to occur less.

As we have all surmised, this must be a case of falling one side of the FFP line if the new accounting wrinkle is allowed, and falling the wrong side if it is not. If the EFL and Derby cannot agree then god only knows where we go next. 

[Eatonram]

I assume the accounts not only need to be revised but also re-audited?? I can see how the Auditors will want to be bullet proof on this considering their previously signed off accounts were called into question.

[Ambitious]

4 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

I struggle to see how amortisation would be able to account for a 31(?) million pound swing in our accounts. I always thought based on the timeline of how things happened, we put in place our amortisation strategy to kick the can down the road with regards to having a real go during the Clement season. We would've hoped at the very least we would be able to sell some players and recoup money, which obviously didn't happen. I think at that point, once we realised we couldn't kick the can far enough down the road to keep us above P&S, we sold the stadium. It kept us very far above P&S as I think the loss over the three years in question was like £7-8m when the limit is £39m. 

When you consider amortisation over three years - of course we would've taken a bigger loss in the first year, but also be better off in others as the overall value of depreciation still remains the same. There is also the news that we apparently have a £30m reserve that we could potentially use which would help. 

I'd be beyond stunned if we fall foul of P&S, although totally understand that I am no accountant and could be talking absolute waffle in my own little bubble. 

Saying all this, and I can't quite believe it didn't occur to me before, but wouldn't we potentially fall foul of the P&S period between 13-16 and possibly 14-17 as the ground sale doesn't come into it. 

2013-14 - £7m loss
2014-15 - £10.1m loss
2015-16 - £14.7m loss - resubmitted accounts. 
£31.8m pound loss (so if the accounts for 15-16 increase by £7.2m which I'd imagine will be close then we could fall foul here)
2016-17 - £7.9m loss - resubmitted accounts. 
£32.7m pound loss (again, if the accounts from 15/16 and 16/17 increase by £6.3m which I'd imagine almost inevitable then we would fall foul here). 

I think I disregarded the previous seasons because it's only the three year window we have to publish the accounts for. When, in actual fact, it's going to be the years before the stadium sale come into it that we will be sanctioned for. 

 

[MACKWORTHRAM]

What happens if we get to the deadline on August 18th and the EFL still don't agree?

Hopefully these are being checked legally so we know beforehand whether or not the EFL have a leg to stand on.

I think we would have resubmitted them to the EFL and we are fine. Seeing this the EFL (probably expecting we wouldn't be and they would finally get the points deduction they so desperately crave)

Because if we had submitted them and breached the rules I'm sure the EFL would have took great delight in handing us a big points deduction.

What does concern me slightly is that season tickets go on sale on the 18th August.

I'm hoping this is just a coincidence but this is Derby County we are talking about so that's highly unlikely.

My worry is that by the 18th August we will know and if we are going to fall foul and get a 9-12 point deduction, some fans might stay away and not get the season ticket.

So Derby are essentially saying. Look this is it, we're getting deducted points, you know what's happening, everything is out in the open and there is nothing left to hide.

So now you know. It's entirely up to you whether or not to get the season ticket.

 

[Ted McMinn Football Genius]

51 minutes ago, Rampage said:

The accounts must have been done quite some time ago. To send those completed accounts in would not be difficult. If not having sent them in when they cannot be changed has slowed us getting out of the embargo then I remain mystified as to what is going on.

I am only guessing, but I wouldn’t be too surprised if we learn (after the window has closed) that the EFL have dragged their heels to prevent us from making additions. Like @RadioactiveWaste has put it, the news would’ve been leaked by now eg: Derby have fallen fowl etc etc etc. 
As this hasn’t happened I would guess that the EFL are maximising the damage upon DCFC and Mel Morris by delaying the lifting of our umbongo 

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

Assume both sides a discussing various things with legal.

If EFL were to lose another one vs us then you would have thought they would piss off other members who have to pay the bill royally so would want their charge to be bomb proof.

[RadioactiveWaste]

45 minutes ago, Charlotte Ram said:

As the accounts will very soon be in the public domain, I cannot see how there could be an NDA in place, much more likely is a "Press Embargo" 

Fair point, but there's been a lot less "roumors" than there around the times of the DC/LAP rulings.