Jump to content

Embargo.


simmoram1995

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

That's because he doesn't have a Cluedo.

If only he'd known what a game of snakes and ladders being a chairman was.

20 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Don’t forget the appointment of Tony Pulis and spending millions on George Saville!! ???

Another of DCFC's crimes! Derby clearly gained a sporting advantage by Tony Pulis being boro manager, as such, should face the consiquences!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

The irony of course is that they already had a centre forward on their books that they had signed for £15m the season before!

They had five centre-forwards on their books that season, with every single one of them individually costing more than we spent on Martyn Waghorn:
Britt Assombalonga: £15m
Martin Braithwaite: £9m
Ashley Fletcher: £6.5m
Rudy Gestede: £6m
Jordan Hugill: On loan, but having moved to West Ham from Preston in the January for £10m

£46.5m of firepower, £36.5m of which was out of Boro's pocket. Don't know how they coped.

Furthermore, £30.5m of that money was spent while Boro were in the Championship. But obviously, us signing Martyn Waghorn for £5m to replace the £11m Matej Vydra is the real problem.

On a side note, they only got a £4m return on that crop of players, with Assombalonga, Fletcher and Gestede all leaving on frees, and Hugill going back to West Ham at the end of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Where have you got this info from?

How do we know that the outstanding charges regarding the accounts do not relate to the year ended 30 June 2020?

Doesn’t matter which accounts the embargo charges relate to. We can wipe the charges by filing the relevant accounts in our preferred  form. Problem we’ve got I think is EFl are saying: ‘well we’ve looked at your resubmitted accounts and we don’t accept them as compliant with the accounting standards. So accept a penalty OR submit them as final and we’ll raise formal charges against you.
 

 I think that’s how all this works and what is probably going on.
 

I think it’s likely we’ve filed accounts based on a new amortisation profile that is not straight line but which is favourable to our P&S position. And that Mel is saying: ‘ I’ve got accountants lining up saying these accounts reflect FRS 102, so bog off with your points deduction. 
 

problem Mel has of course is, even if he’s right, he doesn’t want further proceedings because they make a sale difficult and they could go on for a long time 

The EFl are going to have to change the rules to require straight line depreciation I think. The LAP decision didn’t say you need to use straight line. It said our old version did not reflect the standard 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, JfR said:

They had five centre-forwards on their books that season, with every single one of them individually costing more than we spent on Martyn Waghorn:
Britt Assombalonga: £15m
Martin Braithwaite: £9m
Ashley Fletcher: £6.5m
Rudy Gestede: £6m
Jordan Hugill: On loan, but having moved to West Ham from Preston in the January for £10m

£46.5m of firepower, £36.5m of which was out of Boro's pocket. Don't know how they coped.

Furthermore, £30.5m of that money was spent while Boro were in the Championship. But obviously, us signing Martyn Waghorn for £5m to replace the £11m Matej Vydra is the real problem.

On a side note, they only got a £4m return on that crop of players, with Assombalonga, Fletcher and Gestede all leaving on frees, and Hugill going back to West Ham at the end of the season.

If only they had found a loophole such as selling their tax losses to an associated company...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, r_wilcockson said:

SmartSelect_20210910-070053_Twitter.jpg

How are you interpreting that? They’re close to agreeing a points sanction? or they’re making another proposal on a points sanction shortly? or they’re close to no longer negotiating and we’ll see them in court?

Edited by BramcoteRam84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

How are you interpreting that? They’re close to agreeing a points sanction? or they’re making another proposal on a points sanction shortly? or they’re close to no longer negotiating and we’ll see them in court?

He says proposal not agreement and doesnt mention dialogue with club so doesnt sound as if consensus reached. Anyone know if points proposals would be made public or not until we respond? At least we would know state of play then as efl would have to set out reasons. Or this could just be more speculation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, r_wilcockson said:

SmartSelect_20210910-070053_Twitter.jpg

So according to Percy, the EFL are working on a 'points sanction proposal'. This stunning revelation has me recoiling in abject shock, and horror. I now have the Samaritans on speed-dial as a consequence.

In another huge, worldwide exclusive scoop, he reveals that this may be completed in the 'next week or so', but it also that it may not. 

He also posits the unlikelihood of a takeover deal being struck until the charges are are levied and addressed, which is in itself, another absolute bombshell of a revelation.

In other news, I've just sent John a picture of my pussy...

 

 

 

 

 

 

giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47tjtco915whsj05cv5z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Doesn’t matter which accounts the embargo charges relate to. We can wipe the charges by filing the relevant accounts in our preferred  form. Problem we’ve got I think is EFl are saying: ‘well we’ve looked at your resubmitted accounts and we don’t accept them as compliant with the accounting standards. So accept a penalty OR submit them as final and we’ll raise formal charges against you.
 

 I think that’s how all this works and what is probably going on.
 

I think it’s likely we’ve filed accounts based on a new amortisation profile that is not straight line but which is favourable to our P&S position. And that Mel is saying: ‘ I’ve got accountants lining up saying these accounts reflect FRS 102, so bog off with your points deduction. 
 

problem Mel has of course is, even if he’s right, he doesn’t want further proceedings because they make a sale difficult and they could go on for a long time 

The EFl are going to have to change the rules to require straight line depreciation I think. The LAP decision didn’t say you need to use straight line. It said our old version did not reflect the standard 

If the accounts now conform to FRS 102 then thats all thats required in the current EFL regulations ? 

Edited by Elwood P Dowd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...