Not really. I've got accounts that go back to 2003 and there was a valuation shown then, so it's been going on at least 7 years. Might have been that at one point when the club had more signficant levels of debt and there was talk of a new buyer coming in they wanted to put a valuation on the players (as the value of unexpired contracts would definitely be a consideration for a buyer negotiating a price even if not normally included in the filed accounts) and this was a way of formally documenting it. To have it flagged as news when it's at least 7 years out of date is quite funny - surprised it's not an HDM scoop TBH. In terms of credit rating, intangible valuations are usually adjusted for, but there are plenty of things other than just filed accounts included, like CCJs and frequency and extent of payment outside agreed terms.

Last posted accounts are for 2008 when I'm pretty sure we were at full cap.

We weren't last year but the figures aren't out yet so will be interesting to see what they look like.

2008 was a Wembley year which was probably the difference between a profit and a loss.

If rovers were down at the bottom due to spending
less they wouldn't be averaging 13k so would still post losses

Sheesh, Michael! Is that so?

Rovers'd better start employing this mighty quick then!

Are you sure about that?

That would take a collossal breach of standard accounting practice

They don't know what you mean!

That would be interesting being a hull fan played 27 lost 27