The comparison is valid and yes of course we are focusing on the Bulls' plight.
We have said many times that CB is a good guy. We just have good reason to believe that he and his so called consortium have not been shown a full hand of cards and appear to lack any meaningful financial clout. That's not his/ their fault. Moreover, they may well be being unduly influenced by others whose interest in the sustainability of our/ your great club may not be at the forefront of their minds.
We've been here so many times before; will we ever learn? It appears not
it's ok as you have habit of going back and changing your posts hence why I quoted it
thepimp007 wrote:Funnily enough that emoji looks like a Pinocchio nose coming out and moving the page
Despite his claims that he isn’t here to wind people up, it’s strange that he’s sent me a PM to try and wind me up......
I’m sure there’ll be a wide ranging reason behind it, involving 26 members of a consortium, of which the full details can’t be disclosed due to ongoing investigations by the relevant authorities.
Anyone want odds on nest eggs identity?
Mick G 2/5 Derek who goes in the top house on Tuesdays 2/1 Gary Glitter 5/1 Piers Morgan 18/1
nestegg wrote:Yes, snowie we know about the director loans; and they are not at first sight obvious based on the abridged accounts that are routinely published for rugby league clubs such as Trinity (and the Bulls).
Having spoken to a reliable source (not Mick the Gled btw !) we are however told that there were still some debts as of the date of CB's departure, as there are with most businesses. Therefore our source maintains that to allege that Trinity was debt free when he left may be a tad arrogant. Wakey is after all not a cash business.
.
Just so you know, PEST -NEG, theres a sweep stake on how many posts it takes FA to get you to do a post that is a whole page long. Keep going mate, I am still in for the prize, a season ticket at Odsal. Errr...
it is not just RL clubs that put in abridged accounts, it is most small companies (and lets face it C and C1 clubs are whatever our delusions of grandeur, just that.
I have looked at Spirits accounts, and creditors less than a year went down from £1m in Jan 2013 to £0.7M in 2018, the 2013 is after Glove took £800k hit on his companies loan to Wakie. More interestingly, between the '17 accounts and the '18 accounts creditors over 1 year for 2017 (look at the original 2017 accounts and then their re-statement for the comparative in the 2018 accounts) have gone down by £1.4M and a line called "other reserves" has appeared of yes £1.4m. Any observations? Someone turned a repayable loan into a permanent one? Who would make such a loan? Creditors over 1 year were £0.7k in 2013, so they had gone up by £0.8M in the four years. Looks like a build up of a loan over that time as you would expect them to go down not up over that time. the adjustment between creditors and reserves smells of write-off. One good sign is the increase in cash in the bank over those years from £33k in 13 to £143k in '18.
Anyway, that is just to show that whilst I know little about Wakies trial and tribulations, Wakie are still around despite the '13 crisis, and the net worth of the business in '18 is about £1.2m more than it was in 2013. Not bad, but who has £1.4m to write off?
martinwildbull wrote:Just so you know, PEST -NEG, theres a sweep stake on how many posts it takes FA to get you to do a post that is a whole page long. Keep going mate, I am still in for the prize, a season ticket at Odsal. Errr...
it is not just RL clubs that put in abridged accounts, it is most small companies (and lets face it C and C1 clubs are whatever our delusions of grandeur, just that.
I have looked at Spirits accounts, and creditors less than a year went down from £1m in Jan 2013 to £0.7M in 2018, the 2013 is after Glove took £800k hit on his companies loan to Wakie. More interestingly, between the '17 accounts and the '18 accounts creditors over 1 year for 2017 (look at the original 2017 accounts and then their re-statement for the comparative in the 2018 accounts) have gone down by £1.4M and a line called "other reserves" has appeared of yes £1.4m. Any observations? Someone turned a repayable loan into a permanent one? Who would make such a loan? Creditors over 1 year were £0.7k in 2013, so they had gone up by £0.8M in the four years. Looks like a build up of a loan over that time as you would expect them to go down not up over that time. the adjustment between creditors and reserves smells of write-off. One good sign is the increase in cash in the bank over those years from £33k in 13 to £143k in '18.
Anyway, that is just to show that whilst I know little about Wakies trial and tribulations, Wakie are still around despite the '13 crisis, and the net worth of the business in '18 is about £1.2m more than it was in 2013. Not bad, but who has £1.4m to write off?
Given that CB has now pulled out from the consortium TBH we are not particularly interested in Wakey's accounts anymore mate. Apologies if we may have sought to give the impression that we may be some form of accounting gurus, but we leave that to our Accountant, who is out of the country at present. Your input is nonetheless as always warmly appreciated.
As well as your accounting prowess, which you always like members to know about, we also thank you for your apparent Wakey Wakey insight. Do you fancy coming over to Dewsbury for a year or so to help the club out by a) doing the accounts - somebody needs to do lol, and b) donating a spare £2M you may have in your closet to help partly bail us out!
As for your childish remark c/o FA with respect you appear to be embarrassing yourself by becoming associated with such nonsense. As a moderator FA should know better. After all, you must now surely realise that FA's recent post beggars belief and truly was utter tosh. His (and certain other cynical members) banal utterances are simply water off a duck's back to us nesteggers.
Ewwenorfolk wrote:Despite his claims that he isn’t here to wind people up, it’s strange that he’s sent me a PM to try and wind me up......
I’m sure there’ll be a wide ranging reason behind it, involving 26 members of a consortium, of which the full details can’t be disclosed due to ongoing investigations by the relevant authorities.
Anyone want odds on nest eggs identity?
Mick G 2/5 Derek who goes in the top house on Tuesdays 2/1 Gary Glitter 5/1 Piers Morgan 18/1
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
