So are you saying he makes the previous year look a bit shit so his first full year looks good in comparison.. I presume?
Yes i believe it is what he's saying.
I didn't say it has happened in this case, all I say is that it does happen. Especially in companies in trouble.
In 2013 accounts there was included 475k exceptional gain on the refinancing of the loans. Exclude that from 2013 and over the two years and ACL about broke even. (which is what Robertson/Eastwood from Wasps alluded to I believe)
Eastwood said
"When we looked at the year ending 2013, ACL made an operating profit in excess of £2m. In our ownership that money would be channelled into Wasps’ coffers. That’s the significance of this."
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/wasps-owner-reveals-motives-ricoh-8331444
Operating profit is a measure of income that tells investors how much of revenue will eventually become profit for a company.
In short 2014 vs 2013:
Turnover is down by £2.3m
Cost of sales is up by £0.4m (despite drop in turnover!)
Gross profit is down by £2.7m
Administration cost is down by £1.9m
Operating profit is down by £0.8m
Interests paid is down by 0.1m
Profit before tax is down by 0.7m
Huge drop in turnover and gross profit - that must surely be the impact of losing a major customer.
Cost of sales is up, not down - is that Weber Shandvick? Should have been around £2.7m in 2014 but is £0.8m higher.
In all gross profit is down by some 25%.
They have saved on administration cost to make up for the loss, just not enough.
Interests are a bit lower but all-in-all they are certainly not going upwards (or from strength to strength).
Disclaimer: Although I have attended OSB's online course in forensic auditing, I have never passed the exam.
Huge drop in turnover and gross profit - that must surely be the impact of losing a major customer.
Do you think the sale of car park c which always seemed a bit random was strategic by the council to ensure that there was sufficient cash flow to keep the business operational?
Must have missed that one ?
What, Car Park C going back to CCC?
Wasn't it handed back to CCC from ACL at the time of the new loan? (I might be wrong)
What, Car Park C going back to CCC?
v) to obtain the transfer of ACL’s lease of Car Park C (which had development potential) back to the Council from ACL, for nil consideration (paragraph 3.5.1.1).
O, my forgetful memory is deserting me ...
I knew it was part of the bail out, but I forgot it was transferred for free:
http://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/uploads/other/01_07_2014_01_48_11_01.07.14.pdf (§79)
Thanks for that.
It was a consideration on there, but did it happen?
Not really that fussed but just interested now it's been mentioned.
Basically the council loan was irrational unless you're Wonga
Is that how it was seen in court?
Basically the council loan was irrational unless you're Wonga
You will need to explain, because the court found differently ?
Thanks for that.
It was a consideration on there, but did it happen?
Not really that fussed but just interested now it's been mentioned.
Doesn't that mean that the Car Park Site was given to CCC.
I guess that reduces the value of ACL bought by Wasps and allows CCC to put a different developer in there, if they can find one in Cannes
The court didn't consider the irrational count as it was extinguished by the others apparently.
The court didn't have the knowledge that ACL have gone into further decline since the loan either.
Oh, give it a rest, can you. You told us ahead of the hearing that the loan was contrary to stare aid rules. The judge disagreed with you. Take it like a man
If this JR appeal goes SISU's way could the sale to Wasps and the information in the ACL accounts prove a problem for CCC.
Two things that got mentioned in the court case was that CCC made the loan to protect its investment and that the loan was secure due to the value of ACL. We now know that by the time of the court case CCC were already months into talks with Wasps and the value of a 50 year lease could be argued to be a lot less than the amount of the loan given the amount they have sold a 200 year extension to Wasps for.
I know you can't bring in new evidence but would that be considered things that were known at the time?
The court didn't consider the irrational count as it was extinguished by the others apparently.
The court didn't have the knowledge that ACL have gone into further decline since the loan either.
No one supports SISU- infact the very people you attack were the ones once telling you that we should be wary of them. Good luck with moving SISU on though, i'm not sure how many would want to buy a club that plays in a rugby stadium with minimal revenues. What many failed to realise was that sisu acquiring the Ricoh would have meant that they were one step closer to the exit.Something to look forward too. Followed by another 7 years of driving the value of ACL to zero? Why don't you phone up Sisu and wish them all the best?We really need to move Sisu on, not give them the impression some still support their actions.
No one supports SISU- infact the very people you attack were the ones once telling you that we should be wary of them. Good luck with moving SISU on though, i'm not sure how many would want to buy a club that plays in a rugby stadium with minimal revenues. What many failed to realise was that sisu acquiring the Ricoh would have meant that they were one step closer to the exit.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?