oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 6,714
|
Post by oldie on May 14, 2023 13:07:57 GMT
Payments tosacked managers? Seems plausible, as I'm struggling to think of a reason why a paid employee (senior or not) would loan their employers money.
Noting the lag in accounts vs date sacked, the following would seem to stack up: Darrel Clarke sacked Dec 18 Ben Garner sacked Nov 20 Paul Tisdale sacked Feb 21
(Coghlan quit, so presumably no fee to pay).
So a senior manager is sacked but loans the club substantial amounts of money? Seems implausible to me
|
|
|
Post by baselswh on May 14, 2023 13:27:39 GMT
The SNP were looking for brilliant theoretical mathematicians to tie up one or two 'loose ends'.
Maybe an opportunity.
đ
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on May 14, 2023 13:52:54 GMT
Seems plausible, as I'm struggling to think of a reason why a paid employee (senior or not) would loan their employers money.
Noting the lag in accounts vs date sacked, the following would seem to stack up: Darrel Clarke sacked Dec 18 Ben Garner sacked Nov 20 Paul Tisdale sacked Feb 21
(Coghlan quit, so presumably no fee to pay).
So a senior manager is sacked but loans the club substantial amounts of money? Seems implausible to me Differed severance pay was the thought.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on May 14, 2023 14:13:01 GMT
So a senior manager is sacked but loans the club substantial amounts of money? Seems implausible to me Differed severance pay was the thought. Iâve been thinking along the same lines. But that begs the question whether the ÂŁ300 00 shown as owing in the June 2021 accounts is still being deferred at 30th June 2022. If it is, and it does relate to severance pay due to previous managers, then they are having to wait a long time for their money. And that would still leave another ÂŁ400 000 which has accrued from 1.7.21 to 30.06.22. That ÂŁ400 000 could be a bonus due to JB which had not been paid at 30.06.22. It could also be some sort of remuneration due to EJ in respect of his transfer dealings which is due but not paid. And if the previously owing ÂŁ300 000 was paid to those to which it was owed during 21/22 then the whole of the ÂŁ700 000 debt may have been incurred during the last financial year.
|
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 6,714
|
Post by oldie on May 14, 2023 14:48:57 GMT
Differed severance pay was the thought. Iâve been thinking along the same lines. But that begs the question whether the £300 00 shown as owing in the June 2021 accounts is still being deferred at 30th June 2022. If it is, and it does relate to severance pay due to previous managers, then they are having to wait a long time for their money. And that would still leave another £400 000 which has accrued from 1.7.21 to 30.06.22. That £400 000 could be a bonus due to JB which had not been paid at 30.06.22. It could also be some sort of remuneration due to EJ in respect of his transfer dealings which is due but not paid. And if the previously owing  £300 000 was paid to those to which it was owed during 21/22 then the whole of the ÂŁ700 000 debt may have been incurred during the last financial year. Strange accounting if it is deferred severance pay. That's not a loan but a short term creditor, one which would have had HMRC liabilities as well.
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on May 14, 2023 15:41:29 GMT
So once again we don't know.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on May 14, 2023 16:03:27 GMT
Iâve been thinking along the same lines. But that begs the question whether the ÂŁ300 00 shown as owing in the June 2021 accounts is still being deferred at 30th June 2022. If it is, and it does relate to severance pay due to previous managers, then they are having to wait a long time for their money. And that would still leave another ÂŁ400 000 which has accrued from 1.7.21 to 30.06.22. That ÂŁ400 000 could be a bonus due to JB which had not been paid at 30.06.22. It could also be some sort of remuneration due to EJ in respect of his transfer dealings which is due but not paid. And if the previously owing ÂŁ300 000 was paid to those to which it was owed during 21/22 then the whole of the ÂŁ700 000 debt may have been incurred during the last financial year. Strange accounting if it is deferred severance pay. That's not a loan but a short term creditor, one which would have had HMRC liabilities as well. Strange and possibly a can of worms which is why I couldnât see much point in bringing it up when â key management personnelâ first appeared as an item in the 20/21 accounts list of creditors. But now we know about the high interest secured loan taken out with Nationwide Finance perhaps fans will be more willing to reflect on how the business side of the club is being managed. Itâs possible that when JB says he is paying the salaries of some of his staff he means he has loaned the club cash to enable them to employ the people he needs and for that loan to be used to pay salaries which the club cant or donât want to pay. That, IMO, would be the correct way to do it either through a loan which would show in the accounts as a debt to key management personnel or alternatively as donation. But the wrong way to do it would be for JB to pay these staff â out of his own pocketâ without adhering to the correct statutory requirements. Are these staff employed by the club, subject to the clubâs PAYE scheme and covered by the clubâs liability insurance ? Or are they not employed by the club in which case does JB operate his own PAYE scheme and carry his own employers liability insurance ? These are boring questions and will probably be classed as sh*t stirring. Until something goes wrong and then someone will ask â it was so simple, why didnât we think to do things the right wayâ
|
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 6,714
|
Post by oldie on May 14, 2023 16:47:54 GMT
Strange accounting if it is deferred severance pay. That's not a loan but a short term creditor, one which would have had HMRC liabilities as well. Strange and possibly a can of worms which is why I couldnât see much point in bringing it up when â key management personnelâ first appeared as an item in the 20/21 accounts list  of creditors. But now we know about the high interest secured loan taken out with Nationwide Finance perhaps fans will be more willing to reflect on how the business side of the club is being managed. Itâs possible that when JB says he is paying the salaries of some of his staff he means he has loaned the club cash to enable them to employ the people he needs and for that loan to be used to pay salaries which the club cant or donât want to pay. That, IMO, would be the correct way to do it either through a loan which would show in the accounts as a debt to key management personnel or alternatively as donation. But the wrong way to do it would be for JB to pay these staff â out of his own pocketâ without adhering to the correct statutory requirements. Are these staff employed by the club,  subject to the clubâs PAYE scheme and covered by the clubâs liability insurance ? Or are they not employed by the club in which case does JB operate his own PAYE scheme and carry his own employers liability insurance ? These are boring questions and will probably be classed as sh*t stirring. Until something goes wrong and then someone will ask â it was so simple, why didnât we think to do things the right wayâ Well exactly One of the issues is of course people falling for Barton's narrative. If any of what you say is true then Barton is not working for "free" and he is not paying their wages out of his own pocket, but "loaning" the club money to pay them. On HMRC, I cannot believe that these people are not on the books of the club and HMRC regs are not being adhered to. Anything else is fraud and I hate to think of the consequences of that. But I have to say, all this smacks of stupidity, hubris or a distinct lack of funds. Either way it doesn't put the club in a good light.
|
|
|
Post by baselswh on May 14, 2023 17:00:09 GMT
Could JB mean that as he does'nt get a massive wage ( he's a wealthy man it does'nt adversely effect him) ,that the money saved by this ,goes towards other staff members wages?
|
|
|
Post by Bath Gas on May 14, 2023 17:29:01 GMT
Strange and possibly a can of worms which is why I couldnât see much point in bringing it up when â key management personnelâ first appeared as an item in the 20/21 accounts list of creditors. But now we know about the high interest secured loan taken out with Nationwide Finance perhaps fans will be more willing to reflect on how the business side of the club is being managed. Itâs possible that when JB says he is paying the salaries of some of his staff he means he has loaned the club cash to enable them to employ the people he needs and for that loan to be used to pay salaries which the club cant or donât want to pay. That, IMO, would be the correct way to do it either through a loan which would show in the accounts as a debt to key management personnel or alternatively as donation. But the wrong way to do it would be for JB to pay these staff â out of his own pocketâ without adhering to the correct statutory requirements. Are these staff employed by the club, subject to the clubâs PAYE scheme and covered by the clubâs liability insurance ? Or are they not employed by the club in which case does JB operate his own PAYE scheme and carry his own employers liability insurance ? These are boring questions and will probably be classed as sh*t stirring. Until something goes wrong and then someone will ask â it was so simple, why didnât we think to do things the right wayâ Well exactly One of the issues is of course people falling for Barton's narrative. If any of what you say is true then Barton is not working for "free" and he is not paying their wages out of his own pocket, but "loaning" the club money to pay them. On HMRC, I cannot believe that these people are not on the books of the club and HMRC regs are not being adhered to. Anything else is fraud and I hate to think of the consequences of that. But I have to say, all this smacks of stupidity, hubris or a distinct lack of funds. Either way it doesn't put the club in a good light. Either way, we don't know what the arrangements are, so no idea if it doesn't put the club in a good light. We have no proof of regs not being adhered to etc. I speculated that "working for free" meant that he put his wages to use by paying staff - it is pure speculation on my part, more than likely I am wrong. I would expect somebody of his wealth to have financially savvy people to advise him.
|
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 6,714
|
Post by oldie on May 14, 2023 18:28:12 GMT
Well The debt is on the balance sheet and it's declared as owed to an employee. Whatever the circumstances it's a bit strange.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on May 14, 2023 18:28:46 GMT
Could JB mean that as he does'nt get a massive wage ( he's a wealthy man it does'nt adversely effect him) ,that the money saved by this ,goes towards other staff members wages? He said the same at Fleetwood Bas. This is from a podcast he did after he left in which he describes how his relationship with their owner had deteriorated. â I brought a number one in (Joel Coleman) and he injured his hamstring. I brought a number two in (Jayson Leutwiler) and he ended up being number one. âHe told me he wasnât going to renew Jayson Leutwilerâs contract and heâd done superbly. I said Iâd pay him out of my own money. âI was paying for staff. I was paying for stuff for some of the lads myself because I wanted Fleetwood to win. âI didnât take money home really â I was just paying other members of staff who I felt I needed. Rovers definitely owed key management personnel ÂŁ 700 000 at the end of June 2022 but we donât know which members of management or what the debt relates to.
|
|
|
Post by baselswh on May 14, 2023 18:42:47 GMT
Could JB mean that as he does'nt get a massive wage ( he's a wealthy man it does'nt adversely effect him) ,that the money saved by this ,goes towards other staff members wages? He said the same at Fleetwood Bas. This is from a podcast he did after he left in which he describes how his relationship with their owner had deteriorated. â I brought a number one in (Joel Coleman) and he injured his hamstring. I brought a number two in (Jayson Leutwiler) and he ended up being number one. âHe told me he wasnât going to renew Jayson Leutwilerâs contract and heâd done superbly. I said Iâd pay him out of my own money. âI was paying for staff. I was paying for stuff for some of the lads myself because I wanted Fleetwood to win. âI didnât take money home really â I was just paying other members of staff who I felt I needed. Rovers definitely owed key management personnel £ 700 000 at the end of June 2022 but we donât know which members of management or what the debt relates to. Kevin Bond?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on May 14, 2023 18:43:55 GMT
Well exactly One of the issues is of course people falling for Barton's narrative. If any of what you say is true then Barton is not working for "free" and he is not paying their wages out of his own pocket, but "loaning" the club money to pay them. On HMRC, I cannot believe that these people are not on the books of the club and HMRC regs are not being adhered to. Anything else is fraud and I hate to think of the consequences of that. But I have to say, all this smacks of stupidity, hubris or a distinct lack of funds. Either way it doesn't put the club in a good light. Either way, we don't know what the arrangements are, so no idea if it doesn't put the club in a good light. We have no proof of regs not being adhered to etc. I speculated that "working for free" meant that he put his wages to use by paying staff - it is pure speculation on my part, more than likely I am wrong. I would expect somebody of his wealth to have financially savvy people to advise him. I think any business is shown in a bad light when one of its managers states publicly that he is paying staff out of his own pocket. Most reasonable people would conclude that either the business doesnât have sufficient funds to pay for the staff itself or the directors of the business have ruled that those staff are not needed and are therefore showing incredible weakness by allowing a manager to override their ruling.
|
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 6,714
|
Post by oldie on May 14, 2023 18:47:54 GMT
Either way, we don't know what the arrangements are, so no idea if it doesn't put the club in a good light. We have no proof of regs not being adhered to etc. I speculated that "working for free" meant that he put his wages to use by paying staff - it is pure speculation on my part, more than likely I am wrong. I would expect somebody of his wealth to have financially savvy people to advise him. I think any business is shown in a bad light when one of its managers states publicly that he is paying staff out of his own pocket. Most reasonable people would conclude that either the business doesnât have sufficient funds to pay for the staff itself or the directors of the business have ruled that those staff are not needed and are therefore showing incredible weakness by allowing a manager to override their ruling. Totally agree. Never heard anything like this before. Unless the loans could be converted to shares under a share option scheme at a predetermined price.
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on May 15, 2023 8:18:27 GMT
Either way, we don't know what the arrangements are, so no idea if it doesn't put the club in a good light. We have no proof of regs not being adhered to etc. I speculated that "working for free" meant that he put his wages to use by paying staff - it is pure speculation on my part, more than likely I am wrong. I would expect somebody of his wealth to have financially savvy people to advise him. I think any business is shown in a bad light when one of its managers states publicly that he is paying staff out of his own pocket. Most reasonable people would conclude that either the business doesnât have sufficient funds to pay for the staff itself or the directors of the business have ruled that those staff are not needed and are therefore showing incredible weakness by allowing a manager to override their ruling. In theory could there be a limited company that invoiced a football club for it's services to provide all aspects of player management. That company could employ who they like and pay accordingly via paye. Could end with the owner of that company taking less so as to pay others. Not suggesting this is happening.
|
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 6,714
|
Post by oldie on May 15, 2023 11:30:44 GMT
I think any business is shown in a bad light when one of its managers states publicly that he is paying staff out of his own pocket. Most reasonable people would conclude that either the business doesnât have sufficient funds to pay for the staff itself or the directors of the business have ruled that those staff are not needed and are therefore showing incredible weakness by allowing a manager to override their ruling. In theory could there be a limited company that invoiced a football club for it's services to provide all aspects of player management. That company could employ who they like and pay accordingly via paye. Could end with the owner of that company taking less so as to pay others. Not suggesting this is happening. But again that would be false accounting. In the scenario you paint that would be a creditor on the balance sheet, not a loan.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs V Smegma on May 15, 2023 11:43:04 GMT
Give this squad to Coughlan and I reckon he'd get more than a tune out of it. GC had a similar squad for L2 at Mansfield, I can't recall him getting much of a tune out of them? He had the likes of Collins, Evans, Belshaw, sinclair, Marquis and Coutts there did he?
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on May 15, 2023 13:16:15 GMT
In theory could there be a limited company that invoiced a football club for it's services to provide all aspects of player management. That company could employ who they like and pay accordingly via paye. Could end with the owner of that company taking less so as to pay others. Not suggesting this is happening. But again that would be false accounting. In the scenario you paint that would be a creditor on the balance sheet, not a loan. Was more about those quotes on Barton paying for some staff out of his wages.
|
|
oldie
Joined: September 2021
Posts: 6,714
|
Post by oldie on May 15, 2023 13:32:49 GMT
GC had a similar squad for L2 at Mansfield, I can't recall him getting much of a tune out of them? He had the likes of Collins, Evans, Belshaw, sinclair, Marquis and Coutts there did he? Yes, I would be intrigued to know what the "similar" players were
|
|