Re: Swinton points deduction? : Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:07 pm  

substitute "reason for petitions" for insolvency event, Nothus. So was it one reason behind all six. for example a historic tax bill of £100K which they have defended six times, or they couldn't afford the PAYE for six months out of ten, or something else?

Any thoughts on the balance sheets, Nothus? My view is technically insolvent in 2015 if you ignore the intangible assets, with the business owing twice as much as it had in cash or was owed. Do you know anything about the intangible assets? I just cannot figure out anything that the company could own that would justify being capitalised.

And just say you don't know the answers, Nothus, that is enough, I am after better information that may shed light on the issue.

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:53 pm  

Why? Does it really matter?

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:59 pm  

Dannyboywt wrote:

See some sad stuff on here over the last few years but for a Bulls fan to clutch at such low straws is the worst. When any club get's in difficulty it's sad and if they get winding up orders and sort them we should celebrate that.

It's almost like a final reminder on a household bill martinwildbull there is no limit to the number you get as long as they are paid. Bull couldn't so RFL had to punish you. Sad truth and I think in every case the previous owners didn't get a "Clean" set of accurate accounts and massively underestimated the investment required and ran out of investable capital so just couldn't find the money to fight winding up orders.

In a way the only logic I can see this year from an outside point of view is that the owners are trying to baseline the running cost so the can create a working model to take you forward.

Must as the fans are hurt the owners could have been brought in a few players to get a few more wins, so again all I can see is them trying to limit losses so with full RL money and no points deduction they can start moving upward once more.

When Hood made a mess I did an analysis of 10 years the Bulls Stat accounts and other Bradford data such as economic, and demographic, and concluded that we will never ever get back to those golden days, without a sugar daddy. So all the subsequent events have come as no surprise to me. The majority view on this site, and mine as well, is that we should have been in C1 this year, so yes its a bit annoying, but after a years delay we will be in the place where we can genuinely start to get both team stability and financial stability. I also believe that if chalo proceed as they have hinted, a core of home grown and a selection of experienced players and a reserves side in which they can develop, then that will bring us success in a few years, success meaning a team playing good rugby and winning more than losing. Halifax reserves beat Saints reserves, Fax are in the 8s so it clearly works for them. Have a look at the BBC article on how Monaco with attendances of 9000 a game could win the league.

I see what you are getting at, but a winding up petition is more we are going to have your house; if you are in a place where a winding up petition is being treated as the time to pay then you should not be trading.

So many questions, and nobody with any informative answers to push the analysis along. Anybody?

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:27 pm  

This statement from Swinton might help http://www.swintonlionsrlfc.com/news/356

This statement from Swinton might help http://www.swintonlionsrlfc.com/news/356

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Tue Aug 01, 2017 7:57 pm  

bezzerscr wrote: This statement from Swinton might help http://www.swintonlionsrlfc.com/news/356 If only the motley selection of charlatans and shysters we Bulls fans have put up with as owners had the stones to release such a statement when we have been in such a predicament. I'm glad it's looking more positive for then. The game is already in a precarious position without old established clubs like Swinton going under.

bezzerscr wrote: This statement from Swinton might help http://www.swintonlionsrlfc.com/news/356 If only the motley selection of charlatans and shysters we Bulls fans have put up with as owners had the stones to release such a statement when we have been in such a predicament. I'm glad it's looking more positive for then. The game is already in a precarious position without old established clubs like Swinton going under.

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:28 am  

Thanks bezzerscr. You are not even the GruppenoberKommandantmitbratwurst-in-chief of the RAB branch of the grammar gestapo and yet you clearly understand the difference between a question mark and an exclamation mark.

Totally agree Pass13worD. A reason for the club, by which I mean the fans not the owners, to celebrate.

And it reads like a hold my hands up to a mighty f13k up. November 2016 contractual commitments, budgets need adjusting,assurances to other creditors, etc etc. An admission that the 6 winding up petitions were all essentially related to the same issue going back pre season. No mention of £100k historical tax issue, that did not look right to me either. Reads like the fate that the Dewsbury Ostriches feared except in their case what would happen following promotion to Superleague not the Championship. 3rd party input involved, again no surprise, clearly a publicity shy hero(ine) or hero(etc)(s).

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Wed Aug 02, 2017 8:02 am  

martinwildbull wrote:

substitute "reason for petitions" for insolvency event, Nothus. So was it one reason behind all six. for example a historic tax bill of £100K which they have defended six times, or they couldn't afford the PAYE for six months out of ten, or something else?

Any thoughts on the balance sheets, Nothus? My view is technically insolvent in 2015 if you ignore the intangible assets, with the business owing twice as much as it had in cash or was owed. Do you know anything about the intangible assets? I just cannot figure out anything that the company could own that would justify being capitalised.

And just say you don't know the answers, Nothus, that is enough, I am after better information that may shed light on the issue.

Obviously without access to the accounting records all anyone can do is guess.
So at a guess, I'd say the HMRC winding up petitions were down to unpaid PAYE liabilities, which would explain their regular occurrence. Maybe some VAT too but I'm not sure.
We do know that they were dismissed though, not deferred, so it's largely irrelevant.

As for the balance sheet, again we can only guess. What could be in intangibles? Licences, costs associated with the website, trademarks, maybe even some goodwill?
I don't really think it matters though. Even if they weren't there and the company had negative reserves, it could still continue to trade without any issues.
I work with plenty of companies in such a position, assurances from directors or other sources will keep the company as a going concern. They can't pay any dividends out but that's not really on Swinton's agenda anyway I wouldn't have thought.

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Wed Aug 02, 2017 8:36 am  

Nothus wrote: What is this 'insolvency event' you [martinwildbull] are referring to? HMRC will issue a winding up order every time a payment is late. If all of these petitions were dismissed, then that probably means that the liabilities were eventually paid. Just the sort of anal question that I find hard to resist! It reflects poorly on the RFL as the procession of petitions martinw refers to seems to fly in the face of the RFL's written policies and procedures on "financial sustainability" even if a WUP which is dismissed isn't actually an insolvency event. But what is? I had a quick look. Section A3.1 of the Operational Rules say "as defined in the RFL Articles of Association". But what is "RFL"? Definitions say RFL means RFL (Governing Body) Ltd. The Articles of which on my (sadly non-searchable) copy don't appear at first blush to contain any such definition. Anyone got a microscope and time to use it? My copy is the one passed in Dec 2015. (Maybe our penalties and points have therefore been deducted illegally? Perhaps someone should immediately sue ) Operational Rules: All Clubs shall ensure that at all times their liabilities to HMRC in respect of VAT and PAYE are up to date (in this context up to date means not more than 28 days in arrears). Clubs shall upon request from the RFL give HMRC written permission in such form as HMRC may require for HMRC to share information about the Club’s liabilities to HMRC with the RFL. Notwithstanding the above paragraph if any Club has any liabilities to HMRC it shall also promptly upon request from the RFL confirm the exact amount of any such liabilities both current and historic and confirm exact details of any agreements which are in place with the HMRC as regards the outstanding liabilities. Such certification will require signing by the Club’s Chief Executive and one other Director. It may be considered Off Field Misconduct to have HMRC liabilities, to fail to submit certification, to submit incorrect certification or to under report to HMRC and such Off Field Misconduct may also be considered to be a matter which impacts on the integrity of competition I hope it's not, but the Swinton statement does read like the dreaded chairman's vote of confidence in the manager. Unfortunately to me it reads depressingly llike this one from Marc Green "ruling out" administration a short time ahead of last September's winding up petition of our own.

Nothus wrote: What is this 'insolvency event' you [martinwildbull] are referring to? HMRC will issue a winding up order every time a payment is late. If all of these petitions were dismissed, then that probably means that the liabilities were eventually paid. Just the sort of anal question that I find hard to resist! It reflects poorly on the RFL as the procession of petitions martinw refers to seems to fly in the face of the RFL's written policies and procedures on "financial sustainability" even if a WUP which is dismissed isn't actually an insolvency event. But what is? I had a quick look. Section A3.1 of the Operational Rules say "as defined in the RFL Articles of Association". But what is "RFL"? Definitions say RFL means RFL (Governing Body) Ltd. The Articles of which on my (sadly non-searchable) copy don't appear at first blush to contain any such definition. Anyone got a microscope and time to use it? My copy is the one passed in Dec 2015. (Maybe our penalties and points have therefore been deducted illegally? Perhaps someone should immediately sue ) Operational Rules: All Clubs shall ensure that at all times their liabilities to HMRC in respect of VAT and PAYE are up to date (in this context up to date means not more than 28 days in arrears). Clubs shall upon request from the RFL give HMRC written permission in such form as HMRC may require for HMRC to share information about the Club’s liabilities to HMRC with the RFL. Notwithstanding the above paragraph if any Club has any liabilities to HMRC it shall also promptly upon request from the RFL confirm the exact amount of any such liabilities both current and historic and confirm exact details of any agreements which are in place with the HMRC as regards the outstanding liabilities. Such certification will require signing by the Club’s Chief Executive and one other Director. It may be considered Off Field Misconduct to have HMRC liabilities, to fail to submit certification, to submit incorrect certification or to under report to HMRC and such Off Field Misconduct may also be considered to be a matter which impacts on the integrity of competition I hope it's not, but the Swinton statement does read like the dreaded chairman's vote of confidence in the manager. Unfortunately to me it reads depressingly llike this one from Marc Green "ruling out" administration a short time ahead of last September's winding up petition of our own.

[Bullseye]

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Wed Aug 02, 2017 8:40 am  

I suspect the RFL turn a blind eye to their own operational rules in same way referees ignore players not touching the ball with their foot at the play the ball.

As for Swinton I hope they're alright now but thanks to bitter experience we know these statements have an unhappy habit of proving to be bollox.

Re: Swinton points deduction? : Wed Aug 02, 2017 8:50 am  

You can turn blind eyes to anything, but that may not wash if them pesky lawyers get wind of it