Hung Out To Dry 10 - Pressure on the Conference /Other Clubs
Hung Out To Dry 10 - Pressure on the Conference /Other Clubs
The question of whether the Conference should have stepped in sooner to warn the creditors of what was going on might be pursued – in their statement on the radio last week they made it clear they had been monitoring things for some while – apparently before the Beasants were involved. Similarly other clubs loaned players etc, or made deals to allow monies to be released for specific purposes which limited the availability of this money to general creditors.
-
diamond donald
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 10:27 am
Re: Hung Out To Dry 10 - Pressure on the Conference /Other Clubs
Could'nt agree more!
Indeed, In March the Conference took action against the club (as we all know) about submitting misleading information. Calder was blamed, and then left (or was pushed). Why then did his directorship not terminate until 15th May (from Companies House)?
All this information on the finances of clubs is part of a directive introduced by the Conference, and according to them, is all available in the public domain. I can't find anything.
What was this 'misleading information' EXACTLY, and how often do clubs have to report? If they knew the information was 'misleading' in March, then on what basis could this be done, accurately, since the last filed accounts appear to be from May 2008. Has all other information supplied been accurate? I have my doubts - but if the information on these reports is 'public' then can we have a look?
Then, if further financial information was supplied after March, why was the next action by the Conference at the AGM?
Indeed, In March the Conference took action against the club (as we all know) about submitting misleading information. Calder was blamed, and then left (or was pushed). Why then did his directorship not terminate until 15th May (from Companies House)?
All this information on the finances of clubs is part of a directive introduced by the Conference, and according to them, is all available in the public domain. I can't find anything.
What was this 'misleading information' EXACTLY, and how often do clubs have to report? If they knew the information was 'misleading' in March, then on what basis could this be done, accurately, since the last filed accounts appear to be from May 2008. Has all other information supplied been accurate? I have my doubts - but if the information on these reports is 'public' then can we have a look?
Then, if further financial information was supplied after March, why was the next action by the Conference at the AGM?