Board Statement 15 Feb

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2197
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by Vodka_Vic » Tue Feb 16, 2021 6:58 pm

Even if they do sort out this situation, they can't walk all over business rules of trading insolvent. Just let it go NL.

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4865
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Wed Feb 17, 2021 12:35 pm

Mark Ives. A man with only a fork - living in a world of soup.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

quakersfan
Posts: 412
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 2:26 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by quakersfan » Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:05 pm

onewayup wrote:
Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:45 am
I think we have to go as far as we can in the TROPHY, it's FA competition rules ,which are different from national league rules, I am led to believe. Financial rewards no matter how small is money into the club, the national league has no grant funding so no money comes into the club ,
The national league management cannot say whether the decisions they have taken are legal or not yet still want clubs to sacrifice themselves by going into debt maybe for a lot of clubs administration by trading insolvent, That is illegal in itself knowingly running an insolvent business.
Which is exactly why clubs are refusing to play in the national league N/S .the national league management has skewed everything from the original funding to now the rules of their own league ,there has got to be some accountability from the national league taking responsibility for massive potentially destructive decisions that they made before the national league kicked a ball at the beginning of this season. Miss information from them got the league started, had the correct information been given the national league season would not have started. It is as simple as that.
Agree with most of what you say except the insolvency bit we have likely been trading insolvent over the last ten years just look at our accounts, having said that I’d guess 90% of football clubs at our level trade in the same way. It’s all about when ST monies come in and corporate sponsorship that help ease the situation.

eek
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by eek » Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:41 pm

quakersfan wrote:
Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:05 pm
onewayup wrote:
Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:45 am
I think we have to go as far as we can in the TROPHY, it's FA competition rules ,which are different from national league rules, I am led to believe. Financial rewards no matter how small is money into the club, the national league has no grant funding so no money comes into the club ,
The national league management cannot say whether the decisions they have taken are legal or not yet still want clubs to sacrifice themselves by going into debt maybe for a lot of clubs administration by trading insolvent, That is illegal in itself knowingly running an insolvent business.
Which is exactly why clubs are refusing to play in the national league N/S .the national league management has skewed everything from the original funding to now the rules of their own league ,there has got to be some accountability from the national league taking responsibility for massive potentially destructive decisions that they made before the national league kicked a ball at the beginning of this season. Miss information from them got the league started, had the correct information been given the national league season would not have started. It is as simple as that.
Agree with most of what you say except the insolvency bit we have likely been trading insolvent over the last ten years just look at our accounts, having said that I’d guess 90% of football clubs at our level trade in the same way. It’s all about when ST monies come in and corporate sponsorship that help ease the situation.
If you believe there is the possibility of money coming in in the future you aren't trading insolvently. That only arrives when you reach the point when you know there is no chance you can pay the bill.

Darlofan97
Posts: 4641
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by Darlofan97 » Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:56 pm

quakersfan wrote:
Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:05 pm
onewayup wrote:
Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:45 am
I think we have to go as far as we can in the TROPHY, it's FA competition rules ,which are different from national league rules, I am led to believe. Financial rewards no matter how small is money into the club, the national league has no grant funding so no money comes into the club ,
The national league management cannot say whether the decisions they have taken are legal or not yet still want clubs to sacrifice themselves by going into debt maybe for a lot of clubs administration by trading insolvent, That is illegal in itself knowingly running an insolvent business.
Which is exactly why clubs are refusing to play in the national league N/S .the national league management has skewed everything from the original funding to now the rules of their own league ,there has got to be some accountability from the national league taking responsibility for massive potentially destructive decisions that they made before the national league kicked a ball at the beginning of this season. Miss information from them got the league started, had the correct information been given the national league season would not have started. It is as simple as that.
Agree with most of what you say except the insolvency bit we have likely been trading insolvent over the last ten years just look at our accounts, having said that I’d guess 90% of football clubs at our level trade in the same way. It’s all about when ST monies come in and corporate sponsorship that help ease the situation.
Not true.

There is a difference between the balance sheet & cash-flow. We have made operating losses in the past but can still trade solvently as we have had the cash to satisfy our creditors and reasonable assurances over future income.

In this case, we would be taking on debt and incurring expenditure with little to no assurances of income from 1 April onwards = trading insolvent.

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 11927
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by Spyman » Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:14 pm

lo36789 wrote:
Darlofan97 wrote:
Mon Feb 15, 2021 1:48 pm
To then switch the lights back on for a chance at Wembley does not particularly sit right (unless Step 2 becomes N&V before the tie is played).
Conversely. If we have cut our costs by furloughing (I think DJ mentioned we have in an interview the other day with another club chairman) then there is a question of can we afford the trophy game, on a game by game basis.

If the losers prize = cost to bring players off flexi-furlough + test them then we would be justified.

Hornchurch are in the same boat. Arguably they are better placed as players probably aren't contracted and by law can train - ours can't train on furlough.
I don't know if/how the furlough rules have changed since April-Nov 2020, but 'training' was actually one thing that furloughed employees were allowed to partake in without any issue.

Whether the definition of the word 'training' differs when it comes to sports I do not know - it wouldn't surprise me if the government hadn't thought about the intricacies in this particular situation given their track record for thinking about the intricacies.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

Darlofan97
Posts: 4641
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by Darlofan97 » Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:18 pm

Spyman wrote:
Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:14 pm
lo36789 wrote:
Darlofan97 wrote:
Mon Feb 15, 2021 1:48 pm
To then switch the lights back on for a chance at Wembley does not particularly sit right (unless Step 2 becomes N&V before the tie is played).
Conversely. If we have cut our costs by furloughing (I think DJ mentioned we have in an interview the other day with another club chairman) then there is a question of can we afford the trophy game, on a game by game basis.

If the losers prize = cost to bring players off flexi-furlough + test them then we would be justified.

Hornchurch are in the same boat. Arguably they are better placed as players probably aren't contracted and by law can train - ours can't train on furlough.
I don't know if/how the furlough rules have changed since April-Nov 2020, but 'training' was actually one thing that furloughed employees were allowed to partake in without any issue.

Whether the definition of the word 'training' differs when it comes to sports I do not know - it wouldn't surprise me if the government hadn't thought about the intricacies in this particular situation given their track record for thinking about the intricacies.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.hull ... 191779.amp
But HMRC has moved to clarify its position, with a spokesperson telling the Hull Daily Mail: “Sports professionals undertaking supervised training with their employer are unlikely to be eligible for the grants from the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, because such training directly contributes to generating revenue for their employer.

lo36789
Posts: 9223
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Board Statement 15 Feb

Post by lo36789 » Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:21 pm

Yeh I thought it was more about CPD sort of training rather than anything else.

It is an interesting thing to try and distinguish mind.

Personal development allowed, business development not?

Post Reply