Apparently we can't sign no players now

Pace out

I'd take that at face value, it's just semantics.

Get a 20 point deduction and still win the league anyway

What on Earth is this??

No pace in this element!

Hedontplayforyou wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:13 pm

What on Earth is this??

Read it. New auditors has led to a late filing of accounts on our behalf, which should be resolved within the month.

You can’t really bluff past this kind of stuff. It’s unwelcome and concerning, even if it it’s ultimately resolved quickly with no further penalties.

Seems sloppy at best, hopefully nothing more untoward. Presumably this would have no effect on the summer transfer window in any case as we won’t be competing in the EFL?

I’ve read it, unsure what it actually means. Auditors ? Why’s it taken longer than usual?

Good job we've already bought the league

The late submission of our accounts has been mentioned on the takeover thread. It's as if we have something to hide, we don't do we?

I dont think its very hard to understand they approached new auditors said people would not be used to the club and its finances and thus the accounts have taken longer to be produced resulting in an embargo that means nothing because it will either be gone by summer or ineffective as we will be in the premier league and thus not under EFL jurisdiction. If anything its good news as it provides more clarity on companies house proceedings and a ballpark for the arrival of the accounts.

Anyone who thinks this isn't concerning is living in cloud cuckoo land

If (and I appreciate it a big if) its more than what the club are saying (and lets face it, every club that has gone bust ever has lied about stuff like this) then we could (and I appreciate could also be doing lots of heavy lifting) have significant issues going forward with the league AND the other teams at this level

Its not good news, or stuff to shrugged off without worrying about it

Very unprofessional. When the “new” auditors were instructed they must have been clearly told the deadline date. It’s not a massive corporate organisation. Realistically how long does it take to audit a small club like ours.

beddie wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:25 pm

Very unprofessional. When the “new” auditors were instructed they must have been clearly told the deadline date. It’s not a massive corporate organisation. Realistically how long does it take to audit a small club like ours.

Its a Huge corporate organisation actually and you have no clue the size of the auditing firm so how would you know how long it takes

Happened to us in 2008/09 as well didn’t it (albeit for different reasons)?

Chill out, the transfer window is closed until the summer

Doesn’t exactly come across very well at all does it.

AGENT_CLARET wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:28 pm

Chill out, the transfer window is closed until the summer

It’s almost as if people are more concerned about the wider financial implications of what this may mean rather than the trivial matter of being unable to sign players when we can’t.

This sort of shite is exactly the type of thing I feared with these owners. It’s simply not good enough or acceptable.

Let’s hope it’s put right immediately and that there’s nothing further to worry about. We’ve had a brilliant season thanks to everyone concerned and I would hate for it to become tainted in any way.

Socrates wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:31 pm

It’s almost as if people are more concerned about the wider financial implications of what this may mean rather than the trivial matter of being unable to sign players when we can’t.

If the club is not lying as I doubt they are then it has literally zero financial implication unless your reaching immensely

Not publishing our accounts on time has been rumbling on for a while hasn't it? Whatever the reason, this doesn't usually happen at clubs when there genuinely is nothing to worry about. Maybe we're the exception, I honestly have no idea.

HistoricalClaret wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:24 pm

I dont think its very hard to understand they approached new auditors said people would not be used to the club and its finances and thus the accounts have taken longer to be produced resulting in an embargo that means nothing because it will either be gone by summer or ineffective as we will be in the premier league and thus not under EFL jurisdiction. If anything its good news as it provides more clarity on companies house proceedings and a ballpark for the arrival of the accounts.

I think that's a bit simplistic. It's not a massive business, it's not a huge fee, it's not hugely complex. A simple change of auditor wouldn't cause such a delay.

If anything it just seems unnecessary and unprofessional. Even if the reason is the one given (delay in changing auditors) it seems pretty sloppy. Personally don’t see it as anything to worry about as they’ve already sent a draft of the accounts and will send the full version shortly.

I can see that people are already wetting themselves at this news.

If the statement is truthful on the clubs part then it should be sorted in a month, if the clubs lying then we will also know the sanction in a month to

Not great is it. Will lead to speculation in the media about the motives. Shouldn't impact on transfers hopefully but raises doubt about our financial governance. Fingers crossed it will be quickly resolved.

HistoricalClaret wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:28 pm

Its a Huge corporate organisation actually and you have no clue the size of the auditing firm so how would you know how long it takes

Well surely when the auditors were appointed the board were aware of their size and capability to meet the filing deadline. As I’ve said above, this could be totally innocent, but it’s very sloppy and unprofessional at best.

Also interesting that the club have pinned this wholly on the auditors. If this was my company being publicly hung out to dry I wouldn’t be too impressed, and considering the ramifications I would be straight on the phone to my insurers as the club will surely follow this up with legal action. On the flip side if the club are being creative with the truth then this will no doubt come back to bite.

aggi wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:33 pm

I think that's a bit simplistic. It's not a massive business, it's not a huge fee, it's not hugely complex. A simple change of auditor wouldn't cause such a delay.

it would midway through the auditing process at which point the new auditor has to go through the full process with half the time which according to the club is the case here

gandhisflipflop wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:33 pm

I can see that people are already wetting themselves at this news.

Gandhi, there is no sensible explanation for this delay, and the one the club have given doesn't seem credible

gandhisflipflop wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:33 pm

I can see that people are already wetting themselves at this news.

Well being placed under a transfer embargo is kind of significant news and something that we as supporters should be concerned about. Don’t you think?

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:35 pm

Not great is it. Will lead to speculation in the media about the motives. Shouldn't impact on transfers hopefully but raises doubt about our financial governance. Fingers crossed it will be quickly resolved.

Who gives a **** what the media says? They were saying we would implode last summer

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:37 pm

Well being placed under a transfer embargo is kind of significant news and something that we as supporters should be concerned about. Don’t you think?

The club have released a statement explaining the reasons. We went under an embargo in 2009, no statement was made and no bed wetting either.

Nixon believes it's 'Administrative issue. No biggie.' if anyone is interested.

gandhisflipflop wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:39 pm

The club have released a statement explaining the reasons. We went under an embargo in 2009, no statement was made and no bed wetting either.

Who’s wetting the bed? This is significant news whether you want it to be or not.

Interesting choice of words. The reason used for changing auditors was to move the Club forward. Success is the auditors confirming the accounts give a true and fair view and the statutory accounts being filed on time. On the face of it the output looks like a backwards move which raises the possibility that the former auditors raised concerns. Not saying that is the case but it feels like unnecessary stress.

gandhisflipflop wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:37 pm

Who gives a **** what the media says? They were saying we would implode last summer

Burnley Football Club. Alan Pace. Some supporters. The Football League.

gandhisflipflop wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:33 pm

I can see that people are already wetting themselves at this news.

Fancy talking about it on here hey

.....so JJ Watt was here just as a fan at yesterday's game ?....surely he wouldn't want to invest in a club with dodgy dealings....would he ?

Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:36 pm

Gandhi, there is no sensible explanation for this delay, and the one the club have given doesn't seem credible

Why doesn’t it seem credible?

The EFL will be bothered about stuff like this

The idea that its "bed wetting" to point that out is more than a little silly

Snake oil salesmen

Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:36 pm

Gandhi, there is no sensible explanation for this delay, and the one the club have given doesn't seem credible

The club statement is a credible explanation. The parent company of my place where I work changed the auditors on is one year (an American thing) and we filed late. Took us ages to regain our outstanding credit rating

Only a fool wouldn’t submit their accounts on time.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:39 pm

Who’s wetting the bed? This is significant news whether you want it to be or not.

It will all blow over, and it will be fine.

Duffer_ wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:40 pm

Interesting choice of words. The reason used for changing auditors was to move the Club forward. Success is the auditors confirming the accounts give a true and fair view and the statutory accounts being filed on time. On the face of it the output looks like a backwards move which raises the possibility that the former auditors raised concerns. Not saying that is the case but it feels like unnecessary stress.

Reaaaaaching

bf2k wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:43 pm

The club statement is a credible explanation. The parent company of my place where I work changed the auditors on is one year (an American thing) and we filed late. Took us ages to regain our outstanding credit rating

Is this likely to affect the club’s ability to borrow then?

gandhisflipflop wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:42 pm

Why doesn’t it seem credible?

Because auditors come in and take over jobs and file on time

That is essentially their job

Have you considered the fact that the reason its not been filed on time because the auditors have been waiting for information from the club?

It might well be a minor administrative problem btw, but it also might not be, and if it isn't, then that is a problem