No.

The players are listed as an asset on the balance sheet. This does not effect profit and/or loss (P&L account) atall.

In basic terms the P&L is: income - expenditure = profit or loss, over a given time period (in this case one year).

The players were put down as assets thus showing the full value of the club. Showing the players as an asset makes no difference to the Profit/Loss of the financial year.

Neville beat me to it. Shame Radio Humberside don't understand this basic principle.

ah right, dont really understand how that works to be fair, was just wondering why pearson was concerned about it. If it makes no difference at all then why do it / why not do it for those clubs that dont?

Given some of our performances over the last year, we'd probably be further in the red.

The only real reason to do it is to make the club look more valuable on paper. Example

Team A is valued at 3,000,000
They have 25 first teams valued at approx 30,000 each (total of 750,000

Team A value with squad is now 3, 750,000

I suppose if you are looking to sell the club then valuing it with the players makes some sense.

Yep,

The P&L shows a company's trading performance over a given time period; the Balance Sheet shows the company's value at that given moment in time.

The player valuations therefore make the company (at first glace) look as though it's in a healthier position than it actually is.

It doesn't [ireally [/imatter IMO. The only people who would be interested in this are potential investors, and they'd be able to spot it very quickly.

I understand now. thanks

Best post in this thread.

I agree that the old board were under-investing, not running things as well as they should be and their actions were affecting the clubs on-field performance and profitability.

However I believe that Pearson isn't so naive as to have not done his homework when he bought the club, and that the timing of this story (coming days after the end of the discount period for season tickets, and at the same time as the SMC re-negotiation) isn't just coincidental.

Not with some of the duck-eggs we've had on our books over the last couple of seasons

A scientist who believes in luck . Jesus

In the same rag that day there was a story about a pub in Hedon









Spending £350k improving it and that kinda put everything into prospective. The pub trade is very volatile at the moment and its a gamble investing that much in what is a small business, one a lot smaller the the FC operation. I have every confidence in the new set up at FC and a year from now it will be business as usual, profits and progress for FC .

But there hasn't actually been any PROFIT and certainly no PROGRESS, so how the hell will it be business as usual

Totally agree. Adam Pearson is not daft. He'd have done a full Due Dilligence on the club. Let's remember he's inherited bad financial situations at City on two occasions and was also experienced te financial mess at Leeds United. If he's spending his money, he's going to know what he's buying. Let's remember that this isn't football, it's not a speculative buy hoping for promotion to the Premiership and all the £millions that can bring. Yes, there could be a good honest return, but that is primarily dependent upon our success on the field leading to increased attendances, trips to Wembley/Grand Finals etc.

Pearson will also know how to manage the press, but his track record on that front with City is sound, there's been no Don Robinson-esqe 'We're going to play on the Moon' comments.

Time will tell, but I'm not worried. I'm sure attendances will be up this season and the ongoing operating costs of the club are now under control.

Believe and let's look forward to better times!

A scientist that believes in Jesus would be nice

Two.



Predestination is an alternative, but I'd still consider having a crap destiny to be unlucky.

Another is that everybody gets exactly what they deserve all the time.

Care to point to any evidence of that?

Are you suggesting that, for the 6 years prior to this one, the legal documents submit to Companies House and to HMRC, in the form of Financial Statements, which are intependantly varified, have been incorrect?

Oh look - another Rovers fan with feeble comprehension skills.



Go read the article again. Carefully.

How much profit did you make and how would paying your tax bill have changed that?

The tax liability only came up last year,due to the loophole being closed.I await the amount of rovers EBT bill with anticipation.Hudgell is yet to publicly release figures concerning this,and considering AP has sorted ours out,if i were a dobbin,i would be very twitchy,especially with him being very quiet these days,or will he go begging to Allam again?

Might have used the £1 million soft loan to pay it off.

Hudg wouldn't lie to his own supporters surely? Didn't he say it was going towards ground and youth development?

Quote ="Punos"Might have used the £1 million soft loan to pay it off.'" news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 453701.stm

Quote ="Punos"Might have used the £1 million soft loan to pay it off.'" news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 453701.stm

Rovers fan disguise and Ross from friends, "we were on a break" voice on IT WASN'T A LOAN, IT WAS A GIFT Rovers fan disguise and Ross from friends, "we were on a break" voice off.

and i thort i spoke jibberish