Zoner's Questions for Tara Brady

[McNasty]

I would like Ron Martin to fully clarify the situation with the rent issue in a clear & precise manner.

At RH can he confirm the rent due of £520k per year for the last 11 years has been charged in full, if not what amount has been charged? Has this figure been included in the profit & loss declared each year? How much has been written off on the Balance Sheet? How much is still owing?

At FF what does he estimate the rent to be annually? How much income will be syphoned off from the club by other companies/operaters? What length of lease/security will the club have? Will the lease have regular rent reviews (upwards only)? As likely the club will struggle to pay any rent, how will the non payment be treated? Will the management company set up to run the stadium have they the right to evict the club for non payment? Will the rent be charged as at RH and cause huge losses & the current practice of being written off will continue?

At the AGM Martin stated that the rent is charged but not claimed ( it would only be one of his companies paying another of his many companies) , he doesn't anticipate demanding it but he could well do at some date in the future and he point blankly refused to put it in writing that he would write it off. As soon as there is millions in the football club ( after he has gone ) he will demand the back rent, in my opinion.

 

[Smiffy]

Didn't RM only pay £1.5m for the Roots Hall site?

To then charge (Or not as yet) £520,000 per annum in rental is a joke. Similar to the Bradford problems...

 

[Firestorm]

Didn't RM only pay £1.5m for the Roots Hall site?

To then charge (Or not as yet) £520,000 per annum in rental is a joke. Similar to the Bradford problems...

4.5M according to the accounts

Directors report accounts to 31/7/99

on 2/3/99 RH sold to RHL for 4M
on 4/4/99 lease on B&L sold to SEL for 500k

I think I posted this in the Bradford thread

 

[Beefy]

Until we're in a cash-positive position rent is a non-issue. Any money RM takes out in rent, he'll only have to put back in to make up the shortfall in our income. The Club aren't likely to be evicted from the new ground for non-payment because firstly what else can he do with a massive football ground? And second because it's likely going to take him up to a decade to complete all of the developments at FF and I doubt the Council will play ball with him if he's kicked out the football club on the back of whose move they approved everything else.

 

[Wise Head]

Can anyone give me the figures requested further up in the thread? The main reason being that I think that if the rent has been put through the books even if it is subsequently written off from the balance sheet, then this will have added approx £6 million to our trading losses over the last 11 years, which goes some way to explaining the losses.

 

[Wise Head]

Until we're in a cash-positive position rent is a non-issue. Any money RM takes out in rent, he'll only have to put back in to make up the shortfall in our income. The Club aren't likely to be evicted from the new ground for non-payment because firstly what else can he do with a massive football ground? And second because it's likely going to take him up to a decade to complete all of the developments at FF and I doubt the Council will play ball with him if he's kicked out the football club on the back of whose move they approved everything else.

Sorry Beefy, have to disagree 100%. This is no basis for a successful SUFC at FF. We are totally reliant of Ron's goodwill after he has had his financial windfall. The management company set up for FF could be sold on to another party at any time who might not give a damn about football - remember Delancy Estates who owned half the ground at RH & didn't attend a game. We could be tied into a long term restricted lease with huge late payment penalties. We could be locked out due to non payment or wound up. There has to be a proper financial footing at FF for the club. People need to realise we are still & will be in serious financial mess at FF.

 

[Cricko]

4.5M according to the accounts

Directors report accounts to 31/7/99

on 2/3/99 RH sold to RHL for 4M
on 4/4/99 lease on B&L sold to SEL for 500k

I think I posted this in the Bradford thread

Don't always believe what you read.

 

[Firestorm]

Don't always believe what you read.

John , if you are saying that the information contained in the accounts is incorrect, this is the opportunity to bring RM down that many have been waiting for.

Misrepresentation will be sufficient to get him banned from running a company and may well be enough warrant criminal charges, take what you know to the police and the Companies Investigation Branch (part of the DTI) and they will be able to take this matter further.

 

[Beefy]

Sorry Beefy, have to disagree 100%. This is no basis for a successful SUFC at FF. We are totally reliant of Ron's goodwill after he has had his financial windfall. The management company set up for FF could be sold on to another party at any time who might not give a damn about football - remember Delancy Estates who owned half the ground at RH & didn't attend a game. We could be tied into a long term restricted lease with huge late payment penalties. We could be locked out due to non payment or wound up. There has to be a proper financial footing at FF for the club. People need to realise we are still & will be in serious financial mess at FF.

Who has said we won't be in a mess at FF? I just don't think there's any way we could pay a penny in rent. There's no money to be made as being landlord of a business which doesn't generate enough cash to pay its rent.

 

[Mbof]

Were we due money from the sell on clause of Bailey and Hooper? Has this been received, if not when are we due it and who from, ie the selling club or the buying club? Will this be paid in full or over instalements during the time of the players contract?

 

[united we stand]

HM revenue came after us in Jan 2010 for unpaid taxes. We were told catergorically that the revenue were wrong and we had paid them as part of our payment in Nov 2009.
Therefore once we paid in Jan (?) 2010 we were told this meant that we had now effecively overpaid. Has this now been resolved, had we overpaid them --the revenue opinion , not what we think. How was this all resolved? Were we wrong? Based on the fact that there was no annoucement over our 'victory' over HMRC suggests we were wrong
In Feb 2010 Ron denied rumours taht the players were not being paid on time 'just rumour and speculation" and "a little tiresome". He now admits that players were not paid on time.

The key point here is on two key issues we were mislead/lied to . This is the type of thing that really angers supporters, and makes us unwilling to accept at face value other annoucements

Does Ron understand

 

[Angell Delight]

Which brand of conditioner does Ron use on his barnet?

 

[sufcrocks]

How much money does Ron Martin and other board members expect to make from the proceeds of building and running Fossets Farm stadium and the commercial outlets? Is any of this money going to be reinvested back into the club to improve the squad and the youth system, if so what proportion?

 

[Cricko]

John , if you are saying that the information contained in the accounts is incorrect, this is the opportunity to bring RM down that many have been waiting for.

Misrepresentation will be sufficient to get him banned from running a company and may well be enough warrant criminal charges, take what you know to the police and the Companies Investigation Branch (part of the DTI) and they will be able to take this matter further.

You seem to believe anything as long as it is on paper and within the accounts.Once again I say you are naive or just acting dumb or missed the post of mine about creative accounting.

Do you operate in the real world or believe everything you see in print as factual accountancy wise?

 

[jamesmut2000]

You seem to believe anything as long as it is on paper and within the accounts.Once again I say you are naive or just acting dumb or missed the post of mine about creative accounting.

Do you operate in the real world or believe everything you see in print as factual accountancy wise?

Why didn't you ask him about creative accounting the other night?

 

[Cricko]

Why didn't you ask him about creative accounting the other night?

It is hardly a question you can ask is it.The whole thing about CA is creating a smoke screen.

 

[McNasty]

Why didn't you ask him about creative accounting the other night?

He would say he was being accused of fraud and sue for slander.

 

[jamesmut2000]

He would say he was being accused of fraud and sue for slander.

So it's ok to suggest he is being fraudulent on the internet but you can't do it in person?

 

[jamesmut2000]

It is hardly a question you can ask is it.The whole thing about CA is creating a smoke screen.

Well yes you could have asked. Inevitably whatever answer he would have given would have been classed as more smoke and mirrors so I guess there was no point in asking.

 

[Cricko]

Well yes you could have asked. Inevitably whatever answer he would have given would have been classed as more smoke and mirrors so I guess there was no point in asking.

Exactly..I feel most questions were not asked as there was no point as people knew the answer would be a smokescreen.