boss 0 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Article posted in another place but thought the learned GN posters would appreciate it also: MURRAY INTERNATIONAL EXTENDS ITS ACCOUNTS YEAR END Murray International Holdings Limited will not now need to make public its Accounts until 30 April 2010, five months later than normal. Until now, the year end of the company has been 31 January and the most recently published Accounts are to 31 January 2008. Private companies like MIH have 10 months from the accounting date to publish their Accounts (soon changing to 9 months by the Companies Act 2006), usually meaning that MIHââ?¬â?¢s Accounts are available from Companies House by 30 November each year. But not so this year. MIH will now be preparing Accounts for the 17 month period to 30 June 2009, which will not have to be lodged at Companies House until 10 months later i.e.30 April 2010. Other companies in the MIH group, such as Murray MHL Limited and The Premier Property Group Limited have similarly changed their year ends to 30 June. For the avoidance of doubt, extending the accounting period up to a maximum of 18 months is perfectly legal and, sometimes, appropriate. This does not affect Rangers directly as our accounting year end is already 30 June, as are those of other MIH group companies directly connected to Rangers, such as Murray Sports Limited. We are, though, listed on the Plus Market and its rule book states that our Accounts must be published within 5 months of the year end. So at some point between now and 30 November we will see just how much of a whopping loss we made last year. Be ready for some bad news. So why did MIH change its year end? The simple answer is ââ?¬Ë?because they canââ?¬â?¢. It keeps some presumably dreadful numbers private for another 5 months; out of view of the media, the public, competitors, suppliers et al. The bank will have access to MIHââ?¬â?¢s management accounts and will be well aware of the situation so it is unlikely they will have any problem with the change of year end. Indeed they might even welcome it ââ?¬â?? they as much as anyone will be interested in nursing MIH through the credit crunch. Who knows, by the time 30 April comes around it may be that Rangers has a new owner. And no-one cares what numbers MIH then publish. I guess that is the hope for many, not least Sir Dave. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Wow. Thanks for that, Boss. That will set more than a few alarm bells ringing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
franker 1 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that the year end has been changed to give MIH the maximum time to improve the numbers. Murray has to have had the support of Lloyds banking group to make this decision -something he will be quick to remind any detractors in the financial press. All i can see from to days news is the speculation regarding the future of MIH as it is structured today will substantially increase. Our main concern on this board and others is course Rangers. Lets hope that a group of investors can be persuaded to part with cash sooner rather than later even if it means MIH retaining a stake(i would be happy with them keeping 49%). I am sure Muir and McGill would make capable MIH non execs in that scenario. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that the year end has been changed to give MIH the maximum time to improve the numbers. Murray has to have had the support of Lloyds banking group to make this decision -something he will be quick to remind any detractors in the financial press. All i can see from to days news is the speculation regarding the future of MIH as it is structured today will substantially increase. Our main concern on this board and others is course Rangers. Lets hope that a group of investors can be persuaded to part with cash sooner rather than later even if it means MIH retaining a stake(i would be happy with them keeping 49%). I am sure Muir and McGill would make capable MIH non execs in that scenario. or the maximum time for property values to increase. I don't see Murray agreeing to just sell part of his shareholding. It'll be all or nothing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.