buster. 4,808 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 You're probably right but I think we all have to realise (and it's difficult for some) is that neither King or the incumbents care what we think. King or Ashley or Green or SDM or Whyte will all do what benefits them. We can only hope that, for the most part at least, that coincides with the well-being of the club. I think you have to differentiate between King and the likes of Green/Ashely in that the broad intentions are very different. That isn't to say that the intended route from A to B will be a smooth one or that to make it a more viable & less expensive proposition, DK wouldn't be prepared or see as the best option, to tread a risky and unpleasent path. We are where we are and there is no easy route back, if there is a route at all.... The likes of Green / Ashely would take us on the route to destruction / no-where. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 That dramatic scenario would also spell trouble for King as he would, unfairly in my view, be attacked for not doing something before it was too late. This has been a masterpiece in the art of making money and it's architects command a certain amount of grudging respect for how they have gone about it. their is a group who will attack king no matter what and we both know it will have nothing to do with what king does or doesn't do. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 Some have made light of the various changes to our broker and advisers so I doubt a change of auditor would concern them either. I don't know what pressure Deloittes can bring to bear in that respect but I'd imagine any accounting info will be held back until the last possible moment regardless of what happens with King. A change of auditor would have different implications. Changing auditor will, in the vast majority of instances, result in negativity toward the company itself and, more than likely, result in a negative impact on share price - especially if you go from a Big 4 audit firm to a lower-tier organization. Audit firms have their own means for determining going concern (the criteria remains the same but different firms will view the same evidence, business plans, projections etc differently) - however, given our high profile and given what Deloitte said last year about going concern I would be very, very surprised if a new audit firm came in and gave a clean opinion. Further, you have the issue of another audit firm coming in and having to start the audit afresh, at a time when the results should be getting released - a delay in the publishing of results could also lead to a negative impact on share price. Accounting information will be held back as long as possible, undoubtedly. Folks like Wallace & Nash will be fully aware of the implications of a change in auditor at this late stage. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,151 Posted October 22, 2014 Author Share Posted October 22, 2014 A change of auditor would have different implications. Changing auditor will, in the vast majority of instances, result in negativity toward the company itself and, more than likely, result in a negative impact on share price - especially if you go from a Big 4 audit firm to a lower-tier organization. Audit firms have their own means for determining going concern (the criteria remains the same but different firms will view the same evidence, business plans, projections etc differently) - however, given our high profile and given what Deloitte said last year about going concern I would be very, very surprised if a new audit firm came in and gave a clean opinion. Further, you have the issue of another audit firm coming in and having to start the audit afresh, at a time when the results should be getting released - a delay in the publishing of results could also lead to a negative impact on share price. Accounting information will be held back as long as possible, undoubtedly. Folks like Wallace & Nash will be fully aware of the implications of a change in auditor at this late stage. I don't doubt any of the above and appreciate the learned opinion. However, as said to BD, I'd suspect some shareholders and certain companies would care little for such corporate niceties... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,151 Posted October 22, 2014 Author Share Posted October 22, 2014 I think you have to differentiate between King and the likes of Green/Ashely in that the broad intentions are very different. That isn't to say that the intended route from A to B will be a smooth one or that to make it a more viable & less expensive proposition, DK wouldn't be prepared or see as the best option, to tread a risky and unpleasent path. We are where we are and there is no easy route back, if there is a route at all.... The likes of Green / Ashely would take us on the route to destruction / no-where. It's perhaps unfair to lump King in with the others on that list but it's only fair to acknowledge the faults he does bring to the table as well. The chances of obtaining a new owner willing to pump in tens of millions for philanthropic reasons is next to zero. Yes, King's intentions my ultimately be more kind to the club but it's far from certain his and our ambitions may line up any time soon. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 I don't doubt any of the above and appreciate the learned opinion. However, as said to BD, I'd suspect some shareholders and certain companies would care little for such corporate niceties... They also need to find a willing auditing firm - and there can be little doubt we are a poisoned chalice. Any auditing firm will know that they would face unbearable scrutiny should they get their opinion wrong. Would an auditing firm take on the job ? Probably. Would they give a clean audit report ? I cant say "absolutely not" but if they did it is more than possible they would be investigated by their governing body over their audit practices - but given the statements that our CEO has given over the last 6 months he has already effectively admitted that the Club is NOT a going concern - said how much investment we needed, then how much we needed with the share offer which we know fell well short of the needed funds. Any audit firm giving a clean audit report from just Wallace's statements would have serious explaining to do and could run the risk of losing their licence - and the engagement partner could run the risk of losing his audit practicing certificate too. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 A change of auditor would have different implications. Changing auditor will, in the vast majority of instances, result in negativity toward the company itself and, more than likely, result in a negative impact on share price - especially if you go from a Big 4 audit firm to a lower-tier organization. Audit firms have their own means for determining going concern (the criteria remains the same but different firms will view the same evidence, business plans, projections etc differently) - however, given our high profile and given what Deloitte said last year about going concern I would be very, very surprised if a new audit firm came in and gave a clean opinion. Further, you have the issue of another audit firm coming in and having to start the audit afresh, at a time when the results should be getting released - a delay in the publishing of results could also lead to a negative impact on share price. Accounting information will be held back as long as possible, undoubtedly. Folks like Wallace & Nash will be fully aware of the implications of a change in auditor at this late stage. The implications of a change of CEO and financial consultant will be uppermost in their minds. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,151 Posted October 22, 2014 Author Share Posted October 22, 2014 They also need to find a willing auditing firm - and there can be little doubt we are a poisoned chalice. Any auditing firm will know that they would face unbearable scrutiny should they get their opinion wrong. Would an auditing firm take on the job ? Probably. Would they give a clean audit report ? I cant say "absolutely not" but if they did it is more than possible they would be investigated by their governing body over their audit practices - but given the statements that our CEO has given over the last 6 months he has already effectively admitted that the Club is NOT a going concern - said how much investment we needed, then how much we needed with the share offer which we know fell well short of the needed funds. Any audit firm giving a clean audit report from just Wallace's statements would have serious explaining to do and could run the risk of losing their licence - and the engagement partner could run the risk of losing his audit practicing certificate too. Maybe the last few years have made me overly cynical but the checks and practices of the financial industry have made me less than trustworthy over any such company's opinion. I hope Deloitte apply a lot of pressure to the club in terms of how they interpret the short-term future but I'll never under-estimate how devious people can be when it comes to misrepresenting the position of our club. What kind of report do you expect? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 You're probably right but I think we all have to realise (and it's difficult for some) is that neither King or the incumbents care what we think. King or Ashley or Green or SDM or Whyte will all do what benefits them. We can only hope that, for the most part at least, that coincides with the well-being of the club. I can't see how King will make money from the 'Gers. I think you do him a disservice by lumping him along with Ashley/ Green/ Bluepitch/Margarita. I see neither McMurdo or 3 names have been fed today.............I'm wondering if this might mean something good.s going down 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoodyBlue 0 Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 I can't see how King will make money from the 'Gers. I think you do him a disservice by lumping him along with Ashley/ Green/ Bluepitch/Margarita. I agree - King is not in this for the money at all. I don't believe for one minute that King would aim to benefit personally on a financial front. 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.