Statement from McCabe - Official Site

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


Published Accounts are subject to the rules of whichever Stock Market the company is in.

SUFC is now a private company and has to log it's accounts at Companies House. When we were a public company not so long ago the accounts had to be more detailed to satisfy that market's rules.

So, these rules apply to every registered company in the UK.

Therefore, far from there being "smokes and mirrors" the club accountants fulfill their role and prepare appropriate accounts.

Additional information is provided by the Board at the club AGM both as a prepared statement and in answer to questions from the floor and these questions are often aggressive and searching. When I have attended one suspicious shareholder has been really well prepared to grill McCabe but there really nothing for KM to hide and he easily responds with calm assurance.

Some fans can't be bothered to read this thread even, never mind do research on published accounts and yet still choose to argue with FANS who do take the trouble to do the research, they also choose to disbelieve the owners and their representatives, so they really are lost causes.

Over the years they are told the same consistent messages and figures. They consistently see lies and subtifuge.

Somebody advise us of any other football club which provides more communication and information from their owners than our club because that would be relevant. Bear in mind with regard to transfer fees there is often an agreement between clubs not to disclose the amount involved. Both the buyers and the sellers have their own reasons for exact figures not being in the public domain and regard it as their business, maybe taking pressure off the player, the managers and away from the open market re subsequent dealings. Look at monthly transfers and see how many fees are 'undisclosed', the majority in fact, not just United.

As a Forum member who has tried hard to provide information about the club in an effort to defend the integrity of KM, I must say that it becomes tedious in the extreme when certain posters seem to have a vested interest in causing doubts and unrest, despite the facts of the matters which they never contest with anything material, just rhetoric and innuendo.

On this thread Bohemian and Sean Thornton have provided so much information with so much patience and yet, no matter what they say, they are disbelieved and accused of some ulterior motives.

Trouble is, like me, the patient fans eventually tire of putting in the effort to explain the financials. Thereafter the unbased rhetoric and innuendo can go unchallenged and maybe some younger, newer forum members might even believe it might be true.


You have to understand that as well as his agenda Popeye is smarting over being picked up on his comments re Hulse. He doesn't like that sort of thing. So this is the result along with him rewriting definitions of words. Similarly Barney made himself look stupid on financial matters with his claims on contract law/SCMP and hopped on board in a bizarre attempt to prove he knows what he's talking about. Which won't fool anyone.

You'll notice neither have come up with any actual figures for anything. Not even the annual figures they supposedly want breaking down.
 
Look, Woodwardfan. It is pretty simple. You (like McCabe) can provide all the diversary 'facts' you want, but it is unsatisfactory for you to try to discredit FANS (quite why you suddenly burst into CapsLock on that, I have no idea) who wish to know certain aspects of the financial dealings of the club they support. It's a bit like Clarence Beeks in Trading Places and his iffy pay chit for 'special services'. Obviously, if there is some sort of deal to keep the machinations of this a big, fat secret from those FANS who are serially agitated by the selling of our talented stock at the expense of ... well ... Woolford and Hammond ... then we are bound to be a leeetle beet suspicious and wanting more info.

The FACTS submitted are all very well and good. Big deal we operate at a whopping loss (although no one offers as to why, mind) Many clubs (and businesses) do. I am not interested in the running costs of the club. I am interested in how much we sell players for and how much we pay for their replacements. That is a given measure of the ambition and ability of management and scouting staff. If McCabe has alluded that Murphy's money has already been jizzed away, and he has shat eight large into the club this season, what does that say to you? What does that say about last season? What does that say about overall governance of an ongoing asset, one which near one twenty thousand interested parties (the FANS) attend to watch every other Saturday?

Your seemingly sightless lack of want to interrogate it and spin positive on a dire situation leads me to think you are a sock puppet for things closer to the club. If you are, good luck. You, Foulke and Thornton are pissing in the wind. We are still outside the playoffs wanting snookers to even make a fag end of a challenge at the end of a season we really don't want. McCabe can come over all cross and hurt all he wants but while he continues to try to tough it out and provide us with no answers to why we are where we are (and it is his job, not yours) then he will continue to be met with criticism.

pommpey
 
You have to understand that as well as his agenda Popeye is smarting over being picked up on his comments re Hulse. He doesn't like that sort of thing. So this is the result along with him rewriting definitions of words. Similarly Barney made himself look stupid on financial matters with his claims on contract law/SCMP and hopped on board in a bizarre attempt to prove he knows what he's talking about. Which won't fool anyone.

Ha. 'Popeye'. Haven't heard that one before. This week, anyway. So it's now 'personal'? Nice one. Foxy? Watching this?

I have done with the Hulse issue. Deal with being hoisted by your own petard, why dontcha?

You'll notice neither have come up with any actual figures for anything. Not even the annual figures they supposedly want breaking down.

Because 'the figures aren't there' are they? I don't know why you are bothering here, because you don't know, do you? You have wasted bandwidth dancing round the issue making a berk of yourself and now you are dead cross, simply because wanting to be seen as some sort of ITK cleverclogs, you are found wanting and are in fact, clueless.

Off you go. Go on. Back to bed.

pommpey
 
You used the word 'injured' in double quotes, Captain Pedantic. That suggests to me that you think he wasn't injured. I refute that, and so would Hulse.

The fact that we didn't have a striker to

re·place

2. To take the place of or fill the role of: Jets have largely replaced propeller planes.
3. To provide a substitute for (something broken or unsatisfactory, for example): replace a spark plug; replace a team's coach.

Hulse when he was rendered 'unplayable' (if you like) is a measure of our unpreparedness for the PL.

I really, really hope this clears it up for you. You are currently making a lot of this and getting nowhere, son.

pommpey


Well seeing I was there it's pretty safe to assume I knew then - and now - he was injured. But if you think your argument is strengthened by saying I don't think he was - as stupid as that is - carry on.

The point when you made the comment about replacing the injured Hulse was about not strengthening the squad because McCabe wouldn't spend. When Hulse was injured, he couldn't spend because the transfer window was shut.

Even with your new definition of replace, Hulse wasn't badly injured prior to the Chelsea game.

For someone so keen to comment on the grammar and syntax of others, you're remarkably lax when it comes to your own use of the language.

It could of course just be that your comment was bollocks and you didn't like it being pointed out.

Or both?
 
... droning on ...

Feller. Replacement, within the squad.

If you can't get that (and it seems you are a bit special anyway) then I can't help you any more.

Now go away, eh? You desperation is starting to smell.

pommpey
 
Now we're using popular entertainment as an analogy. Where does Beeks finding himself in the cage with the gorilla fit into this then?
 
Feller. Replacement, within the squad.

If you can't get that (and it seems you are a bit special anyway) then I can't help you any more.

Now go away, eh? You desperation is starting to smell.

pommpey


Debate over. Pommpeys "won" because he says he has.

(Awaits fat mother joke as a finale)
 
FACT:

NOT A SINGLE POSTER ON THIS THREAD IS SAYING McCABE HAS NOT MADE MISTAKES OR IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE STATE OF THE CLUB AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND NOR HAS McCABE SAID OTHERWISE.

PLEASE ABSORB THAT AND MOVE ON.

You're angry, aren't you WWF. EIther that, or there's summat stuck down the left side of your keyboard.

We know mistakes have been made and acknowledge, of sorts, that McCabe has made conditional admissions to that fact. Mistakes, as he alludes, are other people's fault.

pommpey
 
FACT:

NOT A SINGLE POSTER ON THIS THREAD IS SAYING McCABE HAS NOT MADE MISTAKES OR IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE STATE OF THE CLUB AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND NOR HAS McCABE SAID OTHERWISE.

PLEASE ABSORB THAT AND MOVE ON.

Thanks Woody.

Don't profess to know much about accountancy but I do know that , although McCabe has made mistakes , been badly advised , IMO he has always tried to act in the best interest of the club, albeit unfortunately doesn't always cover himself in glory.

SUFC are not within the M25 orbital and a club who buyers have been queuing up to get involved with. We have to be careful what we wish for , at least the bloke at the helm is a Blade , being a fan and chairman can cloud your judgement , but his hearts in the right place .

Sean Thornton and Bohemian have explained issues in a clear simplistic form which , at the end of the day , it's what we do in the future that now counts . Nobody is on the fiddle at the lane .

Pompey has a opinion which has to be respected.


Shall we start giving McCabe some slack with Adkins, we all want the same thing at the end of the day.

It would be good to the piss taking of S6 starting again when there bubble burst . Things in perspective . It's not all shit , doom and gloom at BDTBL.

If it's not football it's finance . Shit we are intelligent fans at the end of the day .:eek:



UTB
 
Gentlemen, and others....

Apologies if this has appeared before, but my recollection is that we took a massive wedge off West Ham a year or so after relegation. I'm sure that McCabe said that this would be used for "the future running of the club".

If that is the case, did it appear in the accounts? Depending on who you speak to, it was £19 million or £23 million, and even with our financial acumen, that takes a great deal of losing.

BTW, George agrees with Bert about the Bramall Lane corner, best view in the house.
 
Long story short

1. McCabe has put loads of money into the club;
2. He has tried to act in the club's best interests;
3. He has made tons of mistakes and we are left in the shit because of said mistakes.

Does anyone really disagree with any of that?
 
Long story short

1. McCabe has put loads of money into the club;
2. He has tried to act in the club's best interests;
3. He has made tons of mistakes and we are left in the shit because of said mistakes.

Does anyone really disagree with any of that?

Thread over.
 

Gentlemen, and others....

Apologies if this has appeared before, but my recollection is that we took a massive wedge off West Ham a year or so after relegation. I'm sure that McCabe said that this would be used for "the future running of the club".

If that is the case, did it appear in the accounts? Depending on who you speak to, it was £19 million or £23 million, and even with our financial acumen, that takes a great deal of losing.

BTW, George agrees with Bert about the Bramall Lane corner, best view in the house.

The Tevez settlement was £25m, recognised in the 2009(?) accounts as £18.7m owing to the discounting of future sums*. It was hoovered up by the Robson and Blackwell eras. You're spot on; the financial management of the club over the past 8 years has been nothing short of woeful.

*this is the idea that £1 today is "worth" more than £1 next year. Therefore, a promise of £1m next year is worth less this year; from memory United's discount rate was about 13%

So it is available then?

Do tell ...

*sits nicely*

pommpey

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk - free access to company accounts. You're the one who's got his cock in a twist about this; have a dig and see what you find.
 
Long story short

1. McCabe has put loads of money into the club;
2. He has tried to act in the club's best interests;
3. He has made tons of mistakes and we are left in the shit because of said mistakes.

Does anyone really disagree with any of that?

No not at all . Just smiling to myself . We could have had ex Bournemouth , Rotherham chairman , Anton Johnson . Now that's another story.

UTB
 
The Tevez settlement was £25m, recognised in the 2009(?) accounts as £18.7m owing to the discounting of future sums*. It was hoovered up by the Robson and Blackwell eras. You're spot on; the financial management of the club over the past 8 years has been nothing short of woeful.

*this is the idea that £1 today is "worth" more than £1 next year. Therefore, a promise of £1m next year is worth less this year; from memory United's discount rate was about 13%



https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk - free access to company accounts. You're the one who's got his cock in a twist about this; have a dig and see what you find.

Thanks Balham - looks like their maths is on the same level as mine

Did any one else do "addups, tekaways, timeses and sharebys or gozintas"?
 
The Tevez settlement was £25m, recognised in the 2009(?) accounts as £18.7m owing to the discounting of future sums*. It was hoovered up by the Robson and Blackwell eras. You're spot on; the financial management of the club over the past 8 years has been nothing short of woeful.

*this is the idea that £1 today is "worth" more than £1 next year. Therefore, a promise of £1m next year is worth less this year; from memory United's discount rate was about 13%



https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk - free access to company accounts. You're the one who's got his cock in a twist about this; have a dig and see what you find.


The £18.7 is after legal fees as well. There's a note in the accounts to that effect.
 
The Tevez settlement was £25m, recognised in the 2009(?) accounts as £18.7m owing to the discounting of future sums*. It was hoovered up by the Robson and Blackwell eras. You're spot on; the financial management of the club over the past 8 years has been nothing short of woeful.

*this is the idea that £1 today is "worth" more than £1 next year. Therefore, a promise of £1m next year is worth less this year; from memory United's discount rate was about 13%



https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk - free access to company accounts. You're the one who's got his cock in a twist about this; have a dig and see what you find.

Ooh. Heat. All over money.

This £25m/£18m/whatever.

Is that included in the £90m he has put into the club?

And if it wa hoovered up during those periods, I'd say he has a little bit of humility to show, than his attack-minded outlook we see these days.

pommpey
 
it's what we do in the future that now counts .

Too right, Bos. Just wish that McCabe had dealt with this side of the equation during his reappearance.

i.e. Will NA have to rely on free transfers/out-of-contracts/cast offs when rebuilding this summer? Will sales be required this summer (Che? Beard? Billy?)? What's the ongoing funding/cash injection situation with the owners? Etc.

Less interested in sympathising with McCabe's "plight", more interested in what the strategy is finance-wise going forwards, personally.
 
Too right, Bos. Just wish that McCabe had dealt with this side of the equation during his reappearance.

i.e. Will NA have to rely on free transfers/out-of-contracts/cast offs when rebuilding this summer? Will sales be required this summer (Che? Beard? Billy?)? What's the ongoing funding/cash injection situation with the owners? Etc.

Less interested in sympathising with McCabe's "plight", more interested in what the strategy is finance-wise going forwards, personally.


Let's be right, not until we know which division we are in can we formulate a strategy for next season.
 
Too right, Bos. Just wish that McCabe had dealt with this side of the equation during his reappearance.

i.e. Will NA have to rely on free transfers/out-of-contracts/cast offs when rebuilding this summer? Will sales be required this summer (Che? Beard? Billy?)? What's the ongoing funding/cash injection situation with the owners? Etc.

Less interested in sympathising with McCabe's "plight", more interested in what the strategy is finance-wise going forwards, personally.


A view expressed much earlier in this thread, despite what some may try to portray

"My point was that we'd heard nothing about plans for getting us out of this division, this season or next. All we got was that investment would be there for the next level. How long have we been hearing that? Surely that investment availability diminishes the more we rack up big losses in L1?"
 
Let's be right, not until we know which division we are in can we formulate a strategy for next season.


Forward planning would be looking at a business plan based on each possibility. They know which contracts are up, they will be aware of the running costs and should be able to make a forecast on wages and how much they will need to put in based on any outcome.
 
Forward planning would be looking at a business plan based on each possibility. They know which contracts are up, they will be aware of the running costs and should be able to make a forecast on wages and how much they will need to put in based on any outcome.


Of course they will, but clearly they can't talk to us about 'ifs and buts' which might imply we have given up on promotion.
 
Of course they will, but clearly they can't talk to us about 'ifs and buts' which might imply we have given up on promotion.


You've just said they can't formulate a strategy. Now they can but they can't talk about it?
 
Long story short

1. McCabe has put loads of money into the club;
2. He has tried to act in the club's best interests;
3. He has made tons of mistakes and we are left in the shit because of said mistakes.

Does anyone really disagree with any of that?
Thats what I call short hand covers all bases in 3 short phrases and perfectly true perhaps we can put this thread to bed now as it's been done to death,it's about be leavers and non-- be leavers, fthe non- be leavers will never beleave, the be leavers do beleave, am I talking shit
there,!!!! anyway!
 

Of course they will, but clearly they can't talk to us about 'ifs and buts' which might imply we have given up on promotion.

Not signing anyone throughout the whole of January more than implies they gave up. In fact it outright screams it in your face.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom