Stadium work

[dlrwrexham]

Originally Posted by pagl

Dont quite see where I implied anything detrimental.
The platform money seems to be ringfenced as I alluded to and I have contributed in about 3 different ways. Have you?

Your last sentence Pag.I knew you weren't having a pop at the platform scheme,but your phrasing that with "anything else detracting from the playing budget" might have read [quite reasonably],to some that you were.It was a simple quip,nothing more,nothing less.Lighten up.

[louisleftboot]

Putting more flames on the walls.

[dlrwrexham]

Originally Posted by Stafford Red

There seems to be an assumption that when the conversion is carried out it won't be accessible.

Again, some posters trying too hard to be pc, or offended on someone else's behalf.

In the eventuality that this is aimed at me,you're so,so far off the mark.Read my response to Pag,and lighten up.

[noisy1]

Originally Posted by Red_Jackoisback

Is it just me or us the MRS floor more slippery now than before the anti slip surface was applied!!

Beat me to it. It's going to be interesting when things get more wintery.

[pagl]

Originally Posted by Omni

Doesn't matter how we receive the money. It has to be brought in this year as a revenue receipt. Capital repayments don't affect the profit and loss.

It's for this reason I think we'll also spend big in January.

I didnt say how but when.
If its drip fed then we dont have to account for it all.
There also must be a big balance sheet liability that can take WST money back to them as well. The accountants will work out ways it doesnt have to be spent.

[Rob]

Originally Posted by Omni

I'd expect a lot more on the stadium before the end of the financial year too. The Danny Ward money all had to be brought into account this year, so we need to spend to ensure we don't post too large a profit and have a big CT bill.

A few have mentioned this point, does the company setup/structure affect things ?

Also if we get staged payments from Ward it would help.

[pagl]

Originally Posted by dlrwrexham

Your last sentence Pag.I knew you weren't having a pop at the platform scheme,but your phrasing that with "anything else detracting from the playing budget" might have read [quite reasonably],to some that you were.It was a simple quip,nothing more,nothing less.Lighten up.

Lighten up when you accuse me of disrespecting the disabled.
Maybe you should have worded it differently.

I am comfortable with my respect for all fund raising and was just asking what stadium work was going on.

[Haruki]

Originally Posted by Rob

A few have mentioned this point, does the company setup/structure affect things ?

Also if we get staged payments from Ward it would help.

Staged payments has no effect on the Corporation Tax liability as we recognise the full amount payable from Liverpool in this years accounts so unless we also recognise the expense in this year then we pay Corporation Tax on it. The staged payments is just the difference between cash and I&E
Also in reply to PAGL, the WST would have injected equity into the club and not debt so again paying money to the WST would not effect the Corporation Tax liability. This is why i advocated using the Ward windfall to pay the stadium lease in one big hit

[Wirral Red]

Originally Posted by Inside Left

I think there has been an ongoing work programme at The Racecourse since WST took over. One has to remember that little was done by the previous owners other than the Ruthin mans attitude suite which seemed an ill thought out vanity project.

As an ex Ruthin resident what is "The Ruthin Mans Attitude?"