weeyin

It's only misleading if you're not familiar with accounting - and I make no claims about being an accountant at any level. In the US we have GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principals), so when you read a balance sheet that's been prepared to that standard you know what's allowed and what's not. That's especially true for people that want to invest money based on that balance sheet. From what I have seen of our accounts, the income, expenditure, assets and liabilities were all clearly laid out. That's all the matters in these cases. When it comes to negotiating a deal, neither party is going to care what we call something, they only care about each of those buckets. It's like companies and investors that love to quote their EBITA - useful in some cases as a comparison tool, but can hide a lot of details if you ignore the balance sheet. If we're using it to mislead someone, that's an entirely different matter (basically fraud), but I don't think any investors are being misled here.

Technically it was properly, but I'd still suggest that having your shoulder ahead of a defender's foot does not make you offside. That's not why that particular law was created and needs to be updated if we are going to squabble over millimetres. Personally, I'd open the discussion with the forward needing their entire body to be ahead of the defender before they were offside.

There are plenty of good keepers across the UK that aren't getting a sniff of first team football. Hopefully we can persuade one of them a regular start is better than coaching the U18s. Even if it's just a loan deal (although those don't usually happen until later in the window).

Is that some of that Mexican pizza I keep hearing about?

That makes sense from a fans' perspective. I feel like some the Board were also swayed by the glamour, rather than focusing on the cold, hard details of the negotiation.

I hope he's not signing the old bloke in that picture.

I've been happily running a VPN for years - but I'm more than happy to take Derek Rae over most (all) BBC and ITV commentary teams. Especially the BBC combo on the Poland game today.

Not a player, but happy to report we get Derek Rae on commentary over here.

Not from an accounting perspective. Assets are valued at "Fair Market Value" or similar all the time. That applies to things like buildings and things like stock prices (that can fluctuate by the millsecond these days). It even applies to less tangible things like "Goodwill".

That's standard "footballing wisdom" - you don't drop your keeper. And even less likely when he is also your captain. It doesn't make sense to me, but given that every manager in the world seems to follow it, maybe there is something to it. Happy with the early signings so far. Looking forward to see what develops between now and the end of August.

I've worked with a lot of accountants over the years. Two things stand out: - most of them can't add without the aid of a calculator - while they are good at accounting and analysing numbers, that is very different from being business savvy. That's not to say accountants can't be good business people, but it's not a given. From everything I've read about the deal, it doesn't sound like the people on our side have much experience in acquisitions. If there are further negotiations, maybe we should get a 3rd party to put together an independent valuation as the starting point before we even start the next round of discussions. We don't need to share it, but those involved should at least read it.

If nothing else, this thread has helped me find a new insult.

"Swift Swallow has Well Fans Raven and Crowing, with SK Puffin his Chest at new boy's Larks on the Park"

-3 million now!

Pretty sure that's what wiped the 2 million off the price.

If we can get one of those Accies-type naming deals, I'm all in favour of that. Free money and we all still call it Fir Park.

I don't know about them specifically, but I didn't vote for any of the 3 resignees. I voted for the new faces I thought would freshen things up and bring in some new ideas.

That's Borussia Dortmund levels of horrific.

Is that not the "matchday top" which, in 21st century footballing money grabs, is different from the training top? I won't be buying either, and don't really care what we train in, tbh.

The resignations smack a bit of "I'll promise to represent the fans views... unless what they want is different from what I want personally, then I'm offski"

What's the opportunity? If it does exist, then we should be charging extra for that opportunity cost, not handing over control for a discount.

That's where it gets a bit complicated, or at least nuanced. The Club Board definitely run the club, but as the Society is the majority shareholder, they run it at the behest of the Society. If we don't like what they are doing, there will be mechanisms, I'm sure, to replace them all.

I agree it's embarrassing, but at least he works in a field where he should at least be familiar with the trolls, morons and eejits on social media. No excuse for it, right enough. Having said all that, any Q&A should have taken place at a properly convened Society meeting.

I said earlier that if the Society lost control I would cancel my direct debit, because there is no way I want to line the pockets of a new investor either now or when they inevitably sell up. That would still be the case for me now.

They don't need to offer anything right now to know this was a terrible deal that was presented. Doing nothing different this year is still better than accepting what The Sheep has to offer.