philipl Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 My mate is an auditor or something like that (all these financial jobs sound the same) so I asked him why they would usually resign. He said "if they were asked to resign as they wanted to appoint someone new or suppose could be for unscrupulous reasons but most common reason just because company want someone new in. They also have to resign after a certain number of years as no longer viewed as independent and objective" Seems may be a storm in a teacup but this is the venkys after all assume what the worst thing is and make it worse still.... They are not required to retire by rotation for the sort of audit Rovers is and it is very unusual to make a change like this 14 days after the accounting year end. If the reason is simply Rovers wanted someone new, a partner at KPMG needs to be sent on a course on how to write a resignation letter while someone at Rovers needs to learn how to run a limited liability company.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Roverall Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Agreed. God it seems a lifetime ago doesn't it? A bouncing Blackburn End giving it large after we went 4-1 up against United... Wonderful memories. What I would say is, if we somehow make it out of this horror, to see a Rovers team not affiliated with Venky's, SEM, Kean... to see a Rovers team score against WHOEVER... that will be a sweet moment to rank alongside any other, because quite simply we will have our Rovers back.
onlyonejackwalker Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 "We consider that the audit of your financial statements falls outside the definition of a major audit." I think this gives us a clue for the reasons they have resigned. The club is all over the place financially and administratively. The Berg saga at court highlighted that and now our auditors reveal a lack of confidence in recent information provided. Or an inability to work with unprofessional morons. Or both. Very concise letter, little friendship or respect there. A counter statement should have been made by the club announcing the new supplier of this service, remedies taken, and thanking the previous supplier for services provided. Basic PR. Embarrassing how badly we are run. Suppliers don't want to know, many sponsors left long ago, employees resign or comment unhappily when probed, customers leaving in droves. Nothing comes as a suprise, but remains very disappointing. Always in the news for the wrong reasons.
Backroom DE. Posted July 25, 2015 Backroom Posted July 25, 2015 Crazy times. Off the back of the 05/06 season, if anyone asked me about Rovers in 10 years I'd be full of confidence and positivity. That season was one of the most enjoyable/incredible seasons in more recent history. Sad to look at Rovers now and potential Oblivion on the horizon. It's also a stark warning to other clubs desperate for a takeover. Be careful what you wish for. It doesn't take long for it all to come crashing down.
den Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 "We consider that the audit of your financial statements falls outside the definition of a major audit." Sounds to me - and I have a GCSE in Tech Drawing - that the owners didn't provide a full and proper set of accounts. Stuff was missing.
davulsukur Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Whatever the reason, is not going to be good for Rovers. Venkys haven't finished destroying us just yet.
Moderation Lead K-Hod Posted July 25, 2015 Moderation Lead Posted July 25, 2015 I'm no accountant, but I very much doubt this is in any way good news....
imy9 Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Maybe we are close to rock bottom. Hope so as this death by a 1000 cuts is tortureous.
Uddersfelt Blue Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Sounds to me - and I have a GCSE in Tech Drawing - that the owners didn't provide a full and proper set of accounts. Stuff was missing. Surely they wouldn't have signed off the accounts? Most likely reason is that KPMG wanted to increase their fees and Venkys refused.
Backroom Mike E Posted July 25, 2015 Backroom Posted July 25, 2015 Gandhi Babu needs to come out and explain. I thought you were copying my babytalk for a moment!
Mike Graham Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Sounds to me - and I have a GCSE in Tech Drawing - that the owners didn't provide a full and proper set of accounts. Stuff was missing. Both of us Den before we went to work at Leyland Bus and Truck! However we both have a degree in life and we can see that the V's, or should I say their baby BRFC are going to end drowning in debt. I am saving up for a Season Ticket at Witton Park......should be all of £25.
Stuart Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Surely they wouldn't have signed off the accounts? Most likely reason is that KPMG wanted to increase their fees and Venkys refused. Most likely? Or most optimistic? Is that how auditors normally do business then?
onlyonejackwalker Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Most likely? Or most optimistic? Is that how auditors normally do business then? Quite. It won't be anything to do with fees. Unless they've not been paid of course. I'm no expert but imagine they have signed off with caveats or signed an abridged version with recommendation for full disclosure going forward. Perhaps they simply don't want to put their name to the tosh submitted by the club and are sick of the negative association with our toxic brand.
Gav Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 When you've got your rebellion and flerked off the venkys gav where will you go and who will you support? I couldn't switch to Burnley thats for sure and Preston isn't really a footballing town so it'll prob be Bolton for me. You must be on the payroll Gordon. I can't for the life of me fathom how anyone could say they'll never go again under Venkys then all of a sudden be their number one supporters, something changed, but what is it?
Roverall Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 It's the simpleton's route. 'Kean and Anderson have gone, its my t'Rovers again.' Pity really.
thenodrog Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 You must be on the payroll Gordon. I can't for the life of me fathom how anyone could say they'll never go again under Venkys then all of a sudden be their number one supporters, something changed, but what is it? I've explained this time and again to you gav, pretty sure you don't have learning difficulties but I am beginning to wonder.... Anyway for you and the slow of learning............. how about roughly £50m pa media money rising now to £80m?
thenodrog Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 Venkdrog SHABBY Look Abbey everybody knows that you have painted yourself into a corner over this BUT if a mohammedan suicide bomber walked into a venky board meeting a blew himself and those present to kingdom come, then BRFC and everything associated with it would cease to exist before the smoke had even cleared. Is that really what you want ?
ABBEY Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 SHABBY Look Abbey everybody knows that you have painted yourself into a corner over this BUT if a mohammedan suicide bomber walked into a venky board meeting a blew himself and those present to kingdom come, then BRFC and everything associated with it would cease to exist before the smoke had even cleared. Is that really what you want ? It's a comin with or without them
JBiz Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 It's a comin with or without them "you know this for a fact?" Could someone link the letter, struggling to find
Stuart Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 "you know this for a fact?" Could someone link the letter, struggling to find Link to the Letter https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00053482/filing-history/MzEyNzYxMzYzMWFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0
philipl Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 The letter is not addressed to anyone by name and briefly deals with the three relevant sections of the Companies Act relevant to an auditor resignation. The opinion about the size of audit is there because the resigning auditor is required to advise the company on what action it needs to take now and has no direct bearing on the resignation or its causes. The letter comes from the Preston branch of KPMG so quite probably 25% of its clients have at least a soft spot for the Rovers. Rovers are undoubtedly the most famous "product" of Blackburn. For this reason, I would have expected even a letter like this to have included words like "it has been an honour to have been associated with" or even signed off with a wish for a successful season. This is why I think the absence of such sentiments point to a very significant problem or two. A row over billings is probably part of it but there will be much much more in the background.
roverandout Posted July 26, 2015 Author Posted July 26, 2015 Don't tell that to the twittermeisters, its all a conspiracy don't you know?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.