Brilliant Disguise

Loving the superiority complex you continually exhibit. With your extensive knowledge of Companies House what are the penalties imposed for these late filing of honest mistakes. Also you never answered my original question do these automated, nothing to worry about Gazette filings have an impact on a companies credit rating through someone like D&B. Since you don’t pay much credence on the information that companies house where would you be concerned with this public knowledge. For example what would you make of a hypothetical company that registered their accounts 2 years running with the exact same balance sheet right down to same stock, debt, cash in bank, creditors and tax liabilities. Would you put this down to spectrum between simple error through to sinister.

Too easy. Since your the expert on Companies House maybe read up on the the legal responsibilities of being a Director of a company and the ramifications to the Business and the individuals of not following those responsibilities. It’s far to easy to for people to become a “Director” of a company without any background checks. Your correct that Companies House is not the right place to undertake all of your due diligence. However it does give you a snapshot of whether the company are undertaking their legal duties to companies house. Even the simple admin ones of doing annual returns, loading your accounts on time and advising Person with Significant Control. Not bothering to lodge these or losing them late are nor simple administration filing issues, they are a demonstration of lack of governance. These notices will also be flagged up in a D&B credit score. But what do i know. I bow to your superior knowledge of Companies House rules and in particular the running of SMFC, SMISA, Kibble and their incubator businesses.

I was just giving your paymaster the benefit of the doubt by using your analogy from the other thread that some times these Strike Off notices are down to simple admin errors

It’s a non trading company with a notice to strike off. (Unless that is another admin error) It could be set up for a variety of reasons. Nothing to do with SMFC so not sure why it’s anyone’s business

See that’s how a business engages properly with their customers. Engagement, acceptance of the issue (even though its not their issue that is being questioned) and a token gesture for the inconvenience. That statement makes you want to go back. Not a statement that paraphrases stop moaning, it’s no our fault, a big boy did it and ran away, give us your money and please accept our mediocrity.

This for me this statement completely optimises the undertone of how the club is run. Roll out any old shit, provide a poor service, and you don’t need to justify or explain any decision to the fans under the banner “Look you helping the club so don’t moan”

If your “Thinking of Making a Claim…… Because it Matters” you could phone Digby Brown Solicitors. Heard they are quite good at getting you compensation.

No point to make. Just trying to rattle your pigeon cage. Meow !!!!

The routine maintenance lies with the Club not an individual. Maybe all of these issues: tickets, strips, crowd numbers, the changes in match day suppliers, the accounting issue identified last year, the boiler issue, the emergency light issue and the other legacy issues are the positive result of the Kibble asking questions on the previous running of the club.

Bazil. Your a bit touchy. Where have I stated that the club underpay and lowball works. I don’t know who or what the club pay for services nor do i have any knowledge how to run a business. I stated the Club, like any other business, SHOULD be run as a competent professional business. Do successful businesses not do the simple things right and work to their strengths by recognising and paying the relevant professionals to undertake the tasks they require done.

100% agree. However we should also be running the club as a professional competent business. This includes getting the simple things right by paying the CORRECT cost for the works that are required.

I’m not seeing this as an anti Kibble campaign. There are 2 separate issues with the club that could be be completely unrelated. One is the ticketing and allocation issue which was as you have advise was the result of mitigating circumstances. The other is why business that have traded with SMFC for years (rightly or wrongly is another debate) have been disposed of and replaced with incubator companies formed originally out of Kibbleworks. The tie up with Kibble is fantastic and can have great benefits to the club. however it cannot be at the expense of losing that connection to local businesses and local people. The club cannot be a Kibble experiment like other initiatives that did not quite work out.

Understatement of the year Bazil ever thought of being a politician.Blinkered, selective and able to spin any story

“That’s made my day that has.” Your so so wrong. What treatment would that be. Feel I’m getting. “Fitted” up with all that “Piped” up anger you have.

Sorry Dad your opinion matters more to me than anyone else. Thanks again for correcting me master of knowledge. That’s just my opinion and not a fact. Hope everone understands.. No wonder this forum is dead on its feet. Bully tactics from you and your various pompous aliases over the years. Sorry my opinion again. 😇

Nothing you said even insinuated that it was an opinion, you asserted it. Just accept that you were either wrong or badly worded the post. It was all of the above. It was a badly worded opinion. Happy now. In my humble opinion the club are playing a blinder, pats on the back all round guys. I’m sure it will be proven that we have the best one man band of companies that do facilities management, builder works and security. If there is another one maybe they can do catering also. It will be like the Waltons. Can wait pieces in sugar at half time. Goodnight JB

Yeah, you've assumed something about an unknown, you could be right that they're not up to it ... though that doesn't change the fact that you were wrong to assert it without evidence. I provided an opinion. I leave the assertions to more intelligent people like you. I am humbled by your superiority on all matters debated on here. Thanks Dad

Okay. What stuff from Companies House would ring alarm bells with you, while during some quick due diligence cursory biased one sided negative review of information.

If we had space for 1000k fans the club would still only manage 1068 fans. Maybe the new company should have given them yellow vests and called them Stuart

Time will tell if they are up to the task. If not SMISA will be asked to bank role the clubs failure. Then we can debate the could should would.

You made the point using the companies house link as a justification. You did not review the companies house information that the catering company were in massive debt, had a court case hanging over them before they were bought by Sodexo. Sodexo only have revenue of circa 20 billion euros. Hardly the same as the size of companies we are debating. My point was that the Winding up order you portrayed was not an admin issue it was a real liquidity issue. But hey this stuff happens in businesses all the time

It’s a forum. Not a blow smoke up the arse of the club meeting. The club have hardly been squeaky clean since the start of the pandemic. As fans we have a right to debate and discuss these issues. The forum is more alive when these issues are being debated. Or maybe its better to be a YES person.

So, to paraphrase, you have nothing to back up your assertions. That was easy, wasn't it? I only have the information that is available on the public forum that the said companies lodged and what other companies have lodged against them. Other than that i have nothing to back up my assertions. I’m sorry i should have asked to read the lovely business plan, reviewed their woolly KYC policy, met with their third party funders and took their bank manager out for lunch. Quack Quack !!

Where as you have jumped on the opposite side known as the Denis Norden approach. It will be all right on the night.

I don’t know anything about the company. Never heard of either of them, never had dealings with them and there is limited information about them. As stated there are a few red flags from the limited due diligence that was available to me. However Bazil and the Club are fine with these “admin errors” Also I don’t run the club. It is the club to decide that its better to take the security contract off the existing company and give it to a company with no track record that is there prerogative. If something goes wrong its the club that have to face the consequences.