(732,627) net cash outflow from operating activities.
Basically We don't have the cash to hand in the business to pay interest, Tax and other liabilities. This figure strips out the depreciation, amortisation, one-off exceptional items such as player transfers and non-cash adjusting items, whilst purchases of assets, financing activities are covered in the other sections of the cash flow. Much Improved on previous years though, normally it has been approximately 1.5million.
The WWFC Ltd balance sheet at 30 June 2011 shows net liabilities of c. £4m. Assuming losses of say a further £1m in 2011/12, the net liabilities at 30 June 2012 could be estimated at c. £5m. Based on ... more
next set of accounts, it has been considered as a non-adjusting event, and the accounts have not been prepared on a break up basis, so we all still considered to be a going concern, even though we... more
The most inportant figure is..... Dusty Bottoms,Tue Jul 10 11:55
is the first that you use to analyse liquidity, along with working capital ratios. Enron were reporting profits for sixteen quarters but if the cashflow statement had been analysed properly the... more
Total debt increased by 917,280 from 7,490,824 in 2010 to 8,408,104 in 2011. Total assets decreased by 364,165 from 5,697,879 in 2010 to 5,333,714 in 2011. Increasing debts, decreasing assets...not a ... more
Different Beancounters count beans in different ways and each gives more emphasis on which beans are of most interest to them. It would certainly be valuable to understand what the Trust's assessment ... more
totally agree and why it took so long to produce the accounts I will never understand. A 1.25m loss making the total debt £7m in 2011.....plus what ever the 2012 loss will be. What I would like to... more
that the delay wasn't in producing the accounts per se. More likely it was the Auditor seeking assurances (and evidence) that funding was available to keep the business as a going concern. Without... more
--back then, Mr B, were that they didn't want to be associated formerly, and possibly legally (?), with an organisation that couldn't even fulfil this most basic of corporate obligations. Quite right ... more