The tsunami of capital destruction that is hitting us now and will flow over the next 2 years is extraordinary and it is caused by the Uniform Business Rate and the increased Living Wage. Probably the majority of city centre retail premises will have to be re-let on nil rents when leases expire or occupants fail, or even in some cases negative rents, so that the freeholders can recover service charges and avoid having to pay UBR themselves. In other words prime retail property that forms a bedrock for many pension funds and other pooled investments is going to produce no yield at all until solutions are found to this crisis. Billions and billions of pounds are going to be wiped off portfolios and it's going to happen fast.
I think many private investors would agree 100% with Richard Murphy. More and more commentators are saying that accounts for public companies no longer help investors decide how to price shares.
I have insisted on cash flow statements being included in the accounts for 2 private companies where I am a substantial shareholder. Perhaps a Source & Application of Funds statement would be even better, although it would amount to little more than a re-arrangement of the same information.
Why was SSAP 10 abolished?
This is important:
I was interested in this statement in the article: 'If someone hosts a party or function at the club, they pay a fee to hire the room (exempt from VAT)...' so I did a search.
What I found is that in October 2011 VAT Notice 709/3 'Hotels and holiday accommodation' was updated, and followed by HMRC Brief number 02/1, and that the rule is this; 'where a room.... is supplied for the purposes of catering, whether or not the catering is supplied by the same establishment, the room hire is subject to VAT at the standard rate.'
Is the article correct?
It is always and everywhere an observable phenomenon that an excessive tax rate leads to either evasion, avoidance, or reduced economic activity, and in the end a lower tax revenue. In the case of VAT the principal method of avoidance for small businesses is to simply turn trade away. We are all seeing examples of small businesses doing this to stay below the VAT threshold. If the VAT rate was less this wouldn't happen so much.
'Mike Ashley, chief executive of Sports Direct, last week called off the buyout and accused the Goals board of using underhand methods to eliminate shareholders from the bidding'
“Like Debenhams earlier this year, this is another example of Ashley apparently being thwarted in his takeover ambitions despite being the largest shareholder and the company in his crosshairs apparently being in an extremely weak bargaining position,” Mould said.
I am confused. If Ashley or one of his companies is a shareholder of one of his targets why cannot he obtain the other shareholders' names and addresses under s.116 Companies Act 2006, and then make an offer directly to all the other shareholders, thus cutting the board out of the loop?
Thanks for suggestions. I have decided on another approach and will report back if it works.
Perhaps worth mentioning that it was normanwl's comment that NEDs ought to have the skills to stop bad situations developing which enticed me to post in the first place. Sometimes these skills are not obvious.
Thanks to DJKL for your helpful response but I do see the accounts, it has been when I ask questions that I have encountered difficulties and I can see why NEDs in larger companies have sometimes been found to be ineffective in challenging established hierarchies.
My answers
The tsunami of capital destruction that is hitting us now and will flow over the next 2 years is extraordinary and it is caused by the Uniform Business Rate and the increased Living Wage. Probably the majority of city centre retail premises will have to be re-let on nil rents when leases expire or occupants fail, or even in some cases negative rents, so that the freeholders can recover service charges and avoid having to pay UBR themselves. In other words prime retail property that forms a bedrock for many pension funds and other pooled investments is going to produce no yield at all until solutions are found to this crisis. Billions and billions of pounds are going to be wiped off portfolios and it's going to happen fast.
Thanks for that.
May I repeat my earlier question. Why was SSAP10 (specifically the Statement of Source & Application of Funds) abolished?
I think many private investors would agree 100% with Richard Murphy. More and more commentators are saying that accounts for public companies no longer help investors decide how to price shares.
I have insisted on cash flow statements being included in the accounts for 2 private companies where I am a substantial shareholder. Perhaps a Source & Application of Funds statement would be even better, although it would amount to little more than a re-arrangement of the same information.
Why was SSAP 10 abolished?
This is important:
I was interested in this statement in the article: 'If someone hosts a party or function at the club, they pay a fee to hire the room (exempt from VAT)...' so I did a search.
What I found is that in October 2011 VAT Notice 709/3 'Hotels and holiday accommodation' was updated, and followed by HMRC Brief number 02/1, and that the rule is this; 'where a room.... is supplied for the purposes of catering, whether or not the catering is supplied by the same establishment, the room hire is subject to VAT at the standard rate.'
Is the article correct?
It is always and everywhere an observable phenomenon that an excessive tax rate leads to either evasion, avoidance, or reduced economic activity, and in the end a lower tax revenue. In the case of VAT the principal method of avoidance for small businesses is to simply turn trade away. We are all seeing examples of small businesses doing this to stay below the VAT threshold. If the VAT rate was less this wouldn't happen so much.
'Mike Ashley, chief executive of Sports Direct, last week called off the buyout and accused the Goals board of using underhand methods to eliminate shareholders from the bidding'
“Like Debenhams earlier this year, this is another example of Ashley apparently being thwarted in his takeover ambitions despite being the largest shareholder and the company in his crosshairs apparently being in an extremely weak bargaining position,” Mould said.
I am confused. If Ashley or one of his companies is a shareholder of one of his targets why cannot he obtain the other shareholders' names and addresses under s.116 Companies Act 2006, and then make an offer directly to all the other shareholders, thus cutting the board out of the loop?
Meanwhile Grant Thornton ...........
I suppose nobody can remember Arthur Anderson. Too long ago. Ancient history.
Thanks for suggestions. I have decided on another approach and will report back if it works.
Perhaps worth mentioning that it was normanwl's comment that NEDs ought to have the skills to stop bad situations developing which enticed me to post in the first place. Sometimes these skills are not obvious.
Thanks to DJKL for your helpful response but I do see the accounts, it has been when I ask questions that I have encountered difficulties and I can see why NEDs in larger companies have sometimes been found to be ineffective in challenging established hierarchies.