Neither Otium/SBS&L nor Wasps Holdings are currently late in filing. Due dates are 28/02/2018 and 31/03/2018
Wasps Finance PLC a subsidiary of Wasps Holdings is late because PLC's file their accounts within 6 months of the year end not 9 months as is the case for a private limited company. The sole purpose of Wasps Finance PLC is the issue of the bond and the distribution of its funds. I would think that the delay would be rectified reasonably soon following the approval of the bondholder meeting proposals
The bond covenants required Wasps Holdings to publish its audited results within 4 months of the year end. This does not mean that the accounts need to be filed at Companies House within 4 months. The above time limits apply. The bondholder proposals that were approved waived the 4 month requirement for the 2017 financials. Doing that means that the 2017 financial accounts are no longer late in being published (not filed).
Accounts will only be filed for any of the companies once they are signed off by the directors and the auditors.
Otium has a problem that needs solving before 28/02/2018 if it is going to file its accounts on time. Namely that to be a going concern there must be a plan or agreement in place that provides for somewhere to play next season. Directors and auditors of any company must consider a period of at least 12 months after the date of signing off the financials (not the year end date) to establish if the company is a going concern or not. Currently a period to at least 27/01/2019 . Clearly if Otium t/a CCFC has no place agreed to play next season then at the very least the auditors must draw attention to that fact, quite probably qualify the audit report and potentially require the accounts to be prepared on a different basis to the going concern one. That would be a disaster for SISU, SBS&L, Otium and the club. In addition to that FA & EFL rules require the audited accounts to be filed with them - failure to do so could incur sanctions against the club. I also believe there is a date approaching where by the club must inform the EFL of ground arrangements next season. This all strengthens the hand of Wasps as to the deal they are prepared to offer to companies taking legal action against them. Personally I think a last minute deal will be done on a short term basis - which I think will cost more and offer less to CCFC
As for the effect of CCFC on the Wasps accounts? Would it be that great? It is ok talking lost turnover but that ignores cost savings. Reputational damage might be a greater risk. However read the Wasps 2016 accounts and CCFC are not highlighted as a significant risk to their business at all, since then what CCFC brings to the Ricoh has decreased following relegation to L2. To focus on the lost 23 games ignores the potential to use the stadium for other revenue generating activities - certainly it would open up greater room occupancy or alternative usage of the lounges for example. Now that might be a problem if CCFC were significantly contributing to the Wasps coffers but a turnover of £250k is around 1% of total Wasps turnover removing that is not going to affect the Wasps Holdings going concern from an audit point of view. Just my opinion as a statutory auditor myself but I doubt that CCFC leaving at the end of the season is going to cause much financial damage. Yes there might be reputational damage but that can be managed and many have short memories on such things. Wasps are in a position where they can say "well we offered a new deal, but we couldn't continue discounting it (or as much) CCFC chose to make other arrangements" CCFC on the other hand appear to have little choice its either choose to leave or accept the deal offered - not a great position to end up in.
Rock and hard place as usual and largely out of the control of CCFC and Boddy
