West Somerset Railway General Discussion

What is filed at Companies House is an extract of the final accounts, and for audited accounts, including a special report by the auditors which refers to the report on the finalised accounts. Hence, those accounts need to be finalised in order for the extract to be prepared and filed. The accounts don't officially 'exist' until the Directors approve them (and hence can't be filed) and then the auditors can sign their Report - if they feel in a position to do so.

A fundamental question for the Directors is whether they feel they can prepare (officially, the Directors prepare the accounts even if they engage professionals to do so on their behalf) the accounts on a 'going concern basis' - whether it is realistic for the business to expect to remain in existence and trading for the foreseeable future (at least one year from the date of signing the accounts). The auditors must then report on whether they consider the Directors' conclusion on this matter to be realistic or not.

I hope that puts in context the comments in the commendably detailed report of the purpose of the EGM that Robin has linked.

Steven

 

Thanks for the information.
What shareholders like me, who could not attend the meeting, could not attend the meeting would like to know is what else was discussed or announced! How long must we wait?

 

Meanwhile, also in West Somerset

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/14/hinkley-negative-life-site-shadow-bridgwater

 

Thanks to Steve edge for his rapid publication of report of the EGM we await with interest the proposals to reduce running of empty trains.

 

The most striking statement is this: "the 15-month accounts were so poor that publication now could well kill the railway off as a going concern". That seems to mean that the information exists and the accounts could be completed, and probably even have been completed for internal use, but that they are being kept secret from the outside world because the Board daren't let them be seen until the (expectedly much more positive) figures for this year can be published at the same time.

Also the desired funding for the infrastructure was £250,000 this year, with similar amounts for subsequent years. So far £80,000 has been raised. This far into the year I would call that only £80,000. If that's all that has come in with all the publicity this year, subsequent years are likely to be worse unless some major sponsors are found. And we have seen Andy Norman's comments about that.

 

I did not attend the EGM ( just discharged from Hospital). Yesteraday's 'press release' ( in effect that is
what the statement. was ) represents the first communication to the 6,000 Shareholders wrt financial details
( however brief ) since June 2018 I think.

The statement reproduced above by 'MellishR' implies that the Plc Directors inter alia do not
believe that currently the Auditor would designate the Railway a 'going concern'. This begs
the question "Have the Auditors actually been given relevant financial information ?"

The Directors have apparently decided to await a ( presumably better ) set of 2019 trading results
so that they can demonstrate to the Auditors that indeed the Plc is a 'going concern'

The loss for the 15month 2018/9 is apparently c.£500K ie as this in effect represents two 'winter
shuts' c £250K for a 12 month year. As of now ie (August 2019) it should be possible ( the pax
data is certainly available and presumably also fixed and variable costs ) to compare total
2018 net revenue vs 2019.

If this does not suggest 2019 at least £250K better than 2018 then the game is up.
If the prediction is > £250K then "Is it enough to repay any outstanding mortgages
and pay fixed overheads (as a minimum) through to the beginning of the 2020 Season ?

These are question that IMHO can and should be answered now ( not in December ).
It is procrastination over the last 24 months that has brought the Railway to this
sorry plight.

Better if the 'game is up' to call in the Receivers now, whilst there is still cash in the
Bank rather than await 'Doomsday'. The Chairman apparently acted positively to
'save' the Company 2018 year end. Now perhaps, in the apparent absence of any
coherent strategic plan, is time for more action. The Shareholders deserve better
than a lingering death.

I would love to be wrong but the rhetoric is no different from that in November 2018.
Like many I love this Railway. Phoenix can rise from the ashes, but there are ashes and
ashes. A cliche I know but...

Michael Rowe.

 

Was there any suggestion of a further delay to the 2019 WSR plc AGM at the recent EGM? Shareholders were notified during May 2019 that the AGM was now due to be held on Saturday 21st September 2019 at The Somerset County Cricket Ground, Taunton.

 

The HPC community impact fund is intended to help counter the well understood problems of a large construction site like HPC.
This is why the WSR has been awarded £100,000 from the fund to help to lessen community impact. One of the things we discovered was that Bridgewater, for many years, has suffered economic depravation. The Community engagement officer is currently devising ways to "Take the railway to Bridgewater" (not literally!) since a lot of Bridgewater folks don't have the means to come to the railway despite it being only 10 miles away.
EDF are deeply involved with the local colleges to ensure that local workers can be trained to work at HPC when it's operational thus bringing much needed jobs and prosperity to the area. The WSR is already offering engineering work experience via the Williton site as a small part of this initiative in partnership with the colleges and we will be expanding that offering going forward.
Surely these actions are better for the community in the longer term, if not then what's the alternative?

 

It is quite interesting to compare JJP's letter of 18th July in respect the reasons stated for the recent EGM:-

"We simply do not think it will be possible to produce meaningful accounts and have them audited in the time scale currently required by the Company's Articles of Association."

[Which I read at the time as the PLC Board simply needing more time to produce the 2018 accounts]

With yesterday's press release:-

"This will defer publication of the Plc accounts until a later date, probably early December, so that this summer's trading figures can be looked at by both the directors and auditors alongside last year's 15-month loss-making accounts in order to demonstrate that the business can go forward as a going concern.... the 2018 accounts would make for dismal reading when published..... the 15-month accounts were so poor that publication now could kill the railway off as a going concern".

[Which implies to me the 2018 accounts were already prepared, and no further time was actually required to complete them for signing off by the PLC Board]

These kind of legal and accountancy niceties are not given much attention by most enthusiasts, as they would rather discuss steam -v- diesels, and livery details.

My own view is that they ought to receive very close attention, particularly at the current time, and with a PLC Board of only 3 plus 'Four Fifty', and with no WSRA Trust representation on the PLC Board.

Cheers,
Julian

 

I'm sure that WSR enthusiasts and supporters have been keeping up to speed with the discussions regarding the WSR legalities and accounting and is fully aware that if the railway is lost then the question of steam -v- diesel and livery detail is totally immaterial. <BJ>

 

Heresy! Quick ban him before it becomes contagious!

 

What a lot of doom and gloom over the past 24 hours!

I will repeat my impression, as someone who attended last Saturday’s EGM. The clear impression was of a group of Directors / Advisors who have a firm grip on a difficult situation and will lead out of the hole.

As to WSRA representation ion the WSR plc Board, Psul Whitehouse, WSRA Chairman is invited to attend the meetings.

As so often, it is now about rolling sleeves up and getting on with it.

Robin

 

There was further explanation at the meeting so this is the not the complete story. Discussing this afterwards their explanation seemed perfectly plausible.

Since shareholders have not received a summary of the Oake meeting at the beginning of the year I don't suppose anything further will be forthcoming. I don't agree with this secrecy but will respect it as most discussions here are, at best, not healthy.

 

Like Robin and yourself I was present on Saturday and yes more was said including a statement about a proposed AGM and filing date for the Accounts for the newly agreed Year Ending March 31st 2019.

I believe the Board are missing a trick by not fully communicating what was said and not formulating a carefully constructed Press Release. In the absence of information people always fear the worse despite reassurance and not having the means to receive money at the meeting was another unfortunate ommision.

A Board Appointment for Marketing and Public Relations is Urgently Required

 

I couldn't agree more, but perhaps that appointment is pending. A plc press release dated 1st July announcing re-structure of the Board included Commercial portfolio within the list of Director vacancies. It indicated that an Interim Adviser was already performing this role but did not name him/her. There is no mention of that adviser on the plc website Corporate Information page, although other Board advisers in post are indeed named. Interim Advisers work with the board for a three month probation period before being considered for co-option.

https://www.west-somerset-railway.co.uk/corporate-information

 

Nearly all of us present would agree with your assessment. However we were just 500 out of thousands of supporters. What is the board doing to communicate with the others?

The board could generate so much good will with better communication but secrecy is the order of the day.

 

And elsewhere, we are told that the overdraft facility has not been touched.

 

Unless I misheard it was stated at the meeting the Overdraft had not been touched!

 

I'm struggling to understand the relevance of that, except possibly that it means that the plc hasn't had to increase the level of actual borrowings.

 

There is a world of difference between 'secrecy' and 'poor communications'. I would hope that no one thinks that issues discussed at a meeting attended by hundreds of people are being kept secret. Poor (or in this case lack of) communications do not a conspiracy make!