Fund accounts to March 2014

I see they have paid the expenses of witnesses giving evidence at the libel trial.

i'm waiting for the explanation of all these numbers -  but isn't this the first time the income from the book is listed? 

So what happened to the advance which afaik was never listed and should have turned up in the 2011 accounts. can't believe Transworld took four years? 

There's also the mention of 'restricted funds' in association with the book. Perhaps they've read Dr. Roberts' article where he pointed out that Transworld would be in trouble if not every penny earned from the book would go on the 'search'.  Because that what it says on the jacket. 

It says that they had no employees in either 2013 or 2014. But didn't some of their other propaganda state that they were paying for a full-time campaign manager?

And so apart from another £400k thats appeared from the book the fund has made a loss.

So £950k was originally donated for the book ? Presumably thats been paid in stages so if the £400k is the last installment they are now on a slippery slope and lets hope lots of costs and expenses to Snr Amarel and their expensive lawyers.

Looks like financially they could be in the shit soon !

I can't wait to read what Enid O'Dowd makes of this.

Just checked Amazon, 

Paperback  listed as 23.000 plus on bestseller list

Hardcover listed as. 112.000 on bestseller list. 

Both bookcovers state that All royalties go to the Madeleine Fund which isn't exactly the same as going on the search for Madeleine ... 

Resistor wrote:It says that they had no employees in either 2013 or 2014.  But didn't some of their other propaganda state that they were paying for a full-time campaign manager?  

-and what about their very own MMU?  As attested in Lisbon.

And the income from the 'book' remains difficult to explain or account for !

Now we see the first statement in the accounts that £950k was 'donated' for the book.

So that begs the question and may answer why its not previously detailed.I am off course now guessing that the moneys for the book were perhaps paid to kate mccann ? How much i wonder.And maybe she has 'donated' £950k of that to the fund ?

I am making some wild assumptions here but would think that a pretty good plan for kate and the book income.

Either way,if thats their lot they need to win some money soon or they will have some financial difficulties.

Tigger wrote:Just checked Amazon, 

Paperback  listed as 23.000 plus on bestseller list

Hardcover listed as. 112.000 on bestseller list. 

Both bookcovers state that All royalties go to the Madeleine Fund which isn't exactly the same as going on the search for Madeleine ... 

"Money made from the book" is a very subjective thing... it would depend what the contract was for payment to Kate...

ie, did she get an advance on the book, ahead of publication? That would be a clear and full amount, perhaps 15,000 pounds, perhaps 10,000 pounds, etc.
Standard publishing contracts usually have an advance, followed by a royalty schedule. Maybe 10% royalties for hardbound, 4% for paperback, something like that. So in hardback, 10% of the cover price would be paid to the writer, but the advance would first have to be paid off. So if the cover price is 12 pounds, then 1.2 pounds would be the 10% royalty, but if the advance was 15,000 pounds, then all those royalties would go back to the publisher until the 15,000 pound advance was paid back. Then, and only, then would the royalties start flowing to the writer.

So for the fund to receive a precise donation of £950k from where is that likely to have come from ?

@canada12

An advance is an advance on royalties - so the advance still has to be paid into the Fund. 

The number given might also include film rights, although they were negotiating filmrights as early as December 2007 with an independent Co. for some 2 million iirc. 

It should include serialisation rights which TM elected to sort out with the Sun and not via the publisher. This would have reduced the advance given I'm told. 

It's my belief that the book was expected to be a multi- million bestseller. So much publicity for free!

Between t- shirts and quality wristbands and various donations ( calendar money to come perhaps?) the fund has generated 21k or just a bit more from website......or if you take off organised charity events maybe less from actual website footfall.....don't amount to a hill of beans. It would appear to need the parents,via books and court cases to remain viable.

Lioned wrote:And the income from the 'book' remains difficult to explain or account for !

Now we see the first statement in the accounts that £950k was 'donated' for the book.

So that begs the question and may answer why its not previously detailed.I am off course now guessing that the moneys for the book were perhaps paid to kate mccann ? How much i wonder.And maybe she has 'donated' £950k of that to the fund ?

I am making some wild assumptions here but would think that a pretty good plan for kate and the book income.

Either way,if thats their lot they need to win some money soon or they will have some financial difficulties.

The costs for the trial in Lisbon will come to considerably more than their assets.

What's all this about Risk,  particularly 'reputational risk'?

Does it mean reputational risk to the fund e.g., if events occurred which came to infer the fund was set up with false intentions (this is my own theoretical example)? Or is it the risk to the fund in payments due for protecting the parents from reputational risk e.g., wages paid for people employed to defend the McCanns (again, my own theoretical example)?



With thanks to the mccanncasefiles and astro.

It's fascinating - has a document of this type been included in the accounts ever before?

As Lionel  says, why use 'donation' when it would have just been the money earned from the book in 2011. 

What should have happened is that the advance was listed in 2011 accounts and further royalties in the  following years. Weird. I think...

@DeeCoy  never mind the reputation, what about the whistle blowing? It all looks like ghastly corporate speak to me, wonder who advised them on that drivel?

Well either that 'donation' is a flat fee for the publishing rights of the book or maybe the advance on the royalties ?

The sum of £400k income for 2014 seems to be a rather precise amount so maybe that £950k 'donation' has been paid in installments ?

This is the first i can recall about the book in the accounts,maybe wrong !

However,this is what 'restricted funds' means....

www.investopedia.com/.../restricted-fund...
Mobile-friendly - A reserve of money that can only be used for specific purposes. Restricted funds provide reassurance to donors that their contributions will be used in a manner they have chosen.

So whoever this donation of £950k came from has presumably imposed terms.

Make sense of that if you can !

As I wrote on another forum: they "donate" twice a sum into the restricted part of the "Fund". There's no indication or proof [being round figures] of that being all of the bewks receipts. And, of course & IMO, it's a tax-relief ...

Is the company registered for Value Added Tax ?
With a turnover like that I would have thought it should be ?.

How is work carried out in authoring a book paid for by a donation?
Should not the company invoice for work done and then receive a payment?
Which includes vat or not ? Or is all book/ authoring work vat free in UK ?

Can anyone clarify ?

Thetruth wrote:Is the company registered for Value Added Tax ?
With a turnover like that I would have thought it should be ?.

How is work carried out in authoring a book paid for by a donation?
Should not the company invoice for work done and then receive a payment?
Which includes vat or not ?   Or is all book/ authoring work vat free in UK ?

Can anyone clarify ?

I think there was a post in the 2011 accounts which may be using part of your house as an office and iirc the query was that it could have been the book. 
Wonder if the MMU is tax deductable as well.

Yes, it would be as it is a legitimate business expense.

Resistor wrote:Yes, it would be as it is a legitimate business expense.

Wonder what the rules are for their 'business' since you have to register for VAT if you go over £81,000 turnover, does their income of donations count as proper income?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id501.html

The accounts are now on Nigel's site - good to see that he's about again.

I think that Enid O'Dowd's report will be added later.

I cannot wait for it ...

Lioned wrote:Well either that 'donation' is a flat fee for the publishing rights of the book or maybe the advance on the royalties ?

The sum of £400k income for 2014 seems to be a rather precise amount so maybe that £950k 'donation' has been paid in installments ?

This is the first i can recall about the book in the accounts,maybe wrong !

However,this is what 'restricted funds' means....

www.investopedia.com/.../restricted-fund...
Mobile-friendly - A reserve of money that can only be used for specific purposes. Restricted funds provide reassurance to donors that their contributions will be used in a manner they have chosen.

So whoever this donation of £950k came from has presumably imposed terms.

Make sense of that if you can !

That's interesting. I know nothing at all about taxation and finance, but I wonder if the restriction might cover, for example, any court costs awarded against the McCann family in the instance of their losing a court case? If that was the case, I'd be surprised if all future donations to the fund weren't restricted in this way.