There is a particular issue in the umpteenth boulder suffered by Triestina and which should trigger doubts regarding the management of the new red halberd leaders. We are talking about the referral of Marco Margiotta and Oliver Marc Centner for, as stated in the Federation’s press release, “having made payments of the emoluments due to members, relating to the months of September and October 2025, through bank transfers debited to current accounts other than the current account held in the name of US Triestina Calcio 1918 srl and dedicated to the payment of emoluments”. Translated, the money was not officially put in by Triestina but by other people.
What happens
This would be enough to raise serious doubts about the overall operation behind the new company. Let’s leave aside the “reports of the independent Commission for verifying the economic and financial balance of sports clubs”, or where the latest referral came from. Everything should be analyzed on the basis of the actions of individuals at the top of the Union. But is it normal practice, in difficult times, to pay salaries from current accounts that are not those of the company? If so, why are these operations “normal”? We know that football, at all levels, hides large gray areas, financially and economically speaking.
The questions
But then a question arises spontaneously: if the salaries were paid from “private” accounts and not from that of Triestina, is the reason attributable to the absence of corporate resources? Or because the transfer of names (a sort of transfer, so to speak) of Triestina’s current account was blocked? The Triestina Sports Union has a current account at the Trieste branch of Banca 360 Fvg, in the square Sant’Antonio Nuovo 1. We tried to contact the branch management, with no luck.
The other reasons
Still looking at the reasons for Triestina’s referral, the federation’s note states that “Marco Margiotta and Oliver Marc Centner, managing directors of the company, were referred for failing to file the report containing the audit firm’s opinion on the interim financial situation at 30 September 2025 by the deadline of 30 November 2025”. Translated, this time too, everything could therefore be traced back to yet another sore point in the ordinary management of the company’s accounts.
What is the mid-term review
“The limited audit of the interim financial statements − we read on specialized sites − not allows us to acquire elements on the basis of which to express an opinion on whether such financial statements provide a true and fair representation, or are correctly represented, in all significant aspects, in compliance with the applicable regulatory framework on financial information”. It, the specialists continue, “unlike the full audit, is not configured for the purpose of acquiring reasonable assurance that the interim financial statements do not contain significant errors”; finally, the limited audit consists “in carrying out investigations, mainly among those responsible for the financial and accounting aspects, of analytical procedures comparative and other limited audit procedures” and would not provide “all the evidence that would be necessary in a full audit engagement”.
Related News :