Ground v Player Sacrifice

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

7 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Morning Lizard,morning everyone.

Morning Midlands, morning everyone. 

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Thirsty Lizard

[Midlands Yellow 3,974]

5 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

I think that's just a matter of semantics really King Canary. The club got the money they needed and gave Colney the upgrade it needed with the money. The fans/investors got their money back with a nice little bit on top - bish bosh everybody's happy.

If you borrow money from a bank you will pay a higher rate of interest and the bank will almost certainly demand some form of security in case you have problems paying it back. 

I'm not suggesting that a scheme of the kind that paid for Colney would finance the whole of a new stand, but it could well be one of a number of sources of finance that together would raise the amount needed. 

 

So definitely not from a player sale in the very near future ? Should relegation come calling and    the club cash in on a few players don’t you think part of the accumulation of cash might be used to build a new stand ? 

[king canary 7,603]

18 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

I think that's just a matter of semantics really King Canary. The club got the money they needed and gave Colney the upgrade it needed with the money. The fans/investors got their money back with a nice little bit on top - bish bosh everybody's happy.

If you borrow money from a bank you will pay a higher rate of interest and the bank will almost certainly demand some form of security in case you have problems paying it back. 

I'm not suggesting that a scheme of the kind that paid for Colney would finance the whole of a new stand, but it could well be one of a number of sources of finance that together would raise the amount needed. 

 

I don't think it is semantics- self-financing suggests your paying for it yourself with nothing owed to anybody, which the Colney scheme clearly wasn't.

Also the original scheme is now regarded as a success because we got promoted and could pay it back. If we'd have struggled for a few years we'd be looking at a £5m debt + interest. It may be preferable to a bank loan but it still isn't as simple a choice as you suggest.

[GenerationA47 751]

13 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Norwich City are a top 26 English football club. I’d only expect my local football club or the scouts to ask for funding to improve training facilities. 

There was no excuse for it to come to that 
and anyone who thinks different should be sectioned.

Seriously Midland... where do you think money comes from?

 Simply printed off by the south stand sponsors’ printing division, perhaps. Or could we have set up a phalanx of shiny new food banks at Carrow Road nominally to subsidise Tory Britain’s poor, but actually taking a generous cut of the produce to build up a City kitty?

All great ideas, but a supporters’ bond was an excellent way to appeal to heads (£) and hearts (<3). Just the imaginative thinking a self -funding club needs.

Personally I’m proud of the club for doing it and of the supporters for their convincing response. They all got paid off, the club got its facilities to attract better players.

 It was hardly a whip-round of the bucket on the rec.

Edited January 8, 2020 by GenerationA47
of not off

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

23 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

So definitely not from a player sale in the very near future ? Should relegation come calling and    the club cash in on a few players don’t you think part of the accumulation of cash might be used to build a new stand ? 

I covered all this yesterday Midlands. I said that part of the cash for building a new stand might come from player sales, but that the club are doing everything they can to raise as much of the cost as possible from other sources. 

[Midlands Yellow 3,974]

3 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

I covered all this yesterday Midlands. I said that part of the cash for building a new stand might come from player sales, but that the club are doing everything they can to raise as much of the cost as possible from other sources. 

Fair enough, I guess all will become clearer in the coming months.

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

10 minutes ago, king canary said:

I don't think it is semantics- self-financing suggests your paying for it yourself with nothing owed to anybody, which the Colney scheme clearly wasn't.

Also the original scheme is now regarded as a success because we got promoted and could pay it back. If we'd have struggled for a few years we'd be looking at a £5m debt + interest. It may be preferable to a bank loan but it still isn't as simple a choice as you suggest.

I'm sorry if the club aren't conforming to your gold standard definition of 'self financing' king canary.

Personally I'm very happy that the bond issue was such a success, that Colney got the upgrade to turn it into a top class training facility and that all the fans/investors got their money back with a nice little bit on top. (The last one is important - there will be a ready pool of fans/investors ready and waiting if we launch a similar scheme to pay some of the cost for building a new stand). 

Obviously, should you object on the basis that such a scheme doesn't satisfy your definition of self financing, nobody will be holding a gun to your head and forcing you to invest in such a bond. 

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

11 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Norwich City are a top 26 English football club. I’d only expect my local football club or the scouts to ask for funding to improve training facilities. 

There was no excuse for it to come to that 
and anyone who thinks different should be sectioned.

It should be like Spartacus at the next home game:

'I'm Sectioned!'

'No, I'm Sectioned!'

'No no! I'm Sectioned!'

[GenerationA47 751]

11 minutes ago, king canary said:

I don't think it is semantics- self-financing suggests your paying for it yourself with nothing owed to anybody, which the Colney scheme clearly wasn't.

 

I think you’re applying an unjustified assumption about what self-financing means in the context of a football club. There is no such strict definition that loans are never taken by clubs defined as self financing 
 

The meaning is more associated with the absence of a super-rich sugar-daddy owner or consortium or Gulf country ploughing cash in. If anything this makes bonds and borrowing more, rather than less likely.

In any case a supporters’ bond is special, as to some degree effectively the supporting community are part of the ‘self’ of the club. morally speaking I’d  say more so than the above-mentioned holding companies, even if not legally so.

[king canary 7,603]

42 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

I'm sorry if the club aren't conforming to your gold standard definition of 'self financing' king canary.

Personally I'm very happy that the bond issue was such a success, that Colney got the upgrade to turn it into a top class training facility and that all the fans/investors got their money back with a nice little bit on top. (The last one is important - there will be a ready pool of fans/investors ready and waiting if we launch a similar scheme to pay some of the cost for building a new stand). 

Obviously, should you object on the basis that such a scheme doesn't satisfy your definition of self financing, nobody will be holding a gun to your head and forcing you to invest in such a bond. 

It isn't my definition or a 'gold standard' is it? 

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/self-financing.html

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

It should be like Spartacus at the next home game:

'I'm Sectioned!'

'No, I'm Sectioned!'

'No no! I'm Sectioned!'

It's been hidden in plain sight all along - it's why the Head Steward has 'Section Head' written on the back of his/her orange jacket. 🙂 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

54 minutes ago, king canary said:

It isn't my definition or a 'gold standard' is it? 

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/self-financing.html

Okay - in the narrowest of terms (see Generation A47's post above)  you are indeed right.

Do you think the bond issue to redevelop Colney was a success?

Do you think a bond issue to finance part of the cost of building a new stand (should it go ahead) is a good idea? 

[Mello Yello 2,289]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

It isn't my definition or a 'gold standard' is it? 

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/self-financing.html

👍

[king canary 7,603]

18 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Okay - in the narrowest of terms (see Generation A47's post above)  you are indeed right.

Do you think the bond issue to redevelop Colney was a success?

Do you think a bond issue to finance part of the cost of building a new stand (should it go ahead) is a good idea? 

'In the narrowest of terms' ie the correct definition. Words mean things. It would be like me claiming I 'self funded' my house when it involves a fairly chunky mortgage.

Yes I think it was a success but I think that is as much down to our on field success allowing us to pay back the fund with ease.

No I don't think it would be a good idea for a new stand- you earlier suggested financing about £10m with it. Under the same terms of 5% interest per year + a 25% bonus on promotion that could end up being quite a steep cost. 

[Mello Yello 2,289]

Maybe the board of Directorship hierarchy could ask the loyal support to again contribute to the future development of the stadium with a "Bring a Brick Day" to the next home game.......?

 

Every little helps.......

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

23 minutes ago, king canary said:

'In the narrowest of terms' ie the correct definition. Words mean things. It would be like me claiming I 'self funded' my house when it involves a fairly chunky mortgage.

Yes I think it was a success but I think that is as much down to our on field success allowing us to pay back the fund with ease.

No I don't think it would be a good idea for a new stand- you earlier suggested financing about £10m with it. Under the same terms of 5% interest per year + a 25% bonus on promotion that could end up being quite a steep cost. 

I didn't suggest financing about £10m by this method alone. There are other things which could be done. Naming rights for the new stand. Incorporating office space or other commercial activities into the new stand (just like they did with the Jarrold Stand), covering the roof of the new stand with solar panels - just a few things off the top of my head. 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Thirsty Lizard

[Mello Yello 2,289]

7 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

I didn't suggest financing about £10m by this method alone. There are other things which could be done. Naming rights for the new stand. Incorporating office space or other commercial activities into the new stand (just like they did with the Jarrold Stand), covering the roof of the new stand with solar panels - just a few things off the top of my head. 

If you're gonna back pedal.....don't do it on a Dutch made bike.....it puts the brakes on......

[Midlands Yellow 3,974]

10 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

I didn't suggest financing about £10m by this method alone. There are other things which could be done. Naming rights for the new stand. Incorporating office space or other commercial activities into the new stand (just like they did with the Jarrold Stand), covering the roof of the new stand with solar panels - just a few things off the top of my head. 

Bring and buy sale at the village hall ? 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

29 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Bring and buy sale at the village hall ? 

🙂 Exactly the sort of thing Midlands. Delia's going to bake some cakes. In the spirit of East Anglian solidarity Marcus Evans is going to bring some old jumble along which he's hoping to sell for a few quid - apparently it's left overs he couldn't manage to flog last time around. 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

3 hours ago, Mello Yello said:

If you're gonna back pedal.....don't do it on a Dutch made bike.....it puts the brakes on......

I had a Dutch bike once - I rode her hard.

This afternoon I've been at my allotment getting down and dirty with a Dutch hoe. 😉 

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,429]

On 08/01/2020 at 12:18, Thirsty Lizard said:

Okay - in the narrowest of terms (see Generation A47's post above)  you are indeed right.

Do you think the bond issue to redevelop Colney was a success?

Do you think a bond issue to finance part of the cost of building a new stand (should it go ahead) is a good idea?  

The Bond issue can be viewed in a number of ways . As has been mentioned the club offered a return on investment way above commercial interest and so unsurprisingly found it over subscribed. 

The 5% fixed then became even higher due to the promotion bonus (25%) . So borrow £10 - pay interest of 5% (50p) plus another 25%  (£2.50) Gives you a 30% return over 1 year. 

So the cost of borrowing was far higher than a commercial loan. The club made the numbers even worse retrospectively by paying it all last year . Something the usual money markets would baulk at because they would usually use that money themselves. 
 

So from a pure professional investment point of view the £5m was very expensive indeed . 
 

From a risk point of view it was a good way to borrow money with the original structure to the repayment . It wasn’t quite the “community” spirited loan it was initially sold as , because of the high fixed return. Organisations were drawn in that perhaps were not initially intended. If you look at the main sponsors of the club I would be amazed if any of them didn’t indulge. I know a few who did considerably. 
 

If the club wants to borrow for the new stand - in my view this is still a long way off in practice but a good distraction- it wouldn’t be funded simply by player sales . There would be many available revenues and I suspect the club would use a combination. The academy model would be tweaked and used again as well as the commercial market . Only Some of the clubs income would go towards it. 

Edited January 9, 2020 by Graham Paddons Beard