No Need To Sell?

[duke63 542]

March 2024 is when the short term loan on advanced media rights is repayable.

Anyone on here fancy digging into their own pockets to pay it off?  Thought not!

Investing in football clubs is like flushing your money down the drain. And its a continuous demand.

[Corbs1 89]

9 hours ago, duke63 said:

Investing in football clubs is like flushing your money down the drain. And its a continuous demand.

Yep, which is why if you’re got some money, bank it! You might need it. 

[Big Vince 318]

On 03/09/2023 at 20:13, Canary dwarf said:

It will be interesting to see if there any available funds for the jan transfer window!

On the contrary, with the loan to be repaid by March, there will be firesales of Sara and Rowe, but Delia will still insist "there was no need to sell" because she thinks all supporters are numpties, which they are, and they will all buy it.

And to think these are the same supporters who hounded out Chase for having a firesale of Ashley Ward at the behest of Barclays Bank.

Edited September 5, 2023 by Big Vince

[CANARYKING 638]

17 hours ago, duke63 said:

March 2024 is when the short term loan on advanced media rights is repayable.

Anyone on here fancy digging into their own pockets to pay it off?  Thought not!

Investing in football clubs is like flushing your money down the drain. And its a continuous demand.

Is this the £66 million ?

[Big Vince 318]

3 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

Is this the £66 million ?

That is my understanding. The parachute payments end this season and the loan was meant to be settled from those media rights payments. Whether it all tallies up in practice and the bean counters have got all their ducks in a row, will only be revealed in the next accounts.

[duke63 542]

9 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

Is this the £66 million ?

I think it will be £30 million. The £66 million outstanding relates to June 2022 accounts but half of that was repayable within one year so presumably that has now been repaid last March. 

[hogesar 9,675]

2 hours ago, Big Vince said:

On the contrary, with the loan to be repaid by March, there will be firesales of Sara and Rowe, but Delia will still insist "there was no need to sell" because she thinks all supporters are numpties, which they are, and they will all buy it.

And to think these are the same supporters who hounded out Chase for having a firesale of Ashley Ward at the behest of Barclays Bank.

Let's have a friendly charity bet for the CSF then?

That we don't sell both Sara and Rowe in January?

All whilst you b*tch and moan, Delia and Michael forego any sort of financial gain in getting Attannassio on board, where they could have made an absolute fortune.

[shefcanary 2,409]

2 hours ago, duke63 said:

I think it will be £30 million. The £66 million outstanding relates to June 2022 accounts but half of that was repayable within one year so presumably that has now been repaid last March. 

And the GM papers reveal the remainder of those has potentially been replaced with a loan from Attanasio. I say potentially, because I am struggling for what other purpose he has made it for, unless substantial operating losses were suddenly incurred in the two months between the release of the last financial statements and Attanasio advancing the loan. I am assuming that there is no compulsion on his part to ask for that to be repaid immediately. 

Whilst I cannot say there will never be a sale of a young playing asset again in the future (there are more reasons for such sales other than to raise cash), I believe Big Vince is on the wrong track for the reason behind Omo being sold purely to replenish the bank account. 

[Indy 3,300]

22 hours ago, hogesar said:

All whilst you b*tch and moan, Delia and Michael forego any sort of financial gain in getting Attannassio on board, where they could have made an absolute fortune.

Technically they still could make an absolute fortune, they own 40% and no price set for that shareholding. 

[hogesar 9,675]

49 minutes ago, Indy said:

Technically they still could make an absolute fortune, they own 40% and no price set for that shareholding. 

They could but anyone with a brain seeing how they're getting Attanassio involved at this stage....

[Indy 3,300]

38 minutes ago, hogesar said:

They could but anyone with a brain seeing how they're getting Attanassio involved at this stage....

Wow no need for the animosity, I just pointed out that your statement wasn’t really factual!

[hogesar 9,675]

5 minutes ago, Indy said:

Wow no need for the animosity, I just pointed out that your statement wasn’t really factual!

Wasn't towards you, unless you couldn't see the way this was heading... Everything to date re-inforces what they've said about not wanting to make money out of the club

[Indy 3,300]

15 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Wasn't towards you, unless you couldn't see the way this was heading... Everything to date re-inforces what they've said about not wanting to make money out of the club

I agree and totally commend them as I’ve posted on the main MA thread! But three years a lot can happen and relations might sour then who knows how it could play out.

[Mello Yello 2,294]

Well it's only been just over a quarter of a century wait....but now hopefully things seem to be moving....For better, or for worse?....

Anyway, a change is always as good as a rest.....

[Big Vince 318]

Southwell reporting that Attanasio paying £5 million for 192,000 shares. So that values the club at £17.1 million. Surely that is a derisory valuation that should be rejected by shareholders because if he offers the same price to all the minor shareholders at some point they will hardly get back more than they put in - thinking back to the earlier rights issues under the current regime.

Even with its indebtedness the club is worth more than £17.1 million. Businesses sold as going concerns typically value at 1-2 times turnover.

Edited September 6, 2023 by Big Vince

[shefcanary 2,409]

3 minutes ago, Big Vince said:

Southwell reporting that Attanasio paying £5 million for 192,000 shares. So that values the club at £17.1 million. Surely that is a derisory valuation that should be rejected by shareholders because if he offers the same price to all the minor shareholders at some point they will hardly get back more than they put in - thinking back to the earlier rights issues under the current regime.

Even with its indebtedness the club is worth more than £17.1 million. Businesses sold as going concerns typically value at 1-2 times turnover.

Attanasio would argue his 40% stake has been gained by injecting £50m into the club through various means. That values the club at c.£125m. Some people sold their shares for £200 in the last 6 months. They therefore valued the club at a slightly higher amount (200 x 619,900). One shouldn't just focus on one metric, any business will have various valuations depending on who is offering the valuation. Vote against the Waiver and you risk the valuation to be close to zero. Its difficult ...

[duke63 542]

11 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Attanasio would argue his 40% stake has been gained by injecting £50m into the club through various means. That values the club at c.£125m. Some people sold their shares for £200 in the last 6 months. They therefore valued the club at a slightly higher amount (200 x 619,900). One shouldn't just focus on one metric, any business will have various valuations depending on who is offering the valuation. Vote against the Waiver and you risk the valuation to be close to zero. Its difficult ...

Any business or asset is only worth what a potential buyer is prepared to pay for it.

Bearing in mind its a football club that would need significant cash invested to move it on to another level and at the last published accounts its assets only outweighed its liabilities by £2.75 million, you could argue he has paid £5 million for a 40% share in an asset worth £2.75 million which seems poor value to me.

[Big Vince 318]

13 minutes ago, duke63 said:

Any business or asset is only worth what a potential buyer is prepared to pay for it.

Bearing in mind its a football club that would need significant cash invested to move it on to another level and at the last published accounts its assets only outweighed its liabilities by £2.75 million, you could argue he has paid £5 million for a 40% share in an asset worth £2.75 million which seems poor value to me.

Which rather illustrates Shef's point that valuations are in the eyes of the beholder.

I suppose what is unique with football clubs is that there is usually no competition when they are sold. It is just one person or entity interested in buying, as opposed to house sales, for example.

Edited September 6, 2023 by Big Vince

[Indy 3,300]

A few posters keep banging on about the club not pocketing the money, but reality is we’ve sold £30 million pounds worth of players, lost a lot of high earners for free, MA injected a large sum into the club and those who keep telling us how solid we financially with regards of the Parachute payment covering the debt! 
So the question is where is that money then? It’s certainly not in buying players, so must be in the bank or gone against future running costs….I get the valid questions that some are asking, as we have certainly had a lot of sales this summer for a club not needing to sell.

Edited September 6, 2023 by Indy

[Big Vince 318]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

A few posters keep banging on about the club not pocketing the money, but reality is we’ve sold £30 million pounds worth of players, lost a lot of high earners for free, MA injected a large sum into the club and those who keep telling us how solid we financially with regards of the Parachute payment covering the debt! 
So the question is where is that money then? It’s certainly not in buying players, so must be in the bank or gone against future running costs….I get the valid questions that some are asking, as we have certainly had a lot of sales this summer for a club not needing to sell.

Exactly. Given that the loan was all structured so as to be paid off by the parachute payments, then the Attanasio investment and the £40 million received (or to be received) for players this summer, including Maddison, ought to have been available for new signings for fees, instead of almost total free transfers. But no, after Fassnacht, £38 million has been (or will be) banked. If Attanasio is, or will be putting in £50 million, then the club ought to be quids in by £88 million. So, like you, where is the money going? It is not as if all the ins are on higher wages than the outs because we are now operating as a Championship club once again.

Is Webber lining the corridors of Colney with solid gold panels, or something?

Edited September 6, 2023 by Big Vince

[Sufyellow 222]

On 03/09/2023 at 15:25, norfolkngood said:

i imagine they were well paid well , say 5 million for both at a guess how did we spend the rest of the 61 million ?

Paid off farke and his staff 

[Sufyellow 222]

On 03/09/2023 at 15:29, shefcanary said:

Yes, we overspent on transfers and wages in a "gamble" on preserving our EPL status. The so called contractual salary cuts on relegation were not as deep as were required, hence why Gibson, Pukki and Krul were still effectively on EPL salaries. There were probsbly others as well.

He is castigated on here but Essex is right to regularly point out the £118m salaries bill in that EPL season was a significant part of the reason for the cash requirement. The next accounts will show the reduction in that bill will not be as much as expected last year. However apart from Gibson, you would expect the majority of players this season are playing for a promotion bonus to get near their EPL salary, and is certainly one reason for the better start so far.

Didn't pukki have to be on prem wages because we kept him for the extra year. 

[Sufyellow 222]

On 03/09/2023 at 15:47, nutty nigel said:

I think we just post a few words from any statement. There was that big interview with 'the suit' from our club about all this. But he also said the fans were part of the atmsphere problem. And that's what we went with. Maybe that was the plan...

That's what they did , say the bad news in clues and chuck in a statement to distract everyone.  Webber did the same in his interview,  he spelt it out in clues , he said if we sell players it doesn't mean we spend it on players,  it could fund players coming in on frees or loans . Head lines were , I am not bothered by a few divorces in the snake pit. The club are not very honest, take what they  say with a pinch of salt. They couldn't say they are broke and need to sell, but they may as well have , because other clubs would have known that. 

 

[Sufyellow 222]

On 03/09/2023 at 15:39, keelansgrandad said:

Not the accounts. Statements such as we don't need to sell. Its patently not true. We have brought in up to £40M during the window and spent little if anything. That sounds to me like banking the money.

Trouble is that is another misleading  statement to put the club in good light . Let the media state the fees and then say undisclosed . Andy was 11 million,  rashica 3 or 4 million,  Aaron's 6 or 7 and 1 million for Mumba. That's about 23 million

 

[Sufyellow 222]

On 03/09/2023 at 18:40, TIL 1010 said:

I think we all know where this statement is heading.

They were good times . 

[Indy 3,300]

22 minutes ago, Sufyellow said:

Trouble is that is another misleading  statement to put the club in good light . Let the media state the fees and then say undisclosed . Andy was 11 million,  rashica 3 or 4 million,  Aaron's 6 or 7 and 1 million for Mumba. That's about 23 million

 

Don’t forget Maddison another £4 million wasn’t it?

[Sufyellow 222]

7 hours ago, shefcanary said:

Attanasio would argue his 40% stake has been gained by injecting £50m into the club through various means. That values the club at c.£125m. Some people sold their shares for £200 in the last 6 months. They therefore valued the club at a slightly higher amount (200 x 619,900). One shouldn't just focus on one metric, any business will have various valuations depending on who is offering the valuation. Vote against the Waiver and you risk the valuation to be close to zero. Its difficult ...

How has he put 50 million in ? I have missed all this . Can you explain please.

[Sufyellow 222]

16 minutes ago, Indy said:

Don’t forget Maddison another £4 million wasn’t it?

Probably a million less didn't Coventry get some of that . 

[Big Vince 318]

1 minute ago, Sufyellow said:

Probably a million less didn't Coventry get some of that . 

£2.5 million is nearer the mark.

[nutty nigel 7,536]

1 hour ago, Sufyellow said:

That's what they did , say the bad news in clues and chuck in a statement to distract everyone.  Webber did the same in his interview,  he spelt it out in clues , he said if we sell players it doesn't mean we spend it on players,  it could fund players coming in on frees or loans . Head lines were , I am not bothered by a few divorces in the snake pit. The club are not very honest, take what they  say with a pinch of salt. They couldn't say they are broke and need to sell, but they may as well have , because other clubs would have known that. 

 

Well I have thought this. Throw away lines that will hide the bad news. However it's how the world rolls these days. Boris was a master at it. Much of the press play along because these little spats create more hits than the bad news which would have to be reported professionly.