A picture of the finished hotel . . .

[canary cherub 1]

. . . can be found on www.landmark-securities.co.uk

Also here''s some information that may clarify the terms of the hotel deal (from a Pinkun article, 1st October 2005).

"The club sold the land to a joint venture company [name not given] in which it has acquired a 30% stake* . . . The capital for the venture is being provided by investors, represented by Landmark Securities plc, who will hold a 70% stake.  The club will not get any direct revenue from the day-to-day profits of the hotel, but will benefit long-term if the venue is successful via the value of shares from its 30% stake."

"The venue will be operated by Kew Green Hotels Ltd.  The club will not be involved in any of the day-to-day management of the hotel."

"Some of the rooms at the [threee/four star 145 bedroom Holiday Inn hotel] will have a view of the pitch."

"The scheme has actually generated £1.1m [which] has been paid straight into the Bank of Scotland to repay part of the loan taken out to help finance the building of the £3.5m Norwich Union Community Stand last year."

 

* Questions: What did it cost (if anything) to "acquire" a 30% stake, and if so where did the money come from?

Had we not used the £1.1m to pay off part of the debt, it would have reached almost £21m last season.  Why has it kept on rising even though we''ve made a profit for the last two years?

 

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

 

a better image is here:

 

http://www.landmark-securities.co.uk/holidayInnHotel.aspx

[Temp the Revelator 0]

The answer to your first question lies within your post - they have sold the land to the joint venture company and bought a 30% stake - this is probably included in the payment for the land.

As for the second question, I don''t know as I am no financial expert, but could I venture that like an ordinary mortgage the overall amount you owe can often actually increase in the first few years before it starts to be paid off?  Could be wrong, and it''s a question I would quite like the answer to as well, but just trying to look both logically and laterally at the situation.

[The Voice of the Thorpe Area 0]

Looks impressive- ashame the team doesn''t though.

[Bovril 219]

hi,

thanks for this, alot of people i know were wondering what exactly the deal was as far as what money is going in-out of the club via this hotel...

also i know the picture on the site given is just an computed generated picture but it doesnt look that bad and it even has the ''holiday inn'' letters written in green,

i also noticed recently they add ''The Barclay'' on the outside of the stand, anyone know when they did this? definately makes it look better on the eye

[YankeeCanary 0]

Thanks for the picture Megson.

I don''t mean to be impertinent Megson but, given your question on directly relating why making profit in a given year can result in rising debt, do you understand the difference between a balance sheet and a P& L statement?

In simplistic terms if I am maintaining a household on an income of 50,000 pounds with total expenses of 40,000 pounds one could say I have a 20% profit on income versus costs. All of this while my overall debt ( for a mortgage for example ) is 200,000 pounds. The next year assume my income and costs have remained the same but we moved into a larger home and my debt ( mortgage ) has increased to 250,000 pounds, even though we made a "profit" for both years on income versus expenses. Overall debt has still risen. I am not making a judgement on whether or not this should have been the case with NCFC, but the simplicity of your question suggested making a profit while increasing the debt does not make sense, whereas, of course it can.

[Syteanric 1]

that looks like the ohtle but isnt our hotel!

 its not connected to the barclay for one! and whast that building accross the street?

 

jas :)

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]

Thanks for the picture Megson.

I don''t mean to be impertinent Megson but, given your question on directly relating why making profit in a given year can result in rising debt, do you understand the difference between a balance sheet and a P& L statement?

In simplistic terms if I am maintaining a household on an income of 50,000 pounds with total expenses of 40,000 pounds one could say I have a 20% profit on income versus costs. All of this while my overall debt ( for a mortgage for example ) is 200,000 pounds. The next year assume my income and costs have remained the same but we moved into a larger home and my debt ( mortgage ) has increased to 250,000 pounds, even though we made a "profit" for both years on income versus expenses. Overall debt has still risen. I am not making a judgement on whether or not this should have been the case with NCFC, but the simplicity of your question suggested making a profit while increasing the debt does not make sense, whereas, of course it can.

[/quote]

Morning Yankee.

Yes I do realise that there''s a difference between debt and loss (or profit).  But over the past two seasons we have made a gross profit of over £12 million.  Of that, the taxman has snatched about £3 million which we could ill afford to lose.  If we weren''t going to invest the profit in the squad (which we haven''t so far), would it not have made sense to reduce the amount of profit by diverting some of it into paying off part of the debt, thereby both saving profits tax and reducing the amount of interest on the debt? 

It smacks of greed on the part of our shareholders.  I could be wrong, however.

 

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

that looks like the ohtle but isnt our hotel!

 its not connected to the barclay for one! and whast that building accross the street?

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I think it''s an "artists impression" of the Barclay Stand lol. . . let''s hope their depiction of the hotel bears a closer resemblance to reality!

 

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

that looks like the ohtle but isnt our hotel!

 its not connected to the barclay for one! and whast that building accross the street?

 

jas :)

[/quote]

I think I''ve cracked it this time.  The picture is a composite of three Landmark projects (see under ''Projects'' on their website).  The Barclay has transmogrified into a project in Cardiff and the building across the road looks remarkably like the project in Milton Keynes . . . the hotel IS our hotel however.  Have I made that clear? 

 

[MP3 0]

you''re both looking at the wrong picture. foghorns link is the right one.

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="MP3"]you''re both looking at the wrong picture. foghorns link is the right one.
[/quote]

Stroll on.  15 posts since December 2003 MP3, and you feel moved to post that.  I don''t know if you''ve noticed, but there are slightly more pressing matters affecting our football club right now.  Pathetic.

 

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]

Thanks for the picture Megson.

I don''t mean to be impertinent Megson but, given your question on directly relating why making profit in a given year can result in rising debt, do you understand the difference between a balance sheet and a P& L statement?

In simplistic terms if I am maintaining a household on an income of 50,000 pounds with total expenses of 40,000 pounds one could say I have a 20% profit on income versus costs. All of this while my overall debt ( for a mortgage for example ) is 200,000 pounds. The next year assume my income and costs have remained the same but we moved into a larger home and my debt ( mortgage ) has increased to 250,000 pounds, even though we made a "profit" for both years on income versus expenses. Overall debt has still risen. I am not making a judgement on whether or not this should have been the case with NCFC, but the simplicity of your question suggested making a profit while increasing the debt does not make sense, whereas, of course it can.

[/quote]

Morning Yankee.

Yes I do realise that there''s a difference between debt and loss (or profit).  But over the past two seasons we have made a gross profit of over £12 million.  Of that, the taxman has snatched about £3 million which we could ill afford to lose.  If we weren''t going to invest the profit in the squad (which we haven''t so far), would it not have made sense to reduce the amount of profit by diverting some of it into paying off part of the debt, thereby both saving profits tax and reducing the amount of interest on the debt? 

It smacks of greed on the part of our shareholders.  I could be wrong, however.

[/quote]

Thanks for the response Megson. With respect to your question, I''m sure you understand the rules in the UK better than I do. At the risk of confusing other readers, allow me to continue responding, however, with the personal example I provided previously. In the example of the mortgage debt I referred to increasing to $250,000 ( I''ll use our currency here to make the point ), if I lived in Canada I may well have chosen to have taken part of my excess disposable income ( profit ) and paid the debt down because it would have been prudent to do so as there is no tax relief for interest paid on that kind of debt reduction. Most people in the USA, however, would have a more difficult decision to make because as to whether or not to reduce the debt as the tax rules here provide significant tax relief against interest paid on that type ( mortgage ) of debt reduction. It would depend upon your overall income and tax rate.

I''m almost encouraging other posters to ask "What does all that have to do with NCFC." Well, all I''m saying is that I''m sure Delia and NCFC have competent tax accountants to explore the best legal means to retain the maximum amount of money within the coffers rather than giving the same to the Government. If it was deemed advantageous to pay the debt down then that surely would have been the route chosen. To avoid doing this because of greed ( as you suggest ) does not really make sense. As majority shareholders, Delia and Michael would stand to gain from either direction taken.  

[Alex Harvey-Jones 0]

Looks a lot better than it does at the moment. I wonder how much they will charge for the pitch side rooms and whether you can actually see the whole pitch from the windows?? Wouldn''t be much atmosphere though - give me a seat in the ground any day!

[MP3 0]

you clearly needed helpwhat if you had gone and booked a room. its a long stroll to milton keynes.16 and counting.........

[whoareyou? 0]

The term ''debt'' is often misused in football terms cos it implies you owe £19 million with nothing to show for it.

The recent accounts actually show the club has debts of £35 million but has money owed to it of £10 million. £11 million of that is owed after more than one year but before 5 years and the other £10 million is owed after more than 5 years. Thats why you keep hearing that its structured debt and is manageable.

In the Chase years, the borrowings were bank loans which could have been called in by the bank at any time which is why we came so close to going bust cos the money wasnt there to pay the bank when it was due.

The club is no where near insolvent and its balance sheet shows its worth aprrox £15 million with the assets it has, which are mainly the players contracts and the ground and traing ground.

As to the hotel, it says we hold a 30% share and according to the website of the Security company they reckon it will be worth £14 million when fnished and up and running, so a 30% stake in that is worth having!

[John Boubepo 0]

Sorry to blow my  negative trumpet on this issue but at the end of the day it''s still a hotel built in the corner of a potentially very good football stadium, I just don''t see how the two go together anymore than building a bus station or supermarket in the corner of a football stadium.

Football is becoming more and more popular as a spectator sport, we should be looking to increase the capacity to 28,000 - 30,000 in the short to medium term while keeping the potential to increase to 35,000 + in the long term, a hotel should not even begin to come into the equation.

[The Third Earl of WimBim 0]

Quite right MP3.....anyway the only thing that too many posts make is a very long fence....now did I ever tell you about the time I booked into the Holiday Inn in Bangkok.......Scrotum almost had a dithery fit, poor fellow.....

[The Fish Seller 0]

Blimey it must be snowing hard in Norwich, all I can see is white.

Of course maybe the page is blank because "Landmark Securities PLC" doesn''t exist any more??? 

Going to be difficult to make money on this deal which was dependent on the value of future shares rising now isn''t it???

Of course I''m probably getting my info off the back of a fag packet.....

 

Or am I?

Here''s a useful starting point for anyone with a couple of quid and a few spare hours over the holiday period.

 http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/  Try the webcheck, some very interesting information there.

I''m sure the Mods would stop me uploading the reports I purchased due to copyright reasons but it is fact that the company formally known as Landmark Securities PLC no longer exists having reverted to a private limited company on Dec 22 2006.

Oh and there are only two shareholders, neither of whom are known to us, the third shareholder based in the Dutch Antilles recently returned their shareholding.

 

 

Name & Registered Office: LANDMARK SECURITIES LIMITED 66 WIGMORE STREET LONDON W1U 2SB Company No. 02046215

Status: Active Date of Incorporation: 13/08/1986 Country of Origin: United Kingdom Company Type: Private Limited Company Nature of Business (SIC(03)): 7011 - Development & sell real estate Accounting Reference Date: 31/12 Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/12/2006  (FULL) Next Accounts Due: 31/10/2008 Last Return Made Up To: 19/05/2007 Next Return Due: 16/06/2008 Last Members List: 19/05/2007 Previous Names: Date of change Previous Name 10/09/1986 LAWCROWN LIMITED 22/12/2006 LANDMARK SECURITIES PLC

[Unlucky Fried Kitten 0]

How well is the hotel doing as regards occupancy rates? Whenever I''ve been past the place it hasn''t exactly been bustling with life - very few cars in the car park and hardly anybody in the bar or restaurant. Has anybody heard reports on the success, or otherwise, of the hotel?

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="JaundicedJockGeorgy"]How well is the hotel doing as regards occupancy rates? Whenever I''ve been past the place it hasn''t exactly been bustling with life - very few cars in the car park and hardly anybody in the bar or restaurant. Has anybody heard reports on the success, or otherwise, of the hotel?[/quote]

It does not make any odds how full it is we don''t make a single penny out of it.

I was told it was a long term investment but how long is long term? 5, 10, 20, 50 years?

But the hotel, 300 odd flats, offices, restaurants and roads will all help the share price when the Club is sold..........pity about the football team!

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[The Fish Seller 0]

I really think you''re missing the point I''m trying to make.

NCFC aqquiired a 30% stake in Landmark Securities PLC either as well as or instead of £1.1m cash on the Hotel deal.(Never actually been stated or determined exactly what this shareholding cost us).

 This Company no longer exists!!

Ergo we cannot still hold a 30% share in it. So what has happened to that?

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

Hotel is farcical, wrong location, wrong strategy, what capacity now is there for a corner infil?

[gazzathegreat 0]

[quote user="JaundicedJockGeorgy"]How well is the hotel doing as regards occupancy rates? Whenever I''ve been past the place it hasn''t exactly been bustling with life - very few cars in the car park and hardly anybody in the bar or restaurant. Has anybody heard reports on the success, or otherwise, of the hotel?[/quote]

In my experience (and I live opposite the thing!) it''s always very busy, taxis pulling up night and day, coaches packed with holiday makers arriving and departng, business clients pulling up to reception in their smart cars. On football days the bar is packed. Restarant always looks busy. I think it''s doing rather well, but not sure of the club''s share of any profits or what they are charging in terms of ground rent or the like.

[T 190]

Intermediate short-term shell companies are entirely normal - it always possible that there is a conspiracy but far more normal and likely is that the assets and shareholdings in the hotel have been simply transferred to another company.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="gazzathegreat"][quote user="JaundicedJockGeorgy"]How well is the hotel doing as regards occupancy rates? Whenever I''ve been past the place it hasn''t exactly been bustling with life - very few cars in the car park and hardly anybody in the bar or restaurant. Has anybody heard reports on the success, or otherwise, of the hotel?[/quote] In my experience (and I live opposite the thing!) it''s always very busy, taxis pulling up night and day, coaches packed with holiday makers arriving and departng, business clients pulling up to reception in their smart cars. On football days the bar is packed. Restarant always looks busy. I think it''s doing rather well, but not sure of the club''s share of any profits or what they are charging in terms of ground rent or the like.[/quote]

The clubs` stake will increase in value if the hotel does well, much the same as if you buy shares in a company they will rise in value if the company trades well. It might suprise some people but i have no problem with the hotel. £1.1m for the right to build on the land and a 30% stake in it looks a no-lose deal. I would like some clarification as to the status of our holding though.

[GMF 736]

[quote user="John Boubepo"]

Sorry to blow my  negative trumpet on this issue but at the end of the day it''s still a hotel built in the corner of a potentially very good football stadium, I just don''t see how the two go together anymore than building a bus station or supermarket in the corner of a football stadium.

Football is becoming more and more popular as a spectator sport, we should be looking to increase the capacity to 28,000 - 30,000 in the short to medium term while keeping the potential to increase to 35,000 + in the long term, a hotel should not even begin to come into the equation.

[/quote]

Are you suggesting we should have built another infill, costing a further £3.5M plus, further increasing the Club''s debt, so everyone could moan that Fixed Assets have gone up again and money should be invested in the team first and nothing else?

[Syteanric 1]

 

As Duncan Bannatyne says on Dragons Den "whats 30% of Nothing!"

A question perhaps for mr Doncaster on Boxing Day

jas :)