Poor old binners

[Carrow89 0]

Appears that their ever exitable manager ''mad jim'' has admitted on Radio so fick tonight that there will only be one or two new players at poorman road in January.So this wonderful £12m to spend was more old b*ll*cks, as was the supposed paying off of the debt.ipswich town - the rancid turkey carcass put out to be picked over by scavengers

[Mark Smith 0]

As much as I''d like you join you in laughing at their ''misfourtune'', I think you''ve missed the point slightly. They don''t need loads of new players because the current squad is working well enough as it is (at home at least). No need to rock the boat too much. If only we were in the posistion of needing just a couple of reinforcements to push for a playoff place...

[Carrow89 0]

Firstly it wasn''t a laugh at their supposed need of players or not - more the fun of seeing the poor old paupers having to face up to the reality of the handover of their club.As to their needing only a couple of players you must be joking. Their paper thin squad has been found out, a couple more injuries and their plight will be far worse than it is now. Check the current form of both teams, the paupers are sliding badly. 8 points out of their last 8 games, that''s relegation form.poorman road - home of farepak style finance

[HappyhammerAndy 0]

Sorry, I''d rather see both Ipswich and Norwich promoted as you.re both easier to get up the A12 from Essex. Maybe, at the expense of Middlesborough and Newcastle. That would save a few bob in mileage!

[xxxx 0]

They do have £12 million to spend but wont spend it all in January , why completely dismantle a team that has the best home record in the League , 2 or 3 good additions and start winning one or two away and they will be there or thereabouts .

[ricardo 7,396]

[quote user="The Drop"]They do have £12 million to spend but wont spend it all in January , why completely dismantle a team that has the best home record in the League , 2 or 3 good additions and start winning one or two away and they will be there or thereabouts .[/quote]

If you trouble to read the articles on the ITFC site you will they do not have £12 million to spend in January. Where this idea came from I just can''t understand.

The guy Evans bought the clubs £30+ million debt for £8 million and has given them another £3.7 million to help with the day to day expenses of the club. Since they are running at a loss of £90k a week, I can''t see them having anything to splash out on players.

[ca 1]

[quote user="ricardo"]

[quote user="The Drop"]They do have £12 million to spend but wont spend it all in January , why completely dismantle a team that has the best home record in the League , 2 or 3 good additions and start winning one or two away and they will be there or thereabouts .[/quote]

If you trouble to read the articles on the ITFC site you will they do not have £12 million to spend in January. Where this idea came from I just can''t understand.

The guy Evans bought the clubs £30+ million debt for £8 million and has given them another £3.7 million to help with the day to day expenses of the club. Since they are running at a loss of £90k a week, I can''t see them having anything to splash out on players.

[/quote]

 

Not sure what you''re reading on the Binners website Ricardo, but this is the link referring to the £12m which clearly says hes paid off their £30 odd m debt plus has given them £12m to spend on players.

 

http://www.itfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10272~1182181,00.html

[Carrow89 0]

Unfortunately CityAngel what you are quotings is the red face''s spin not the actual details.  Try clicking on the link at the bottom, there you''ll see that the £32m debt HAS NOT been paid off, merely owed now to MEI. It is also accruing interest where it wasn''t before. There is also the £564,000 per year they have to pay MEI." The debts will not have been extinguished........£32.0m of debt previously owed to third parties will be now be owed within the same group."So what happens to the £12m ? Players bought when the board decides. A board controlled by MEI ! And this little overlooked bit too " to fund increased short-term losses including those arising from player wages ". Given that the paupers are losing around £3m a year, with even higher losses predicted (falling gates and income) it is no wonder that money is needed to keep them afloat.So, they still have the £32m debt plus "£2.6 million, and certain related contingent amounts, £1.0 million, owed by the Club to Bank of Scotland" and have to now fork out £564k. Any wonder mad jim is now talking of only one or two loanees in the New Year.itfc - next year''s turkey, plucked, gutted and all ready stuffed

[ricardo 7,396]

[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="ricardo"]

[quote user="The Drop"]They do have £12 million to spend but wont spend it all in January , why completely dismantle a team that has the best home record in the League , 2 or 3 good additions and start winning one or two away and they will be there or thereabouts .[/quote]

If you trouble to read the articles on the ITFC site you will they do not have £12 million to spend in January. Where this idea came from I just can''t understand.

The guy Evans bought the clubs £30+ million debt for £8 million and has given them another £3.7 million to help with the day to day expenses of the club. Since they are running at a loss of £90k a week, I can''t see them having anything to splash out on players.

[/quote]

 

Not sure what you''re reading on the Binners website Ricardo, but this is the link referring to the £12m which clearly says hes paid off their £30 odd m debt plus has given them £12m to spend on players.

 

http://www.itfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10272~1182181,00.html

[/quote]

 

Read this Angel. It''s from their Supporters Trust dated Dec 14th.

Note the bits in red.

Trust on the Takeover By: Colin Kreidewolf The club has now published full details of the planned takeover of Ipswich Town by Marcus Evans upon which shareholders will vote at the Extraordinary General Meeting on Monday. The Trust remains broadly supportive of the deal, partly because of the desperate financial position that the club finds itself in. In the recently published annual report and accounts for 2007, the club was only able to avoid a £2.5m operating loss by the including the bonus payment due after the transfer of Darren Bent from Charlton to Spurs. If this takeover had not been proposed there is nothing to suggest that the financial position would not have deteriorated further. We are already seeing crowds falling with a consequent effect on revenue. One could see that we would continue to be a selling club and maybe one or two of our brighter prospects would have to be sold to balance the books. The £32m of debt remains problematical for many Town supporters as Marcus Evans has been able to purchase this for 20p in the pound meaning that he has paid less than £7m for the outstanding debt payable to Norwich Union and Barclays. However, that debt is not to be absolved from the books of Ipswich Town and the full £32m remains payable to a Marcus Evans Group company. In addition, the Trust understands that the debt will continue to accrue interest, so the debt will increase. Remember the club has had an interest-free holiday for the last couple of years during which time no interest has accrued, although a certain amount of equity in the club has been issued to Norwich Union in exchange. The essential terms of the deal are that Marcus Evans will invest £3.9m in ordinary shares so that enough ordinary shares can be issued to ensure he achieves an 87.5% shareholding in the club. He has not sought to buy out what will be come the minority shareholders in the club but if further financing is required and additional ordinary shares are issued in exchange, then he will be able to increase his stake further should other ordinary shareholders not wish to increase their investment. It is interesting to note that in the documents accompanying the takeover the club talks of the existing ordinary shares as being basically worthless. This is little more than two years after they put a value of £20 a share when they made the most recent share offer. Little has changed in terms of the overall size of the debt to change the valuation, so why did the directors feel comfortable with valuing shares at £20 at that time? Of course, no one would have bought their shares as an investment, more as a donation to their club and it is important to recognise the contribution of people such as Holly Bellingham, Michael Spencer and Peter Cohen in making the ‘donations’ in order to safeguard the interests of Ipswich Town, as well as the 3,000 smaller shareholders who also contributed. A further £8.1m will be invested in preference shares which will accrue 7% interest annually. These shares will be repayable at some time in the future should we achieve promotion to the Premier League and remain there for a period of time. Should the club achieve promotion to the Premier League, then the proposed takeover could prove very lucrative for Marcus Evans as he will be able to receive repayment for the preference shares and the outstanding debt plus accrued interest. However, is that a bad thing? He is taking a risk as there is no certainty that the club will achieve promotion over the next few years, let alone this season, and we live in a culture where risk-taking should be rewarded. Plus the club is in a dire financial position and desperately needs to refinance its balance sheet. However, were there other options on the table and did the club rush into an exclusivity agreement with Marcus Evans at the expense of listening to other offers? The Trust understands that there were other parties, including David Sullivan (although any move on his part would have been prevented or at least delayed by his involvement in Birmingham City), a local consortium and another City-based investment group, who were interested in paying off the debt and investing a similar amount of new money for a lower percentage ownership. However, the chairman was not prepared to talk to them because the club had already entered into an exclusivity agreement with Marcus Evans. The Trust has written to Marcus Evans seeking certain assurances about his long term intentions as regards the club and are awaiting a reply. Once all is said and done though, the Trust remains broadly supportive of the deal and welcomes the new investment in the club.

Ipswich Town 1st are an investor in Ipswich Town FC

© Ipswich Town Independent

A somewhat different perspective to some of the wildly inaccurate stuff in some papers.

The guy has bought the club (or 87% of it) for £12 million. He also owns the £32 million debt which ITFC still have to pay him, plus interest.

Sounds like a white Knight to you??????

No, I don''t think so.

[BigFish 1,988]

[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="ricardo"]

[quote user="The Drop"]They do have £12 million to spend but wont spend it all in January , why completely dismantle a team that has the best home record in the League , 2 or 3 good additions and start winning one or two away and they will be there or thereabouts .[/quote]

If you trouble to read the articles on the ITFC site you will they do not have £12 million to spend in January. Where this idea came from I just can''t understand.

The guy Evans bought the clubs £30+ million debt for £8 million and has given them another £3.7 million to help with the day to day expenses of the club. Since they are running at a loss of £90k a week, I can''t see them having anything to splash out on players.

[/quote]

 

Not sure what you''re reading on the Binners website Ricardo, but this is the link referring to the £12m which clearly says hes paid off their £30 odd m debt plus has given them £12m to spend on players.

 

http://www.itfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10272~1182181,00.html

[/quote]

Please try and keep up here CityAngel.

Like when looking at the NCFC accounts there are multiple intrepretations a number of things but it is clear that Marcus Evans didn''t "pay-off" the debt but bought it as a financial transaction and is expecting ITFC PLC to keep servicing it. In addition £8m of the money is for preference shares at around 7% which again the club must service. Neither of which it can do without eating into the famous £12 million. Add in the operating loss and this explains why there can only be 1 or 2 players.

[Syteanric 1]

CA.. Evans has got Ipswich town by the Boll***s, they would of been better off struggling to pay the debt to the bankers..

 

Evans is now the owner of the debt.. he can set the repayments to however much he wants whenever he wants.. he could, if he also wanted, add 100% interest onto the debt aswell...

 He could walk into Ipswich town Tommorow and tell them he wants the money by the end of the week....

They are in a far worse position then they were in before! not sure if the term is "asset Stripping"... but basically if Evans says Jump then Ipswich say "how high"

jas :)

[Carrow89 0]

To clarify Marcus Evans did not buy the club for £12m it was " Secondly, in return for the payment by MEI of approximately £3.9

million to the Club, the Club will issue to MEI such number of ordinary

shares in the Club as will give MEI a stake of 87.5 per cent."The £8.1m was more of a ''loan'' earning 7% a year.More importantly should be read " During our intensive negotiations with MEI, your Board has

sought, so far as possible, to protect the position of shareholders and

the interests of the Club, but it should be recognised that this was in

the context of the priority claims of our lenders."This clearly shows that they had no choice.Much of what has been quoted on various binner forums, suffolk newspapers and other assorted idiot outlets has been the speculation and spin put out by the club. Phrases such as " we believe that this deal,  we believe that we have found,  it is not anticipated,  and the Board believes that the Club''s future will be safe in his hands,  It is anticipated that,  Marcus Evans has indicated a willingness,  MEI could theoretically,  a return is unlikely,  your Board has

sought,  so far as possible have been taken as absolutes.Sheepshanks has handed over control of the club for about HALF the fee we received for Ashton with no certainty or guarantees, merely this red faced clown''s over-optimistic platitudes.No debts have gone, in fact more outgoings have been taken on. This is no more than a stay of execution exacted at a price that will be felt for many years from now.itfc - bin man walking

[ca 1]

I did understand that the debt is now owned by the MEI group but it says clearly on their website in December that

'''' The deal with Marcus Evans will see the new owner of the club make £12m available to Jim forplayers signings and wages for the January Transfer window''''

So are you saying that its not true, that their website is lying and he hasn''t paid £12m into their bank account for new players cause thats not how it looks to me?

[Carrow89 0]

The debt is NOT OWNED by the MEI group. It is still owed by Ipswich Town FC. Ipswich Town FC is now owned by MEI. Semantic it might seem but very pertinent when it comes to tax and liabilities.How did Sheepshank''s words about the club being able to meet the loan payments outside of the Premiership, or that the club was in no danger of administration at the club AGM a couple of months before it went into administration look to you ?How did Sheepshanks words about standing down from the club when it''s financial future was secure look to you now ?Did you believe those words just because Sheepshanks said them ?Again, I suggest you go to the bottom of that article and click on the link so you can read for yourself in full the real deal -For full details of the agreed sale to Marcus Evans click on the home page of the Club website.

[Graham Humphrey 13]

Do you know what, it''s brilliant being able to laugh at Ipswich''s fortunes isn''t it? But just think - if they were going for the play-offs and (say) had an incredible home record, while we were trying to avoid the drop with next to nothing to spend in the transfer window... well wouldn''t that be awful? We couldn''t really laugh at them then, could we? Thank God we''re not in that position...

[Huddy 0]

It seems that Ipswich arent as well off as the press would let you believe. I reckon they will spend a bit, but if what ive just read is accurate then i reckon if they fail to reach the premiership in a couple of seasons they''ll be back to square one or worst!

[Vern 0]

Regardless of all the facts and figures I just hope they get relegated, they go into administaration and a atom bomb drops down smack bang in the middle of their stupid pathetic ground. Scum Scum Scum.........Ooh, that feels better now I have got that off my chest. 

[Carrow89 0]

Well done lad, heroically missing the point of the thread.The laughter is aimed at their pompous "oooh, ain''t we all rich"  squeals of delight, that now appear to be a bit premature and ill founded.However if you wish to make speculation about current funding then check who has just coughed up for five Premiership loanees.Check on January 31st how much of their supposed £12m has been spent on new players at poorman rd and how far they are ahead of us then.itfc - the future is bleak

[YankeeCanary 0]

Despite the criticism regularly directed at the Norwich Board for not seeking additional new investment, I find it particularly telling that within the Ipswich Town FC communication it states:

"nearly 50 financial institutions and potential investors have been contacted and spoken to in the past 12 months. We also regularly publicised our search for fresh capital locally, nationally and internationally. We appointed external advisors, Riverhill Partners, to assist us in the overall process. Several leads were pursued and detailed discussions held with interested parties although the club did not receive ANY formal proposals until Marcus Evans approached us in early August." 

If anything, the statement is supportive of what Delia had to say in past meetings. There''s nobody banging the door down unless they are clear the pickings are ripe. There''s also no doubt that Ipswich were, at the end of the day, between a rock and a hard place in accepting the only offer that was on the table, even if it meant barely stopping short of selling their souls.

[BigFish 1,988]

[quote user="cityangel"]

I did understand that the debt is now owned by the MEI group but it says clearly on their website in December that

'''' The deal with Marcus Evans will see the new owner of the club make £12m available to Jim forplayers signings and wages for the January Transfer window''''

So are you saying that its not true, that their website is lying and he hasn''t paid £12m into their bank account for new players cause thats not how it looks to me?

[/quote]

Wages - That is the key word CA. The binners are losing c£300k a month + what ever loan repayments they need to make. A lot of the "£12 million" will be heading towards paying the current wage bill. What is that likely to be - best part of a million per month? So around £8 million to get them to the start of next season. Doesn''t appear to leave much for players. Still this is supposition, we will know on the 31 Jan..........if they bring in 4-5 players I''ll admit I''m wrong [:D]

[ricardo 7,396]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="cityangel"]

I did understand that the debt is now owned by the MEI group but it says clearly on their website in December that

'''' The deal with Marcus Evans will see the new owner of the club make £12m available to Jim forplayers signings and wages for the January Transfer window''''

So are you saying that its not true, that their website is lying and he hasn''t paid £12m into their bank account for new players cause thats not how it looks to me?

[/quote]

Wages - That is the key word CA. The binners are losing c£300k a month + what ever loan repayments they need to make. A lot of the "£12 million" will be heading towards paying the current wage bill. What is that likely to be - best part of a million per month? So around £8 million to get them to the start of next season. Doesn''t appear to leave much for players. Still this is supposition, we will know on the 31 Jan..........if they bring in 4-5 players I''ll admit I''m wrong [:D]

[/quote]

Magilton has been quoted as saying he will bring in only 1 or 2 new players. I will be very surprised if we see them spend anything over a million quid.

I have to admit I felt quite envious when they first unvieled their new backer and the papers were full of this £44 million takeover nonsense. Having read the terms of the agreement and some of the more thoughtful comment on various ITFC sites I have modified my views somewhat. Anybody who thinks they have got a £12 million transfer pot is living in fantasy land.

The only plus point of the takeover is that Evans has a financial incentive  to get them in the Prem. However if they don''t he is still on a winner. The £8.1 million he paid for the preference shares has to be serviced at 7% so thats over half a million a year in interest payments. On top of that they still owe him £32 million.

If I was a Town supporter I would be very afraid.

[The Blueness of Everything 0]

Marcus Evans, the asset stripper, the cherry picker?

Come on, lads, you can do better than that. If Evans was simply an asset stripper, he would have invested in one of the many clubs which own their grounds. Not one owned by the council. We have no cherries to be picked.

Has Marcus Evans bought the debt cheaply in order "to hold us to ransom" for a big pay-back if and when we reach the Premiership? Think about that for a moment or two. This is a man with millions to invest and who has made his fortune on wise financial decisions. Is that how you would choose to expand your "empire" if you were in his shoes? Would you call that a sound financial proposition?

Much as you will hate to hear it, Marcus Evans has given us £12 million to spend because he believes we are heading onwards and upwards. His heart has ruled his head. If a similar backer appeared at NCFC, you would bite his hand off for the money.

Or perhaps the offer would never be made public?

[Carrow89 0]

Nice to see the fine tradition of suffolk stupidity being upheld by our latest pitchfork juggler. Perhaps some day his podgy little finger will trace along pages of the deal outlined on the club website. Until let me explain.It is because you paupers have nothing to secure loans against that you have ended up in skid row. It is for that reason that MEI have taken over your club for £3.9m - stuffing those who stuck their hands in their pockets to bale you out. The supposed £12m has not been given to you. There is no you. MEI own you and control the board. They will decide where that £3.9m goes. The remaining £8.1m is to be used to make up the growing losses of a club not on ''the way up'' but losing money year in year out. A club with falling gates as well as falling income. Also the £8.1m is a loan being charged at 7%, not a gift.A similar ''backer'' would not appear at Carrow Road anymore than a loan shark would trawl down Newmarket Road looking for customers. MEI have taken over your grubby little club for about a quarter of what Charlton received for Darren Bent. Remind us again how much your financialy incompetent club sold him for. You current form is at relegation level, you cannot win away and there''s every likelihood that you will have to ship out more players from poorman road to balance the books. Your future looks rather like you - not too bright.

itfc - not so much on skid row as death row

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="The Blueness of Everything"]

Marcus Evans, the asset stripper, the cherry picker?

Come on, lads, you can do better than that. If Evans was simply an asset stripper, he would have invested in one of the many clubs which own their grounds. Not one owned by the council. We have no cherries to be picked.

Has Marcus Evans bought the debt cheaply in order "to hold us to ransom" for a big pay-back if and when we reach the Premiership? Think about that for a moment or two. This is a man with millions to invest and who has made his fortune on wise financial decisions. Is that how you would choose to expand your "empire" if you were in his shoes? Would you call that a sound financial proposition?

Much as you will hate to hear it, Marcus Evans has given us £12 million to spend because he believes we are heading onwards and upwards. His heart has ruled his head. If a similar backer appeared at NCFC, you would bite his hand off for the money.

Or perhaps the offer would never be made public?

[/quote]

The Blueness Of Everything apparently includes those those thick double-lens spectacles so apparent in your verbage. How does your common sense explain that after a year of searching, nay, may I say begging, the local, national and international communities for interested parties to step forward and make a proposal for this fine specimen of a club you end up with a queue of .......one? Did you think the Red Sea had just parted. Possibly, because those chasing with chariots carrying soldiers with whips and swords were actually the debtors always on the heels of Ipswich Town FC in recent years.

[ricardo 7,396]

[quote user="The Blueness of Everything"]

Marcus Evans, the asset stripper, the cherry picker?

Come on, lads, you can do better than that. If Evans was simply an asset stripper, he would have invested in one of the many clubs which own their grounds. Not one owned by the council. We have no cherries to be picked.

Has Marcus Evans bought the debt cheaply in order "to hold us to ransom" for a big pay-back if and when we reach the Premiership? Think about that for a moment or two. This is a man with millions to invest and who has made his fortune on wise financial decisions. Is that how you would choose to expand your "empire" if you were in his shoes? Would you call that a sound financial proposition?

Much as you will hate to hear it, Marcus Evans has given us £12 million to spend because he believes we are heading onwards and upwards. His heart has ruled his head. If a similar backer appeared at NCFC, you would bite his hand off for the money.

Or perhaps the offer would never be made public?

[/quote]

Yes Blueness, we would quite like a backer with a few quid but we hope and pray it''s not someone like your guy. His history dosen''t seem to suggest any "heart ruling the head". Basically the guy is an asset stripper and your only hope is that he can make you an asset worth stripping.  

I make no argument about the guy being astute financially. As I stated in my post, he can''t lose either way.Unfortunately it is ITFC supporters and shareholders who have lost out and will continue to lose out in the future.

I hope for your sake Blueness, that things turn out o.k. because the rivalry between our two clubs has been great fun in the past and will hopefully continue for many more years.

When you spend £12 million in the January transfer window I will come back on here and admit I got it wrong but somehow I don''t think that will happen.

OTBC

 

[whoareyou? 0]

I''ve heard rumblings that the £12 million investment they had could be blown away by a potential backer for us in the next month or so. Has anyone else heard these rumours? My father was told it was a strong possibility at the Wolves match.

[Bigmarkcanary 0]

[quote user="whoareyou?"]Can anyone elaborate on what whoareyou? said? My feeling is that it could just be the Cullum rumour all over again - what have others heard? [:-*]

[whoareyou? 0]

Was told to my father by someone who is a professional referee who watches City. That is all i know about the person who told him.

[Bigmarkcanary 0]

Web Team, how come whoareyou?''s post at 5:58pm is not up?

[Yellow Rider 0]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]Appears that their ever exitable manager ''mad jim'' has admitted on Radio so fick tonight that there will only be one or two new players at poorman road in January.

So this wonderful £12m to spend was more old b*ll*cks, as was the supposed paying off of the debt.

ipswich town - the rancid turkey carcass put out to be picked over by scavengers
[/quote]

Seems that ITFC have offered £1.5M for David Norris (Plymouth) - looks like you could be wrong in your assumptions about their ''lack of cash''? Why don''t we all just move on from the Marcus Evans debate (although I agree I would not have wanted him anywhere near City) and see how it pans out. The priority surely is what happens on the pitch. Bash the binners by all means but why not try and get the upper hand where it really matters ''cos last time I looked at the league table we were a long way adrift (about 11 points if memory serves me correct). With the overall weakness of this league and the unpredictability of performances I would not be at all surprised to see them promoted and then who''s laughing. Sure as hell won''t be us will it?