has hedge fund fraud screwed NCFC's attempts to roll outstanding loan over???

[lucky green trainers 0]

has the huge USD50b hedge fund fraud scandal scuppered city''s attempts to roll over the £2.5m RBS loan due for repayment this month (i think i''m right in saying...)???cos rbs has got its fingers burned in this fraud to the tune of several hundred billion quid...gasp,,,doesn''t look good does it...so does this explain the bell swop speculation story???as in, wot no cash?<>

[Desert Fox 0]

LGT,

The fraud in total amounted to £32 billion - therefore the RBS share could not be sveral hundred billion quid, which in any case way exceeds their market cap. I would doubt whether this would have any bearing on the issue of a piddling £2.5M loan, which alomost certainly has already been subject to a deal before this news broke. If we have rolled over the debt, there is probably soem money to spend on players (from the deferred transfer fees from players that we have sold in the last few years). If we have not rolled over the debt, then the deferred fees is probably needed to pay off the debt. Given teh recent bullish views attributed to Foulger, I had hoped that the former was true, but today''s rumour about Bell makes more pessimistic and inclinded to believe the latter. Either way, not long to find out the truth.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"]has the huge USD50b hedge fund fraud scandal scuppered city''s attempts to roll over the £2.5m RBS loan due for repayment this month (i think i''m right in saying...)???

cos rbs has got its fingers burned in this fraud to the tune of several hundred billion quid...gasp,,,

doesn''t look good does it...so does this explain the bell swop speculation story???as in, wot no cash?<>


[/quote]

Firstly NCFC Plc''s £2.5m loan re the ex LSE land is with the BANK OF SCOTLAND (part of HBOS and not part of RBS!!).

Secondly RBS potential exposure is £400m.....it may be less if they recover any money. Have a look at form 6K per the link below:

http://www.investors.rbs.com/investor_relations/financial_info/EdgarSearch.cfm

Have a nice day!

 

[lucky green trainers 0]

ok guys - thanks for putting straight re the millions typo...doh///and ok - so the loan is secured with bos  [:$] who are still in for a wedge (hundereds of millions) with this scuppered hedge fund fraud - but lets be clear,,,some equity will be recovered, because a certain amount of capitial was required to keep the racket solvent - but seriously how much will be recovered???  30% at best??? and how long will it take to get back via the us courts/auditors???yonks...my point is - that there seems to be no easing of the shortage of money in the banking system,,,and therefore this must impact upon NCFC''s ability to roll the loan over - at the same rates at the very least...worse, would be the refusal to renegotiate - and doesn''t the fear of further losses in the secondary market make lenders in the primary market more cautious???and isn''t this the main reason why the primary lenders are not keen to lend to each other or to businesses and consumers anyway - uk treasury forecasts maybe 5 years of grief before banks lend freely and normally again!!!so - what''s the chance of a loss making company rolling over their loans right now in the current market???unless other collaterals are secured against it - ie director assets/their houses etc???for me - a swop deals suggests a lack of cash - and sets alarm bells ringing...which is fair comment, is it not???

[Desert Fox 0]

LGT,

I agree that any rollover would be on worse terms than at present (harsher covenants and a higher margin), but this would not be very significant given the sum is only £2.5M.

If we do not rollover, there is cash available to cover this, largely from deferred transer fees. However, if we use this source of funding it is likley to impact upon the January transer budget.

Assuming that Foulger was right about new players, if we pay for these it suggests we haev rolled the loan over. If we swap and get in free transfers only, it suggests that we have used the cash because we could not get the loan rolled over.

Failure to roll over the loan would not result in administartion, but would probably hasten our decline in terms of performance.

However, even a lack of improvement in performance might not spell doom for us becuase this league is unusually polarised this season and there are a lot of weak teams near the bottom. Given that we should expect maybe one team to incur the 10 point adminsitration hit (Southampton? Watford?) we may be safe trundling along at our current average of a point a game.

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="Desert Fox"]

LGT,

I agree that any rollover would be on worse terms than at present (harsher covenants and a higher margin), but this would not be very significant given the sum is only £2.5M.

If we do not rollover, there is cash available to cover this, largely from deferred transer fees. However, if we use this source of funding it is likley to impact upon the January transer budget.

Assuming that Foulger was right about new players, if we pay for these it suggests we haev rolled the loan over. If we swap and get in free transfers only, it suggests that we have used the cash because we could not get the loan rolled over.

Failure to roll over the loan would not result in administartion, but would probably hasten our decline in terms of performance.

However, even a lack of improvement in performance might not spell doom for us becuase this league is unusually polarised this season and there are a lot of weak teams near the bottom. Given that we should expect maybe one team to incur the 10 point adminsitration hit (Southampton? Watford?) we may be safe trundling along at our current average of a point a game.

[/quote]hope you''re right ds - come jan 31st,,,our financial posi,,,and league future should be clearer...