Companies House - Registration of charge

[AjcW]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

The loans are secured. Against the  said income. Like the hermansen payemnets for example, I have understood it that the payments won’t come to us, they will  go straight to  Macquarie. So there can be no late or missing payements. 

That applies to the transfer ones, yes.

 

The problem is the 3 that we currently have secured against future TV revenue/parachute payments.

 

If we don't get promoted, then every penny of parachute payments goes straight to the vampires and still wont cover everything, so interest will go up on remaining payments.

 

If we don't get promoted with the time frame that parachutes run out then **** knows what happens... probably secure it against other assets!

[Sol thewall Bamba]

10 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

The loans are secured. Against the  said income. Like the hermansen payemnets for example, I have understood it that the payments won’t come to us, they will  go straight to  Macquarie. So there can be no late or missing payements. 

What about the ones that aren't tied to guaranteed transfer payments?

[MPH]

19 minutes ago, AjcW said:

That applies to the transfer ones, yes.

 

The problem is the 3 that we currently have secured against future TV revenue/parachute payments.

 

If we don't get promoted, then every penny of parachute payments goes straight to the vampires and still wont cover everything, so interest will go up on remaining payments.

 

If we don't get promoted with the time frame that parachutes run out then **** knows what happens... probably secure it against other assets!

 

11 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

What about the ones that aren't tied to guaranteed transfer payments?

 

wouldn't it be the same principle? That the  money will go directly to Macquarie? They’ll give  the premier league or whoever a document signed by both parties showing where the payments need to go?  
 

if you have literally hundreds of millions to begin with to make these kind of loans, then surely you take care of all legal concerns like this?

Edited 6 November 2025 by MPH

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

 

wouldn't it be the same principle? That the  money will go directly to Macquarie? They’ll give  the premier league or whoever a document signed by both parties showing where the payments need to go?  
 

if you have literally hundreds of millions to begin with to make these kind of loans, then surely you take care of all legal concerns like this?

A bunch of those loans were secured against future premier league TV money.

 

Now I don't know about the intricacies of these things but I think it's unlikely that we'll receive TV royalties for a league that we're not in, but I could be wrong!

[ian__marshall]

The other question of course is where will the money come from to service the cost of these loans. I can't imagine the rates are cheap, and the consolidated balance must be pretty high. 

[MPH]

20 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

A bunch of those loans were secured against future premier league TV money.

 

Now I don't know about the intricacies of these things but I think it's unlikely that we'll receive TV royalties for a league that we're not in, but I could be wrong!

 

parachute payements?

[Sol thewall Bamba]

2 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

parachute payements?

Which are at best 55% of the money we've borrowed and at worst 20%. That's a significant gap.

[MPH]

Just now, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Which are at best 55% of the money we've borrowed and at worst 20%. That's a significant gap.

 

 

If I’m not mistaken, revenue is then secured against championship tv money and sponsorship and potential player sales. That’s going to be a lot slower coming in, but it could also explain our player sales and subsequent lack of investment in the playing side.its going to  be a slower return of funds for the bank but they have to expect some caveat with these multi million pound secured loans..

[AjcW]

@MPH I think the point that myself and Sol are trying to make is that in our current situation.... this is not a good thing. 

Every penny we make will be servicing these facilities.

[MPH]

23 minutes ago, AjcW said:

@MPH I think the point that myself and Sol are trying to make is that in our current situation.... this is not a good thing. 

Every penny we make will be servicing these facilities.

 

agreed. We are in a mess and we only have ourselves to blame for  being a part of it. I’d liken it to some kind of vulnerable person being taken advantage of by a loan shark but we were not a vulnerable person- we got ahead of ourselves and perhaps got a bit too hungry for continued success…

[Sol thewall Bamba]

37 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

If I’m not mistaken, revenue is then secured against championship tv money and sponsorship and potential player sales. That’s going to be a lot slower coming in, but it could also explain our player sales and subsequent lack of investment in the playing side.its going to  be a slower return of funds for the bank but they have to expect some caveat with these multi million pound secured loans..

Yeah that's kind of the point I'm making. Because of the loans King Power have taken out on our behalf we'll have to sell what few assets we have and pay sponsorship money directly to the bank to pay them off, if we stay in this league.

[Stadt]

We could afford to be so frivolous, even now to a degree (!), if we managed to shift players instead of letting their contracts run down.

 

Rudkin has a unique ability to overpay on transfer fees and wages on shit players, they turn out to be shit and then overvalues them, walks away from deals, there aren't forthcoming offers due to said wages, we loan players out with options that aren't exercised and then we pay most of their wages... only to leave on a free.

 

Our business model is essentially sell good players to fund the runaway wage budget spent on dross we can't or won't sell. Eventually we'll run out of the family silver through the 1 in 4 or 5 good players we buy, plus the academy pipeline won't always reliably produce. All of this is secured against TV revenue of a league we won't return to whilst Top and Rudkin are at the club.

Edited 6 November 2025 by Stadt

[The Year Of The Fox]

1 hour ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

A bunch of those loans were secured against future premier league TV money.

 

Now I don't know about the intricacies of these things but I think it's unlikely that we'll receive TV royalties for a league that we're not in, but I could be wrong!

A mate of mine was harping on about this being a regularly used thing in the PL, pointing out he’d told me of one other club who also does this

 

He went very quiet when I asked him which league they were playing in

[Wsl]

On 12/08/2020 at 19:28, Babylon said:

Who claimed Kingpower lent the money, they haven't put their own cash in for a long time. Technically anything the club makes is there's, so technically they have. But outside source money they haven't. 

 

This lot are known as the vampire bank... bloody suckers!

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jul/28/vampire-kangaroo-macquarie-boss-defends-management-of-debt-ridden-thames-water

 

The vampire kangaroo....

[AjcW]

7 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

A mate of mine was harping on about this being a regularly used thing in the PL, pointing out he’d told me of one other club who also does this

 

He went very quiet when I asked him which league they were playing in

Was about to say this also. There’s two or three teams in the prem that have done similar. But no one with the Vampire Kangaroos. I think Burnley have something but it’s with Barclays 

[cropstonfox]

12 minutes ago, Stadt said:

We could afford to be so frivolous, even now to a degree (!) if we managed to shift players instead of letting them run their contracts down.

 

Rudkin has a unique ability to overplay on transfer fees and wages on shit players, they turn out to be shit and then he overvalues them, walks away from deals, there aren't many forthcoming offers due to the said wages, we loan players out with options that aren't exercised then we pay most of their wages... only to leave on a free.

 

Our business model is essentially sell good players to fund the runway wage budget spent on shit players we can't or won't sell. Eventually we'll run out of the family silver through the 1 in 4 or 5 good players we buy, plus the academy pipeline won't always reliably produce. All of this is secured against TV revenue of a league we won't return to whilst Top and Rudkin are at the club.

All True,but quite depressing.Whats the solution?

[Lambert09]

1 hour ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

A bunch of those loans were secured against future premier league TV money.

 

Now I don't know about the intricacies of these things but I think it's unlikely that we'll receive TV royalties for a league that we're not in, but I could be wrong!

Am I wrong or Essentially, is it  like having a loan secured against your house. It’s a security for the bank, so as long as we pay what we owe, it’s irrelevant.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

4 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

Am I wrong or Essentially, is it  like having a loan secured against your house. It’s a security for the bank, so as long as we pay what we owe, it’s irrelevant.

But in that analogy we've taken a big old salary cut.

[Gamble92]

Remember when I said I was worried about the loans on here in 2020 and so many of you told me I knew nothing and the owners always pump so much money in. They'd never do anything to harm us. How dare I be so ungrateful. 

[Stadt]

35 minutes ago, cropstonfox said:

All True,but quite depressing.Whats the solution?

Protesting to force a sale 

[RonnieTodger]

It’s things like this that the Facebook army are so blissfully unaware of.

[Stadt]

7 minutes ago, RonnieTodger said:

It’s things like this that the Facebook army are so blissfully unaware of.

Careful what you wish for like Mike Ashley running the club in a stable manner! 

[The Year Of The Fox]

1 hour ago, Lambert09 said:

Am I wrong or Essentially, is it  like having a loan secured against your house. It’s a security for the bank, so as long as we pay what we owe, it’s irrelevant.

A mortgage based on the well paid job you don’t actually have 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

36 minutes ago, RonnieTodger said:

It’s things like this that the Facebook army are so blissfully unaware of.

Yeah but debt to equity conversion!

[Tommy G]

Will probably end up having to refinance the loans - presume they are under some kind of financial covenant reporting too. Be interesting to read any going concern comments from the auditors this year.