Club Finances - new charge registered against club (Macquaire Bank Limited)

[Blue-fox]

Even if we did go down, majority of the fans would still go anyway even when we only have a squad of under 18s travelling to Blackpool on a Tuesday night. 

[Kopfkino]

The other charge that has been registered is probably of more interest..

[AjcW]

This is the sort of thread that shouldn’t really exist on here.

 

I mean this in the politest way possible but the people freaking out over it have absolutely no knowledge of financing and the poor sods trying to explain it in simple terms are shouting into a void  

 

 

[AjcW]

13 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

The other charge that has been registered is probably of more interest..

Shhhhhh don’t poke the hornets nest  

[The whole world smiles]

1 minute ago, AjcW said:

This is the sort of thread that shouldn’t really exist on here.

 

I mean this in the politest way possible but the people freaking out over it have absolutely no knowledge of financing and the poor sods trying to explain it in simple terms are shouting into a void  

 

 

Translation: some of you are thick as shit! 

[moore_94]

45 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

The other charge that has been registered is probably of more interest..

Tried to read it, not a clue what it means  (if I read the one you mean)

[Clever Fox]

29 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

Tried to read it, not a clue what it means  (if I read the one you mean)

It basically just means the Company is taking a loan out against the future payments from the premier league even if we were to be relegated up to and until 2025.

This as I understand it means that the football side of the Business will continue without the burden of trying to pay for the KP or Seagrave while also trying to buy players to improve the Team.

It's unlikely to be costing us anything upfront either as these are often endgame contracts.

Lets say we're due 100 million from the premier league at the end of the season. Then the Club could agree to accept say 90 million at the start of the season, Then hand over the 100 million at the end of the season.

This way the club gets to use the money early. In our case it seems to pay of the Balance of Seagrave or more likely the redevelopment of the KP. Which in turn will bring in increased revenue from Match day receipts.

This is quite common in business where companies often raise loans against future profits using previous years profits as a guide to how much they can borrow.

In our case it all looks very good for the future given the short term nature of the loans.

This has the potential to really cement our position in the top 4 permanently from 2025 onwards.

Exciting times to be a Fan.  

[Babylon]

8 hours ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

I know. Every year some donut makes out like we've not got a pot to piss whilst we buy a new training ground, extend the stadium and spend 60m.

We’ve borrowed money to do all those things, and made large losses even without doing those things. We’ve had to do something the owners hadn’t shown appetite for a good while after promotion and that was invest beyond our means. 
 

I think everyone knew that option was there, the question was did they want to do it. Because, at the end of the day they need to cover us should things go south. 
 

So we’ve pissed in someone else’s pot. 

[moore_94]

7 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

It basically just means the Company is taking a loan out against the future payments from the premier league even if we were to be relegated up to and until 2025.

This as I understand it means that the football side of the Business will continue without the burden of trying to pay for the KP or Seagrave while also trying to buy players to improve the Team.

It's unlikely to be costing us anything upfront either as these are often endgame contracts.

Lets say we're due 100 million from the premier league at the end of the season. Then the Club could agree to accept say 90 million at the start of the season, Then hand over the 100 million at the end of the season.

This way the club gets to use the money early. In our case it seems to pay of the Balance of Seagrave or more likely the redevelopment of the KP. Which in turn will bring in increased revenue from Match day receipts.

This is quite common in business where companies often raise loans against future profits using previous years profits as a guide to how much they can borrow.

In our case it all looks very good for the future given the short term nature of the loans.

This has the potential to really cement our position in the top 4 permanently from 2025 onwards.

Exciting times to be a Fan.  

Yeah I am fine with that one, the one I was unsure on is that there has actually been another charge posted on the Company House regarding a mortgage of our estates and some stuff regarding intellectual property

[Kopfkino]

8 hours ago, moore_94 said:

Tried to read it, not a clue what it means  (if I read the one you mean)

I don’t understand the IP bit cos I’m not sure how we use our IP and what the value is in it.

But otherwise we’ve basically mortgaged all the property we own so the training ground, stadium, belvoir drive and anything else

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

I don’t understand the IP bit cos I’m not sure how we use our IP and what the value is in it.

It's a hold against our name, our badge, website etc. Essentially our brand.

 

A bit like how Mike Ashley goes around buying up brands when they go bust as the name, logo etc all hold intrinsic value. 

Edited 7 September 2021 by Babylon

[ian__marshall]

What's all this nonsense about being in financial difficulty if we get relegated?!? We're hardly going to lineup in the championship with the players we have currently, and the sale of these will easily clear the debt.

 

Furthermore, assuming we did get relegated and for whatever reason were unable to offload any player's (hence not reducing the debt), we'd be nailed on favourites to bounce straight back with this squad the following season (even our second string would be favourites to land a top 2 spot) so the club would only have to service the loan payments for a year. 

[Ric Flair]

3 hours ago, Babylon said:

We’ve borrowed money to do all those things, and made large losses even without doing those things. We’ve had to do something the owners hadn’t shown appetite for a good while after promotion and that was invest beyond our means. 
 

I think everyone knew that option was there, the question was did they want to do it. Because, at the end of the day they need to cover us should things go south. 
 

So we’ve pissed in someone else’s pot. 

It just shows how obscene it is trying to do what we've done. Many clubs try this and have the square root of fcuk all to show for it. We've managed a Prem title, a QF CL run, an FA Cup, x 2 5th place finishes and 2 EL campaigns. Its unbelievable. 

 

I'm fascinated to see what the long term plan is, the simple economics are that without huge increases to commercial revenue, an even bigger expansion to our stadium than what we have planned or CL qualification every season then we will continue to make huge losses. 

 

It's why we have done so so well to cash in on our star players and is what has allowed to us to break free to be the best of the rest and better than some of the big 6 too. People might argue with that statement but not many clubs of our ilk are raising £50-100m a season from selling a player they can afford to let go and then recruit as well (for the most part) as we do. That's how we've done this, but it took the PL win I suppose to give us the platform to do so where every man and his dog wanted to take what we had and we've managed to be reimbursed immensely. 

 

It's all well and good us not selling anyone this summer but if Tielemans, Soyuncu and Ricardo refuse new contracts this season then it's a risk that we don't want to be getting in to, that's what Arsenal and Tottenham have done in recent years and not only lost out on huge money but the players motivation also nose dived and together has caused them to bomb.

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

It just shows how obscene it is trying to do what we've done. Many clubs try this and have the square root of fcuk all to show for it. We've managed a Prem title, a QF CL run, an FA Cup, x 2 5th place finishes and 2 EL campaigns. Its unbelievable. 

 

I'm fascinated to see what the long term plan is, the simple economics are that without huge increases to commercial revenue, an even bigger expansion to our stadium than what we have planned or CL qualification every season then we will continue to make huge losses. 

 

It's why we have done so so well to cash in on our star players and is what has allowed to us to break free to be the best of the rest and better than some of the big 6 too. People might argue with that statement but not many clubs of our ilk are raising £50-100m a season from selling a player they can afford to let go and then recruit as well (for the most part) as we do. That's how we've done this, but it took the PL win I suppose to give us the platform to do so where every man and his dog wanted to take what we had and we've managed to be reimbursed immensely. 

 

It's all well and good us not selling anyone this summer but if Tielemans, Soyuncu and Ricardo refuse new contracts this season then it's a risk that we don't want to be getting in to, that's what Arsenal and Tottenham have done in recent years and not only lost out on huge money but the players motivation also nose dived and together has caused them to bomb.

I think once the ground is done, then we're set for a period of consolidation to pay for it all. I can't see the plan changing too much, invest in young talent and sell them on. The ground increase starts to make it easier to keep players and offer bigger wages etc. It will be just a bigger version of what we're doing now I suppose. 

 

It's a dangerous plan, a bad few signings and you're in the muck. 

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I think once the ground is done, then we're set for a period of consolidation to pay for it all. I can't see the plan changing too much, invest in young talent and sell them on. The ground increase starts to make it easier to keep players and offer bigger wages etc. It will be just a bigger version of what we're doing now I suppose. 

 

It's a dangerous plan, a bad few signings and you're in the muck. 

Yeah, we're surely looking at the stadium expansion costing what the training ground did so we are having to pay off £200m in the next however many years. Unless we pay for it off over about 20 years then that has to have an impact on our cash flows. The juggling act though is if we consolidate too much then we risk falling behind and perhaps never catching back up. This club has been the bollocls for so long now that I'm not so sure those associated with it, nevermind the fans could handle us not being the centre of attention and poster boy of English football.

[coolhandfox]

10 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I think once the ground is done, then we're set for a period of consolidation to pay for it all. I can't see the plan changing too much, invest in young talent and sell them on. The ground increase starts to make it easier to keep players and offer bigger wages etc. It will be just a bigger version of what we're doing now I suppose. 

 

It's a dangerous plan, a bad few signings and you're in the muck. 

I'd chuck in losing the current manager into that, no guarantee we get someone as capable.

 

What give me some comfort is we are investing in long term infrastructure improvements, not chucking it all at the playing squad. 

 

12 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Yeah, we're surely looking at the stadium expansion costing what the training ground did so we are having to pay off £200m in the next however many years. Unless we pay for it off over about 20 years then that has to have an impact on our cash flows. The juggling act though is if we consolidate too much then we risk falling behind and perhaps never catching back up. This club has been the bollocls for so long now that I'm not so sure those associated with it, nevermind the fans could handle us not being the centre of attention and poster boy of English football.

People are very blasé about where we are at the moment, could easily change over night, lot of examples since the start of the PL Newcastle, Leeds, Blackburn.    

 

[Clever Fox]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

Yeah I am fine with that one, the one I was unsure on is that there has actually been another charge posted on the Company House regarding a mortgage of our estates and some stuff regarding intellectual property

We know the Banks always like to cover their Ass. The Mortgage is just further assurances for the Banks that the money will be repaid if anything happened to the premier league money not being made available.

The Premier league is a 3rd party in this agreement but the Bank are lending the money to the Club, So want a guarantee from the Club. i hope that makes sense.

Not sure on the intellectual property, but again I assume it's just the Bank covering all bases.

 

We just need to keep the Football side of things steady for the next 4 years then things can really take off.

Our Susan is one smart Lady when it comes to finances.

[Babylon]

32 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

I'd chuck in losing the current manager into that, no guarantee we get someone as capable.

 

What give me some comfort is we are investing in long term infrastructure improvements, not chucking it all at the playing squad. 

 

People are very blasé about where we are at the moment, could easily change over night, lot of examples since the start of the PL Newcastle, Leeds, Blackburn.    

 

100%, I'm sure they are pragmatic enough to know there will be ups and downs along the way. But if you believe in your strategy, and let's face it they've got no reason to not. They'll stick to it and hopefully come out the other side again. 

[coolhandfox]

11 minutes ago, Babylon said:

100%, I'm sure they are pragmatic enough to know there will be ups and downs along the way. But if you believe in your strategy, and let's face it they've got no reason to not. They'll stick to it and hopefully come out the other side again. 

Yes, its about getting more right then you get wrong, I think we learnt a massive amount from the awful 2016/2017 transfer window. We got burnt badly on buying players in their late 20's for big money

[davieG]

55 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

I'd chuck in losing the current manager into that, no guarantee we get someone as capable.

 

What give me some comfort is we are investing in long term infrastructure improvements, not chucking it all at the playing squad. 

 

People are very blasé about where we are at the moment, could easily change over night, lot of examples since the start of the PL Newcastle, Leeds, Blackburn.    

 

Portsmouth are the best example of how it can all go wrong if you're mis-managed

 

Top tier 2003-10

FA Cup winners 2007-08

UEFA -  2008-09

FA Cup Finalist 2009-10

Relegated 2010

Between 2010-13 Entered Admin and relegated 3 times

Nearly Liquidated in 2013 but saved by the Portsmouth Trust

Sold by the Trust to an Investment Co. 2017

Now reside in League 1

 

Can't see our owners doing this.

 

 

 

 

[Fox in the North]

55 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

I'd chuck in losing the current manager into that, no guarantee we get someone as capable.

 

What give me some comfort is we are investing in long term infrastructure improvements, not chucking it all at the playing squad. 

 

People are very blasé about where we are at the moment, could easily change over night, lot of examples since the start of the PL Newcastle, Leeds, Blackburn.    

 

Just look at Bournemouth, they had 5 relatively solid seasons but have nothing to show for it because they just spent it all on playing staff (admittedly trying to stay up). I’m just glad we got one big infrastructure project done.

[Lesta2014]

Hopefully the world class facilities at the training ground help bring through more youngsters and quicker, could save us plenty in the market and make us money long term. I reckon that will be in the plan anyway. 

[Spudulike]

41 minutes ago, Fox in the North said:

Just look at Bournemouth, they had 5 relatively solid seasons but have nothing to show for it because they just spent it all on playing staff (admittedly trying to stay up). I’m just glad we got one big infrastructure project done.

Future generations will look back on our golden era and be able to identify the key moments that established our club in the upper echelons. Many clubs have passed through the Premier League ranks (50 so far) without anything to show for it (Bournemouth is a good example you highlight). We could've been another but now have an honours board that we are not embarrassed about and infrastructure (when complete) the envy of most. 

 

A quick delve into Of Fossils & Foxes records the clubs attempt the build a new double-decker stand alongside the pitch in the 1930's. It never happened due to finance but you can only wonder how that would've raised the clubs status for decades. 

 

Whatever happens in the future our golden era has already given us a legacy for all to see with more to come. The club has changed and we've been lucky to see it happen. 

[sacreblueits442]

1 hour ago, coolhandfox said:

I'd chuck in losing the current manager into that, no guarantee we get someone as capable.

 

What give me some comfort is we are investing in long term infrastructure improvements, not chucking it all at the playing squad. 

 

People are very blasé about where we are at the moment, could easily change over night, lot of examples since the start of the PL Newcastle, Leeds, Blackburn.    

 

.....just considering myself to be fortunate to be in this position, I suppose it could easily have been some other club that the owners chose to invest in!!!

Blackburn were bankrolled by Sir Jack and was not a sustainable way of running a club, Newcastle has Ashley (what more can you say) there are no other owners such as him out there who considers his club his own kingdom. His unwillingness to invest and attitude to supporters and managers does not foster a team who can raise itself from the sick bed he has created.

  Leeds gambled with potential income and could be seen as very much what we are doing at this moment and as they failed to achieve their goals the rug was pulled out from under them.

  There is no reason Newcastle with a new investor cannot challenge in this league further down the line and Leeds could actually become a force again. Blackburn however I do not see getting anywhere near the heady heights they had previously reached.

  If it all goes wrong, there is usually a way back.

[coolhandfox]

12 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

.....just considering myself to be fortunate to be in this position, I suppose it could easily have been some other club that the owners chose to invest in!!!

Blackburn were bankrolled by Sir Jack and was not a sustainable way of running a club, Newcastle has Ashley (what more can you say) there are no other owners such as him out there who considers his club his own kingdom. His unwillingness to invest and attitude to supporters and managers does not foster a team who can raise itself from the sick bed he has created.

  Leeds gambled with potential income and could be seen as very much what we are doing at this moment and as they failed to achieve their goals the rug was pulled out from under them.

  There is no reason Newcastle with a new investor cannot challenge in this league further down the line and Leeds could actually become a force again. Blackburn however I do not see getting anywhere near the heady heights they had previously reached.

  If it all goes wrong, there is usually a way back.

True but I really live without a return to the 2004-2007 season. 

 

I'd be still going down if we were in L1 or L2 etc.