Registration of Charge

[grobyfox1990]

50 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

I'd say the rate on interest reflects the risk, so they don't view it as high risk.

 

 What recent PL teams have been in trouble, especially with parachute payments?

Good point. Especially re parachute payments. And I guess given the low rate the borrowing amount isn’t that high 

[st albans fox]

It would appear that we register charges against the club every summer and every winter - basically borrowing against future income to provide cashflow. We then satisfy those charges within the next year or so as we receive monies from the PL and pay back the loans against which the charges are security. 
 

I don’t see why this charge should be seen as anything different or with any significance. 

[Tommy G]

This is completely normal course of business practice

[Lambert09]

3 hours ago, EnderbyFox said:

Am I right in thinking we took out a similar loan when Man City paid installments for Mahrez? We got instant access to cash & Man City paid the installments to Macquarie instead?

yep, we got a loan with the future mahrez payments as the collateral so we could use it now.  

 

Perhaps they are planning to spend the fofana money before he leaves 🤔

[Incognito]

Yup, entirely standard practice within the Premier League now.

 

I read a fascinating interview (if you're into that kind of thing) with Bruce Buck, the former Chelsea chairman under Abramovich. He talked about how Chelsea had debt despite the owners billions. There was a lot more detail and reasoning, but it was purely for cash flow. 

[Bayfox]

3 hours ago, EnderbyFox said:

Am I right in thinking we took out a similar loan when Man City paid installments for Mahrez? We got instant access to cash & Man City paid the installments to Macquarie instead?

Not sure if they paid it direct. But yes the money for the training ground was mortgaged against future TV income and rhe fact they knew we had a 30 million lump sum coming in for Mahrez as it was paid in 2 installments. This was confirmed at one of the FCC when they announced the training ground the morning after we had been given a sneak preview of the slides and drawings etc.

[chuck'em]

3 hours ago, taupe said:

Neither a lender nor borrower be.... so someone or other said.

- Mark Corrigan

[sylofox]

4 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

Confirmed.

 

Charge code0459 3477 0023

Is that your premium rate slut line number?

Edited 17 August 2022 by sylofox

[taupe]

4 minutes ago, chuck'em said:

- Mark Corrigan

What? The brother of Katherine, a girl in my class at school? I never heard him say it but it's possible I guess. My brother knew him better than me so I could ask him. He'd probably wonder wtf I was on about though.

[mozartfox]

This is very exciting news indeed.   Bednarek incoming and contract extensions for Vesty and Bertrand. This Window is really starting to take shape.  
 

 

 

[MPH]

8 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

This is very exciting news indeed.   Bednarek incoming and contract extensions for Vesty and Bertrand. This Window is really starting to take shape.  
 

 

 

 

it’s been pear shaped for a while now!

[Terraloon]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

It would appear that we register charges against the club every summer and every winter - basically borrowing against future income to provide cashflow. We then satisfy those charges within the next year or so as we receive monies from the PL and pay back the loans against which the charges are security. 
 

I don’t see why this charge should be seen as anything different or with any significance. 

It actually is. 
 

The facility with Mcquarie has jumped from £52.5 million to £80 million but strangely the charge is registered against central TV monies for the period February 2024- July 25 there is another charge that runs from Feb 2022 to June 23.

 

As has been stated quite a few clubs borrow against future TV monies its a bit like ST money but if that was all that was borrowed no one would blink but. A few clubs borrow against transfer income and yes Leicester do but what we also know is the in the trading year 20/21 AS had to loan the club another £30 million, another £42.5 million was loaned by King Power and a further £35 million standby facility was put in place.

 

 

[Terraloon]

54 minutes ago, Bayfox said:

Not sure if they paid it direct. But yes the money for the training ground was mortgaged against future TV income and rhe fact they knew we had a 30 million lump sum coming in for Mahrez as it was paid in 2 installments. This was confirmed at one of the FCC when they announced the training ground the morning after we had been given a sneak preview of the slides and drawings etc.

Yep there were two  further annual payments of £17 million due from Man City. It’s very difficult to see exactly how much Macquarie advanced but if the £30 million figure you quote is correct and £34 million was due that potentially could mean that £4 would be the price paid to get hands on the cash in advance. 

[st albans fox]

17 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

It actually is. 
 

The facility with Mcquarie has jumped from £52.5 million to £80 million but strangely the charge is registered against central TV monies for the period February 2024- July 25 there is another charge that runs from Feb 2022 to June 23.

 

As has been stated quite a few clubs borrow against future TV monies its a bit like ST money but if that was all that was borrowed no one would blink but. A few clubs borrow against transfer income and yes Leicester do but what we also know is the in the trading year 20/21 AS had to loan the club another £30 million, another £42.5 million was loaned by King Power and a further £35 million standby facility was put in place.

 

 

The detail of the charge has only been put up in the past hour or so 

 

there are a number of charges still o/s 

 

where is the amount covered by the charge detailed?  
 

 

[Staff]

39 minutes ago, taupe said:

What? The brother of Katherine, a girl in my class at school? I never heard him say it but it's possible I guess. My brother knew him better than me so I could ask him. He'd probably wonder wtf I was on about though.

Nah, he's roommates with Jez

[Terraloon]

19 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The detail of the charge has only been put up in the past hour or so 

 

there are a number of charges still o/s 

 

where is the amount covered by the charge detailed?  
 

 

They are detailed in the 2021 accounts

[Ginger_Filbert]

1 hour ago, Bayfox said:

Not sure if they paid it direct. But yes the money for the training ground was mortgaged against future TV income and rhe fact they knew we had a 30 million lump sum coming in for Mahrez as it was paid in 2 installments. This was confirmed at one of the FCC when they announced the training ground the morning after we had been given a sneak preview of the slides and drawings etc.

Have we already paid off what we owed for the training ground?

[Terraloon]

15 minutes ago, Ginger_Filbert said:

Have we already paid off what we owed for the training ground?

Again reference to the accounts points out that on completion of Seagrave interest on the property related debt is now being expensed suggests and that a further £20+ million was borrowed suggests there is still quite a debt related to the TG

[stu]

 

[VLC86]

“Hi Macky, so yeah- that £10m we owe you this month…. I’ve got something you might like

 

hey come back, it’s a lovely coat wrack” 

 

 

[Ric Flair]

Not so sure other PL clubs have these with the quite the same frequency that we are doing. 

[moore_94]

2 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Not so sure other PL clubs have these with the quite the same frequency that we are doing. 

Wolves have used them a fair bit as well I believe

 

Other clubs will take "loans" from their owners and through other means

Edited 17 August 2022 by moore_94

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Not so sure other PL clubs have these with the quite the same frequency that we are doing. 

I looked at West Ham earlier and they have in the past (not as much as us) but seem to have satisfied pretty much all of them (and they now have a new investor ) 

[Ian Nacho]

Pretty risky thing to do imo. If we ever do go down and do not receive any parachute payments, we’d struggle to come back up. 

[moore_94]

1 minute ago, Ian Nacho said:

Pretty risky thing to do imo. If we ever do go down and do not receive any parachute payments, we’d struggle to come back up. 

Realistically if we did go down the amount we could get from selling our players would be more than enough to get a squad good enough to come straight back up