• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Open Letter To Ellis Short/Petition

Status
Not open for further replies.

Carteron said:
I'm no expert by all means, but he wants to sell and seemingly £50m is his price. I don't know any billionaires, but shouldn't our efforts be going into showcasing what could potentially be here. Granted we aren't going to magically get 40k there on Saturday with a white hot atmosphere driving us to a 3-0 win, but shouldn't any efforts to get public attention be focussed on showing where the club could get to with solid, sensible investment, and an ethos where we are all in it together.

How we do this I'm not sure, but there are some bright sparks on this board who must have some ideas.
Click to expand...
The issue is that if we were in the northern conference and getting 40k support week in week out Short would be happy. Our league position is the last thing he's bothered about, and the price he wants is wholly unrealistic.
 
PitYacker said:
....and the price he wants is wholly unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm assuming that once you have given him £50m then you have to take on the Drumaville (?) debt of £60m plus the SBC debt of £60m (we await current figures). the asking price should be what he paid for it ie £10m to £15m.

However we do have a number of players/assets that will be sold (Borini/Khazri/Lens et al), a whole load of players are leaving in the close season and we still have 2 to 3 tranches of the parachute money left.

What I'm not sure about is if we still own the SOL and the Academy. Anyone know?
 
If someone buys the club for £50m, does that mean that we still have the SBC loan plus an amount to repay Short? Or would the debt to him be negotiated in any likely deal?

Basically, does new ownership make much difference unless it's someone incredibly wealthy?
 
Mattyrobinson said:
If someone buys the club for £50m, does that mean that we still have the SBC loan plus an amount to repay Short? Or would the debt to him be negotiated in any likely deal?

Basically, does new ownership make much difference unless it's someone incredibly wealthy?
Click to expand...
I think the answer to that is "yes". The £50m is for him to hand all the problems over to you. He bought the club for £10m to £15m and he would sell it for £50m making a nice tidy profit for himself.
 
Father Jack Hackett said:
Whilst I signed it, I can see why some find it futile. As has been said, we can't demand a bloke sell something he wants to sell anyway. The debt will be massively off putting anyway.
Click to expand...
No one is really expecting him to sell and everything be fine, all down to one petition. But this has come across as We can't even come together as a collective group, to say we're sick and fed up and want something to change. That's all to be gained out of his, or hopefully what was to be gained imo.
 
Buchans Boots said:
I think the answer to that is "yes". The £50m is for him to hand all the problems over to you. He bought the club for £10m to £15m and he would sell it for £50m making a nice tidy profit for himself.
Click to expand...

@Grumpy Old Man might have a better idea but I think that Short took shares in the club for the Drumaville debt so if he sold for £50m that would just leave the SBC loan outstanding.

I'm no accountant though so I could be completely wrong.
 
Buchans Boots said:
I think the answer to that is "yes". The £50m is for him to hand all the problems over to you. He bought the club for £10m to £15m and he would sell it for £50m making a nice tidy profit for himself.
Click to expand...
I think a sale would be a sale of Drumaville, so new owners would buy the club and have an asset which is the loan to the club. New owners could then do what they want with that. That’s how short did it, he then effectively wrote off the loan to Drumaville, hopefully any new owners would do the same.
 
Buchans Boots said:
I think the answer to that is "yes". The £50m is for him to hand all the problems over to you. He bought the club for £10m to £15m and he would sell it for £50m making a nice tidy profit for himself.
Click to expand...

No, any purchase of the club would be done via the purchase of drumaville so there’d be no debt to short left. That is effectively within the £50m asking price
 
WHD said:
How does that effect players currently under contract? Are you saying the club will be obliged to cut their wages?
Click to expand...

I'm saying the club needs to comply with the salary cap. The club's turnover next season is likely to be in the range of £40-45m if we're relegated. That implies losing £10m from the wage bill from where we are now. Expect a ruthless purge of anyone on a big wage. The Rodwell situation will have to be resolved, finally.

Buchans Boots said:
Yes, I'm assuming that once you have given him £50m then you have to take on the Drumaville (?) debt of £60m plus the SBC debt of £60m (we await current figures). the asking price should be what he paid for it ie £10m to £15m.

However we do have a number of players/assets that will be sold (Borini/Khazri/Lens et al), a whole load of players are leaving in the close season and we still have 2 to 3 tranches of the parachute money left.

What I'm not sure about is if we still own the SOL and the Academy. Anyone know?
Click to expand...

Not if you buy the shares in Drumaville, as Short did when he bought out the Irish. In that situation the debt from Sunderland to Drumaville remains, but is now in the hands of the new owners. The SoL and AoL are assets of Sunderland Limited.

Buchans Boots said:
I think the answer to that is "yes". The £50m is for him to hand all the problems over to you. He bought the club for £10m to £15m and he would sell it for £50m making a nice tidy profit for himself.
Click to expand...

No - he'll make around a £55m loss. The figure I've heard quoted most often for his purchase price is £30m. He's capitalised £101m in debts, but £96m of them are pre-acquisition. Drumaville are currently owed £69m. 30+101-96-69=104, giving him a total invested of £104m.
 
Last edited:
Grumpy Old Man said:
I'm saying the club needs to comply with the salary cap. The club's turnover next season is likely to be in the range of £40-45m if we're relegated. That implies losing £10m from the wage bill from where we are now. Expect a ruthless purge of anyone on a big wage. The Rodwell situation will have to be resolved, finally
Click to expand...
But how can it be resolved without breaching the players contract?
 
WHD said:
So what would be the ramifications of doing that? Surely if it is an option we should be doing it now?
Click to expand...

Probably a standup fight with the PFA. Easily started by instituting disciplinary proceedings for underperformance of contract. There'd need to be some kind of payoff, obviously, just not for the full value of the contract.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Probably a standup fight with the PFA. Easily started by instituting disciplinary proceedings for underperformance of contract. There'd need to be some kind of payoff, obviously, just not for the full value of the contract.
Click to expand...
Think we should have done this as soon as he didn't leave in the transfer window.
Its costing us over £1.5m to keep paying him until the summer when as you say the situation will have to be resolved
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Probably a standup fight with the PFA. Easily started by instituting disciplinary proceedings for underperformance of contract. There'd need to be some kind of payoff, obviously, just not for the full value of the contract.
Click to expand...
Will end up going to the Court of Arbitration for Sport and they'll see 'Sunderland' and 'contract' in the title of the case and they'll go "not these f***ing idiots again" :|

Buchans Boots said:
I think the answer to that is "yes". The £50m is for him to hand all the problems over to you. He bought the club for £10m to £15m and he would sell it for £50m making a nice tidy profit for himself.
Click to expand...
The idea of Short actually making money out of us boggles the mind.

If he walks away in the end having actually earned any money at all then he legitimately is one of the greatest business men of all time.
 
Buchans Boots said:
I think the answer to that is "yes". The £50m is for him to hand all the problems over to you. He bought the club for £10m to £15m and he would sell it for £50m making a nice tidy profit for himself.
Click to expand...
Is that right, surely not? I genuinely don't know mind, but how can he make money after subsidise our losses for so long?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top