Takeover in trouble

[KittenMittens]

Just in the interest of transparency, what were your claims to inside knowledge when the club was being sold by Short? Was it a party in Donald's consortium you were linked to or another consortium altogether?

Sure it was spanish investors

It was a party of Spanish investors, who were to come on board alongside Donald as majority shareholders. He made that deal too difficult (which I now think was motivated by the fact he could see a pathway to getting the club to pay for itself and negating the need for him to find a big up-front payment) and they pulled out, leaving SD as the main man, which he was never brought on to be.

Essentially, I think once he and Short worked out that part, they have understood that Short can pocket £30m+ in club money that he wouldn't have gotten much of otherwise, and SD has figured that if he flips the club within 12-18 months, he'll also make about £25-30m.

 

[Lewberry pie]

Have you taken the time to look into it?

He literally loaned Madrox (himself effectively) £9.6m to pay off his own debt to Short, then Short reduced that debt to £7m. As yet, we know nothing about the terms of that loan, any repayment schedule, or what happened to the £2.6m extra. If you think this is normal and we should just shut up and tow the line, you're going to be in for a rude awakening one day.

And I have some magic beans for you.

That's a fairly common thing to loan money between your business, @Grumpy Old Man could perhaps conform this?

And if like you say we actually don't know the terms or anything in relation to repayment, assuming it won't just sit their as a debt from one business to another I don't know why you appear to be making only negative assumptions about it.

 

[Alma]

Profit they made by paying for the club with it's own money, then borrowing on behalf of the club's assets and loaning £10m to themselves, some of which is completely unaccounted for? And also setting up the loanee company so that we likely will never see the details of where SAFC's money actually went?

Alma, all I'm saying is please get a job at HMRC and audit my company accounts.



I'll give you a clue. It rhymes with 'scarachute blayments'.

I know nothing of accounting, that's why I never attempt to go into any detail so I am not sure why did you mention that? Could it be that you are using my comment to fit your agenda.
I am too long in the tooth to be conned by anyone but I have followed with interest the podcasts, statements and reports detailing the owners plans and I really don't see anything that surprises me. I have also read some of the rubbish posted on here where fiction becomes fact within a couple of posts so excuse me if I am selective who I believe and who I know to be spouting shite.

 

[KittenMittens]

That's a fairly common thing to loan money between your business, @Grumpy Old Man could perhaps conform this?

And if like you say we actually don't know the terms or anything in relation to repayment, assuming it won't just sit their as a debt from one business to another I don't know why you appear to be making only negative assumptions about it.

Why do you assume this? The loaner and loanee are the same person. What kind of terms do you think that he gave himself? Draconian

 

[Macho]

I heard as far back as January from 2 players that if we didn’t go up we were “fucked” financially wise, all this call for investors and saying it’s only for the long term incase we go up I think is a load of bollocks tbh, we’ve not long ago listened to SD and CM on the latest podcast and say the finances are better than we thought they would be and they can keep whatever players we want as we can afford them, well it’s pretty clear that we obviously can’t as we are letting players go without even having a replacement ready, pretty obvious we need the high earners to be gone so the finances can’t be as great as they are making out! SD has came off Twitter as he knows what backlash he’ll get with Cattermole gone and potentially others to follow with only 1 in at the start of pre season training, how about SAFC getting ahead of the game and bringing players in before pre season training instead of rushing and panic buying! Seems to me we have no forward thinking plan and we’ll just go along and see where it takes us like last season

I heard they never had any money and running into financial difficulties was inevitable with only those at the helm.

 

[Lewberry pie]

Why do you assume this? The loaner and loanee are the same person. What kind of terms do you think that he gave himself? Draconian

I didn't assume it I said assuming to give context of some kind of guess, why are you actually assuming that it is only a negative? Are you an accountant familiar with football clubs and large umbrella companies? What do you know that would give you sick a negative impression?

 

[KittenMittens]

That's a fairly common thing to loan money between your business, @Grumpy Old Man could perhaps conform this?

And if like you say we actually don't know the terms or anything in relation to repayment, assuming it won't just sit their as a debt from one business to another I don't know why you appear to be making only negative assumptions about it.

If I loaned myself a substantial sum (around half of our yearly revenue) and offered no timescale for repayment, you'd better believe my board would be very sceptical of my motives.

 

[Macho]

SD has figured that if he flips the club within 12-18 months, he'll also make about £25-30m.

Bingo, he wasn't gutted for the club because we lost out on promotion, he was heartbroken at the fact this is in danger.

 

[West_Winger]

If I loaned myself a substantial sum (around half of our yearly revenue) and offered no timescale for repayment, you'd better believe my board would be very sceptical of my motives.

Except he’s the majority shareholder so he can do as he pleases.

 

[Lewberry pie]

If I loaned myself a substantial sum (around half of our yearly revenue) and offered no timescale for repayment, you'd better believe my board would be very sceptical of my motives.

He owns both companies, he has literally just moved some money from one company to another.

 

[KittenMittens]

I didn't assume it I said assuming to give context of some kind of guess, why are you actually assuming that it is only a negative? Are you an accountant familiar with football clubs and large umbrella companies? What do you know that would give you sick a negative impression?

I own my own company and have been through investment with mutiple parties. I know how a lot of this works on a practical level, and it's the total lack of transparency and oversight that concerns me. Loaning yourself that amount, via a company that will not publish detailed accounts, is a red flag. I'm not going to say what GOM says, which is to wait for their explanation, because until these two get pushed, they don't answer, and even when they do, it's usually in vagaries and literal terms.

For example, if SD tells us 'it definitely wasn't £32m, absolutely 100% not that', I will assume it could be anything up to £31,999,999.99p because that is how he works. We know that amount was at least £25m, he has said that. What he has been careful not to class in the same deal is that he then loaned himself another £9.6m to pay the balance he owed Short for his shares, £2.6m of which was later waived. That amount is still outstanding according to SD and CM a month ago.

 

[Lewberry pie]

I heard they never had any money and running into financial difficulties was inevitable with only those at the helm.

So when he had to show the fa that he had 50 million in liquid funds, what was that?

 

[KittenMittens]

Except he’s the majority shareholder so he can do as he pleases.

So am I. You think I can funnel money between the businesses without attracting concern? Fuck the legalities man, you are making excuses for the bloke using SAFC's cash to pay HIS debt.

So when he had to show the fa that he had 50 million in liquid funds, what was that?

I believe now from their words and characterisation that they showed proof of funds of £20m only.

 

[Secret Visage]

So when he had to show the fa that he had 50 million in liquid funds, what was that?

Magic beans?

 

[Lewberry pie]

I own my own company and have been through investment with mutiple parties. I know how a lot of this works on a practical level, and it's the total lack of transparency and oversight that concerns me. Loaning yourself that amount, via a company that will not publish detailed accounts, is a red flag. I'm not going to say what GOM says, which is to wait for their explanation, because until these two get pushed, they don't answer, and even when they do, it's usually in vagaries and literal terms.

For example, if SD tells us 'it definitely wasn't £32m, absolutely 100% not that', I will assume it could be anything up to £31,999,999.99p because that is how he works. We know that amount was at least £25m, he has said that. What he has been careful not to class in the same deal is that he then loaned himself another £9.6m to pay the balance he owed Short for his shares, £2.6m of which was later waived. That amount is still outstanding according to SD and CM a month ago.

That loan was related to money owed to inter Milan iirc, he openly discussed this and this is why Ellis waived some of the money as he had sold it without that matter resolved.

Magic beans.

You're accusing him of committing fraud?

So am I. You think I can funnel money between the businesses without attracting concern? Fuck the legalities man, you are making excuses for the bloke using SAFC's cash to pay HIS debt.



I believe now from their words and characterisation that they showed proof of funds of £20m only.

So they told a bare faced lie?

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

That's a fairly common thing to loan money between your business, @Grumpy Old Man could perhaps conform this?

And if like you say we actually don't know the terms or anything in relation to repayment, assuming it won't just sit their as a debt from one business to another I don't know why you appear to be making only negative assumptions about it.

There are a lot of assumptions being made. More later.

 

[Secret Visage]

That loan was related to money owed to inter Milan iirc, he openly discussed this and this is why Ellis waived some of the money as he had sold it without that matter resolved.


You're accusing him of committing fraud?


So they told a bare faced lie?

Not at all, I sit aside as an interested bystander.

 

[Lewberry pie]

I own my own company and have been through investment with mutiple parties. I know how a lot of this works on a practical level, and it's the total lack of transparency and oversight that concerns me. Loaning yourself that amount, via a company that will not publish detailed accounts, is a red flag. I'm not going to say what GOM says, which is to wait for their explanation, because until these two get pushed, they don't answer, and even when they do, it's usually in vagaries and literal terms.

For example, if SD tells us 'it definitely wasn't £32m, absolutely 100% not that', I will assume it could be anything up to £31,999,999.99p because that is how he works. We know that amount was at least £25m, he has said that. What he has been careful not to class in the same deal is that he then loaned himself another £9.6m to pay the balance he owed Short for his shares, £2.6m of which was later waived. That amount is still outstanding according to SD and CM a month ago.

So rather than allow them to explain anything you're choosing to believe the negative connotation. Glad we cleared that up, what's your agenda then?

 

[Macho]

So when he had to show the fa that he had 50 million in liquid funds, what was that?

That means he has 50 million in liquid funds and has no intention of dipping into it. Bet that liquid funds is about 20 million better off when he does a monorail style Simpsons blitz.

 

[KittenMittens]

That loan was related to money owed to inter Milan iirc, he openly discussed this and this is why Ellis waived some of the money as he had sold it without that matter resolved.

Except that he used the loan to Madrox (still outstanding) to pay his own share balance. He has said that.