• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

New buyers put off by £20 million hole in accounts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Father Jack Hackett said:
Even if, as they stated, Sartori put £3m in (which now seems improbable) it would only value the club at £15m when it hasmd 2 years of parachute money coming in, massive season ticket sales and a load of good young uns in the academy.
How it's now allegedly worth more than twice that is anyone's guess. If the Mail report is correct? They want at least 7 times as much.

Got our club back though eh?


He also went on the radio twice and couldn't explain any of the accounts coherently
Click to expand...

He couldn't explain anything coherently in fairness. He comes across as thick as two short planks. Staggered how he's been a successful businessman based on what we've heard of him at this club.
 

roppa said:
And our own paper

You must be logged on to see external links
Click to expand...

Have you seen the last line in the snippet shown in your post? "According to reports".

That means they've read the Daily Fail article and are reporting on the existence of that article, nothing more.
 
fyl2u said:
I think it being written off is the only way that would make it so that there was no legal obligation. Wasn't all this related to the financial black hole left by the Alvarez / Ndong situations anyway, and the reason why they renegotiated with Short for all this to happen in the first place?

I'm pretty sure SD/CM told us about all this a year or so ago.
Click to expand...
I think @Grumpy Old Man will be the one, his take will be informative
 
“When asked if Sartori’s payment was received by Sunderland, the club replied on Thursday that he “invested in Madrox shares”. When asked, more specifically, how much he paid for his 20 per cent stake, Sunderland replied: “The club is not privy to the detail of arrangements between the shareholders and directors of its parent company. This is a matter for Madrox.” According to Companies House documents, Donald, Methven and Sartori are listed as directors of Madrox.”

You must be logged on to see external links
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Seems pretty obvious why FPP pulled out of a takeover deal and instead simply offered a loan where Donald could try and prove he deserved the asking price. He might fuck up the best chance we've got if coming back, and still some blindly defend him
Click to expand...
they all thought he was a nice man though after watching STID 2 ...i hate the conning little twat and his gobshite sidekick !
 
Laidback Jack said:
This is it. Anyone that dare to say a cross word on here got shot down in flames. I said something along the lines of 'They sound good but talk is cheap, lets see if they put it into action. It's all very well and good loving the adoration of the fans and fame but lets see if they still do that when the shit hits the fan'

I got absolutely crucified. For a long time we couldn't see past them. Ultimately they've spun a PR wheel and we’ve fallen for it.
Click to expand...

Well not everyone did so ‘we’ve’ is not entirely right but as you say, people were shot down for even the smallest criticism in the early days. I just hope they go. And sharpish
 
fyl2u said:
SD himself said in an interview about a year ago that they were under no "legal obligation" to pay it back but not to worry about it.

It's not news. ;)
Click to expand...
Thought so, I remember him saying he 'might put it back, or he might not'. I assumed it would be knocked off the price of a potential sale if not. If he wants his £40m AND the £20m, that's a bit naughty. The article doesn't quite say that.

I think SD comes across so incoherently at times, that he tells us something earth shattering, but it gets lost in minced up words.

Like when he was saying he'd offset small losses with the sale of the odd academy graduate. We didn't realise he meant as soon as they're potty trained.
 
“Madrox has continued to invest funds as required, (which will be reflected in next year’s figures) and in a way to ensure the club remains debt free, as promised. This has resulted in SAFC receiving around £11.5 million since the year end,’

This bit here, they really do think we are stupid! 10 million of that was from the loan given to Madrox by FPP. Get these arseholes out of our club now.
 
When the article says that Madrox have put in a further £11.5m in since the accounts were done, is that all their own money or is £10m of it actually the American cash, so its £1.5m net from them? Can't really tell from the article or the quotes?
 
Chizno1 said:
“Madrox has continued to invest funds as required, (which will be reflected in next year’s figures) and in a way to ensure the club remains debt free, as promised. This has resulted in SAFC receiving around £11.5 million since the year end,’

This bit here, they really do think we are stupid! 10 million of that was from the loan given to Madrox by FPP. Get these arseholes out of our club now.
Click to expand...
Plus if they hadn’t used £20.5m of the club’s own money for their purchase there would have been plenty of money there to keep it debt free!
 
wackyjacky said:
GOM, any say on what's gone on here? Looks like bad crack to me, even if not illegal.
Click to expand...

Can't say anything till I've got something to look at. As you say, bad crack, but not illegal. The argument will undoubtedly be that it was club money used to pay a club debt (technically true). Just goes to show the mess you get in if you bollix up the structure of a deal through assumptions that don't work. The club will be more worried about who's leaked the accounts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top