• 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.
Grumpy Old Man said:
No. Madrox owns 100% of Sunderland. If Sartori owned 20% of Sunderland, he could sell those shares independently of Donald. As it is, all he could do is sell off his Madrox shares, and even then, under the company's articles, he'd have to offer them to Donald amnd Methven first at the same price. It's a legal technicality, but an important one. Madrox and Sunderland are different legal persons.


He still owns the leasing companies.
Click to expand...

did not know the leasing company was still owned by him. Thanks for putting me straight.
 

Guinness Guzzler said:
No you're right on that one, it doesn't make a bit of difference to us really. It does, however, make me wonder about what Sartori is bringing to the table. I mean, no one does what Donald did, no one gives you what could be £5m worth of shares for a quid, it seems really strange. If it was to get him involved and investing that would be one thing, but he doesn't seem to have done that yet and Donald seems to want to sell before he gets the chance. The whole thing just seems crazy.
Click to expand...
I’m struggling to get any of it to add up tbh. Not sure that lots of what they have done makes any sense. That said I don’t see how much of it benefits them either.

I guess we could argue maybe Donald is looking to get more for the club now because he sold a chunk cheaply before.
 
MADBOB THE MAKEM said:
your wrong I know for a fact the loan has a payback facility in place YOU get your facts right
Click to expand...
Financial experts been on Talksport today and everyone that looked at agrees (even @Grumpy Old Man if you put money into accounts as expenditure you are not paying it back), only thing he says he wants to able see is the proper accounts fair enough don’t agree with him but can see where he is coming from, but not you, you know better as usual because you are the owner’s mates, “They are paying it back” well actually no there not, just clear off please as proper fans who really care about our club had enough of you and your mates crap, as your all an embarrassment.
So sling your hook.
 
sksk3021 said:
What’s that?
Click to expand...

On the topic of parachute payments in chronological order:

Parachute payments not to be used, they're security.
Parachute payments were always to be used in the manner.
It's a loan that I'll drip feed back.
It's actually been written off.
Double bubble with writing off the amount and adding it to the value.

Whilst nothing legally "dodgy" I'm sure, that's how I would categorise the whole ordeal.

Hope that makes sense, I have a headache.
 
MADBOB THE MAKEM said:
Grumps as I said before an arrangement has been set up to pay it back, everyone needs to calm down
Click to expand...
This^^ people having a meltdown over aa newspaper article when there's probably only a handful of people on here that fully understand companies accounts when they are released. I don't fully understand half the stuff people like GOM post about the accounts so will just leave it to them. The club isn't going bust like some on here seem to suggest
 
Coeus said:
On the topic of parachute payments in chronological order:

Parachute payments not to be used, they're security.
Parachute payments were always to be used in the manner.
It's a loan that I'll drip feed back.
It's actually been written off.
Double bubble with writing off the amount and adding it to the value.

Whilst nothing legally "dodgy" I'm sure, that's how I would categorise the whole ordeal.

Hope that makes sense, I have a headache.
Click to expand...
Ahh not the Sartori bit sorry crossed wires I think.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Part of that was used in 18/19 (that's what the Close Brothers loan was about). The resetting of the cost base and wage bill will be budgeted to treat the parachute as non-recurring income, and will have been used to cover costs still above the desired recurring level. All cost-cutting is a gradual process if you think about it. If you annualise the pay of all your employees at the start of the year at £20m, and the end of the year as £10m, you won't actually have saved £10m that year. The actual wage bill will be somewhere between £10m and £20m depending on when employees leave. If those employees are players, that's usually right at the end of the year, so there are virtually no savings in the year you do it.
Click to expand...

As this whole thing unravels, it seems more likely that Juan was initial security to get it over the line. God knows how that works in reality though.
 
Redby-lad said:
Is the current reported selling price high because he has to give Sartori 20% of it? How much of Madrox does Charlie own?
Click to expand...

No. Sartori would be entitles to 20% of any dividends paid by Madrox or 20% of any distributions if it were wound up after paying out all costs and settling liabilities. Methven owns 6%.
 
ALL lower league clubs will be facing financial meltdown with the “no football” and “playing behind closed doors” threat . We have no idea as to when crowds can return to watch football and this is a major concern for clubs outside of the Premiership. Never say the clubs won’t go bust as it’s not impossible we have all seen massive companies go to the wall when finances become to hard to handle.
 
Coeus said:
Yea sorry, my fault. I'm on one today.

I can see why folk dont like the quid thing though. It implies dodgyness doesnt it? Getting something for a pound that is worth far more?
Click to expand...
No idea tbh. Another thing that doesn’t really make sense. Not sure how it impacts the club either way.
 
Coeus said:
Yea sorry, my fault. I'm on one today.

I can see why folk dont like the quid thing though. It implies dodgyness doesnt it? Getting something for a pound that is worth far more?
Click to expand...

It's a little odd, but the price between buyer and seller of any shares in a company is between them. We can speculate on Donald's reasons, but selling shares at an undervalue isn't a crime. Perhaps it was on the promise of cash inputs from Sartori later, in which SD can only be sorely disappointed when he buggered off to try his hand in Uruguayan politics almost immediately afterwards.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
No. Sartori would be entitles to 20% of any dividends paid by Madrox or 20% of any distributions if it were wound up after paying out all costs and settling liabilities. Methven owns 6%.
Click to expand...

Let's be honest though, that would still be a hell of a lot more than £1! What would happen if we were sold for £35m, that money went into Madrox and sartori then said he wanted to leave Madrox, surely he'd sell his shares for a lot more than £1 given the money they'd have in the bank?
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
It's a little odd, but the price between buyer and seller of any shares in a company is between them. We can speculate on Donald's reasons, but selling shares at an undervalue isn't a crime. Perhaps it was on the promise of cash inputs from Sartori later, in which SD can only be sorely disappointed when he buggered off to try his hand in Uruguayan politics almost immediately afterwards.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what youre saying gom but were coming at this from slightly different angles. I believe as a fan we should know why something appears odd, sd earlier podcasts would agree with me. You from a legal stand point.

To be honest I'm not fussed about sartori other than I dont think our money should be finding it's way to south america as the earlier tabloids reported he said.

I just want it finished.
 
pwsafc said:
This^^ people having a meltdown over aa newspaper article when there's probably only a handful of people on here that fully understand companies accounts when they are released. I don't fully understand half the stuff people like GOM post about the accounts so will just leave it to them. The club isn't going bust like some on here seem to suggest
Click to expand...
Mag bastard.
 
Coeus said:
I know exactly what youre saying gom but were coming at this from slightly different angles. I believe as a fan we should know why something appears odd, sd earlier podcasts would agree with me. You from a legal stand point.

To be honest I'm not fussed about sartori other than I dont think our money should be finding it's way to south america as the earlier tabloids reported he said.

I just want it finished.
Click to expand...

in some ways why do we care. In fact maybe Sartori has had their pants down. Every fucker else seems to have had them down why would he be any different. He probably said aye lads get me involved and I’ll smooth the ways with all the top Uruguayan talent and give you loads of my own cash in due course [fingers firmly crossed behind his back] cue 20% equity for a quid and old Juan Sheet is potentially turning 1 English pound into several millions when a sale is done. Good. Another shafting for Donald & Meth head
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top