• 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:
Both routes appear plausible. If the buyer were FPP, then most likely, as it gives them a ready made holding company to replace the one they dissolved.
Click to expand...
I still can't get my head around why FPP have bothered with this £10m loan.

They could have bought the club outright by now if they wanted to, which suggests that they don't, but they stand to make an insignificant (to them) amount of interest on the loan to Madrox.
 
Mattyrobinson said:
I still can't get my head around why FPP have bothered with this £10m loan.

They could have bought the club outright by now if they wanted to, which suggests that they don't, but they stand to make an insignificant (to them) amount of interest on the loan to Madrox.
Click to expand...

Playing a long game. They have their own idea of the club's worth.
 
Sons of The Wear said:
FPP would be long gone if they weren’t interested. Could it be they are just observing from afar and letting the current regime hang themselves before pouncing and getting SAFC for next to nothing?
Click to expand...

Here is hoping, they must have had someone in the UK looking at things. SD said that they invest in people, if that's the case they'd have experts worldwide (based on their success).
 
No. 1 is Gary Rowell said:
@fyl2u do you believe it now that GOM has said it?
Click to expand...

What do you mean do I believe it? He's backed up what I was saying. :lol:

You were the one saying the owners were liars for saying "categorically" that a buyer would have to buy Madrox but then later saying they might use Madrox to buy other sporting companies.

I was pointing out that it wasn't what they said at all, that they actually only said it was "most likely" they'd sell Madrox, and that they said at the time that a buyer "could" buy the club from Madrox. I also pointed out that the statement was made long before they mentioned they might buy other sporting companies anyway so it's entirely possible that at the time they said it there were no plans to buy other sporting companies with Madrox whereas later they decided to consider doing it. I.E. the owners weren't lying, you were lying about what they'd said.

Grumpy has now told you that "both routes seem plausible". :lol:

Seriously, man. Just admit you were wrong and let's get on with our lives.
 
KittenMittens said:
It sounds like they were spooked during the process of evaluating us rather than Donald negotiating a price they didnt like.

You can't sell something to someone who hasn't made an offer to buy it, even if that is their long term plan. This is what they were comfortable with.
Click to expand...
I reckon after FPP completed exhaustive due diligence it came down to their valuation of the club being lower than Donald's. Donald has been banking on someone doing the version of due diligence that he and Charlie did - which was done in about 2 weeks on the back of a fag packet.
The loan looks like a salvage job and it favours the Americans. I bet they are just waiting and watching as Donald's valuation tumbles down to their original offer - or maybe even less.
 
Last edited:
Or maybe they agreed a price in principal that was contingent on promotion, and this loan is effectively a retainer.

Still seems odd though because someone else could come and buy Madrox outright and pay off the remaining balance on the loan in doing so.
 
Barney Rubble said:
I reckon after FPP completed exhaustive due diligence it came down to their valuation of the club being lower than Donald's. Donald has been banking on someone doing the version of due diligence that he and Charlie did - which was done in about 2 weeks on the back of a fag packet.
The loan looks like a salvage job and it favours the Americans. I bet they are just waiting and watching as Donald's valuation tumbles down to their original offer - or maybe even less.
Click to expand...
The problem will be that FPP’s valuation was at a point in time, based on the world then. Football imploding will negatively impact that valuation so there may still be a gap when Donald reduces.
 
FFS.

Why does anyone still think anyone is going to buy a football club in the middle of a Global Pandemic?

NUFC is not getting sold. They will pull out as this thing drags on. The Germans will stop their football again as soon as they Covid 19 cases.

SAFC will be lucky to come out of this shit storm in one piece.

A lot of Clubs are going bust. The lower league clubs struggle to turn any kind of profit, lucky to break even. The main income is from gate receipts and they are not coming back until sometime next year at the earliest.

There's talk of bailouts, unless that comes from the EPL, it isn't going to happen. The economy is fucked and the money is going to be needed for a lot more important things than some tinpot football clubs that get a few thousand through the door on a Saturday.
 
Last edited:
Grumpy Old Man said:
Nothing to do with that. If a shareholder lends as an individual it will show in the company's accounts as a shareholder loan. Money moving between group companies happened in very group I ever audited or worked for. It's absolutely routine, as is the occasional writing off of balances. It's simply very visible.

The tax advantages have nothing to do with taxation of trading profits. In any event, Sunderland won't be paying any tax for a very long time, because it has around £200m in unutilised tax losses to offset against future profits. The advantage comes in the treatment of any capital gains made on the sale of any investments made by that company. If they make a large gain on the sale of Madrox, that profit goes, proportionately, into their indvidual companies which they set up to hold the shares. This is where the saving to them as individuals comes in; if they are the sole shareholder of that business (tick), and have owned it for at least two years (tick, as of a couple of months ago), then any gain arising when the company is sold or liquidated is taxable at 10%, rather than 20%. That's why the ownership will pass through companies until you reach the top ones owned by the investors as individuals.
Click to expand...
riffraff said:
I’ve nivver understood why HMRC don’t nominate auditors. Companies choosing their own isnt right.
Click to expand...
and how does that work with competition laws? A government body can’t decide who gets the work. It wouldn’t be impartial, one auditor getting a £10k job and another being given a£100k job, that’s even before you get into profitability of jobs. The only way it would work is if the audit profession became a government owned role.
Also it would be companies house rather than HMRC as it is the financial statements that are audited not the tax return and computation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top