• 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.

ALL NUFC and Sportwashing stuff in here. (Threads will be merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Georgewhitt said:
Which translates as wanting more money ffs.

Think things through man.
Click to expand...
no..they hae the money..its how not to lose some of it to hmrc thats the priority..ashleys companies are not refistered offshore..so hmrc are knocking on the door looking for a big chunk of the305 million right now..
 

Newcastle takeover: Amanda Staveley insists she did not use Mike Ashley loan deal​


You must be logged on to see external links

, Chief Sports Reporter

Friday October 15 2021, 5.00pm, The Times
Amanda Staveley organised a deal to borrow tens of millions of pounds from Mike Ashley’s company to help fund the purchase of Newcastle United — but her representatives insist she has not used the loan facility.

Staveley’s company PCP Capital Partners LLP, which now owns 10 per cent of Newcastle after
You must be logged on to see external links
, arranged the “vendor loan” with St James Holdings Ltd in April of last year, allowing borrowing of up to £150 million. A vendor loan is typically an arrangement where the seller agrees to lend part of the purchase price to the buyer.

​



:cool:
 
kildaremackem said:
no..they hae the money..its how not to lose some of it to hmrc thats the priority..ashleys companies are not refistered offshore..so hmrc are knocking on the door looking for a big chunk of the305 million right now..
Click to expand...

Erm. After deducting the original cost and later inputs by Ashley there'll be bugger all in CGT to pay.
 
Georgewhitt said:
Which translates as wanting more money ffs.

Think things through man.
Click to expand...
Less tax means more money. That’s how it looks to me. I have five beans. Every year one of those beans is taken away in bean tax.
If I can find a way of not paying the bean tax in full. I have all five beans. More beans.
But I am incredibly thick so I’m probably way off.
 
kildaremackem said:
no..they hae the money..its how not to lose some of it to hmrc thats the priority..ashleys companies are not refistered offshore..so hmrc are knocking on the door looking for a big chunk of the305 million right now..
Click to expand...
I'll say it again, because you are obviously not listening
"Which means they want more money"
f***ing hell man, not losing what you already have to HMRC means the same f***ing thing.
 
richest said:

Newcastle takeover: Amanda Staveley insists she did not use Mike Ashley loan deal​


You must be logged on to see external links

, Chief Sports Reporter

Friday October 15 2021, 5.00pm, The Times
Amanda Staveley organised a deal to borrow tens of millions of pounds from Mike Ashley’s company to help fund the purchase of Newcastle United — but her representatives insist she has not used the loan facility.

Staveley’s company PCP Capital Partners LLP, which now owns 10 per cent of Newcastle after
You must be logged on to see external links
, arranged the “vendor loan” with St James Holdings Ltd in April of last year, allowing borrowing of up to £150 million. A vendor loan is typically an arrangement where the seller agrees to lend part of the purchase price to the buyer.

​



:cool:
Click to expand...
oof

I hope she hasnt borrowed the money from PIF - not sure what would happen if she couldn't pay I back
 
kildaremackem said:
she didnt..the newspaper got that wrong..
but again, if she had doen that, it would be a lot shrewder than using her own money...
why? firstly its more tax efficient for when she goes to sell..
secondly..if the interest rate was low enough,..she could invest the same money in something that makes cash now..at a higher interest rate than she owes ashley..

so lets say..she owes ashley 3 per cent a year..?
she invests in a trust which pasys 4.5 per cent a year..
she uses that 4.5 per cent to pay ashley his 3..and keeps the 1.5 per cent a year for doing nowt...her money is therefore working twice for her..once to own newcastle and once to make her 1.5 per cent..
thats how rich people do it..
borrowing money is not a sign they dont have any when rich people do it..
Click to expand...
They didnt get it wrong, its there as a fact
 
Georgewhitt said:
I know you are not an unintelligent man, therefore
1- You have a very good idea of whether that would have been insulting, but will not admit it, and
2- You don't want to, or can't answer this question and still be credible.
Click to expand...

Well, when the fans turned up in French garb, the French players enjoyed it. You're stating that the Saudis would definitely be offended, but it's guesswork based on what you hope will happen rather than any proof.

Your question is predicated on my accepting that the chairman was ridiculed, which I don't believe he was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top