• 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.

Loans/ Debt to the owners

Status
Not open for further replies.

HarrogateMackem said:
Apologies if this is being discussed elsewhere, please merge if so:

You must be logged on to see media items
Click to expand...
Not entirely understanding his language but from what I know it seems like a directors loan which you put in and get back it’s quite standard practice unless you take the piss with percentage rates. Maybe he means something else I’m not sure? Or maybe their rates takes the piss? Im
Not an expert on shares but directors loans are a normal thing in business. I’ve forgone wages myself and done it so it helps cash flow without me working for free and others who do r take a wage I’m guessing would put in to help cash flow then take the money back on sale. Maybe I’m missing his point entirely. What it does do is make a mockery of the argument that they are being charitable by putting money in which I’ve head implied - they’re investing for more money back if there’s interest on it.
 
sir rowell cummins said:
Not entirely understanding his language but from what I know it seems like a directors loan which you put in and get back it’s quite standard practice unless you take the piss with percentage rates. Maybe he means something else I’m not sure? Or maybe their rates takes the piss? Im
Not an expert on shares but directors loans are a normal thing in business. I’ve forgone wages myself and done it so it helps cash flow without me working for free and others who do r take a wage I’m guessing would put in to help cash flow then take the money back on sale. Maybe I’m missing his point entirely. What it does do is make a mockery of the argument that they are being charitable by putting money in which I’ve head implied - they’re investing for more money back if there’s interest on it.
Click to expand...

Very few directors loans are interest bearing (though some are). Equally very few are secured.
 
Clavas said:
So the Chancers:
  • took ownership with the club debt free and "offset" the purchase price using the clubs own money
  • oversee it produce the worst team (year after year) in terms of league position in its 143 year history
  • and now have the club in debt
And people still defend them
Click to expand...

They are absolute scum… anyone attempting to defend isn’t a Sunderland supporter.
 
sir rowell cummins said:
Not entirely understanding his language but from what I know it seems like a directors loan which you put in and get back it’s quite standard practice unless you take the piss with percentage rates. Maybe he means something else I’m not sure? Or maybe their rates takes the piss? Im
Not an expert on shares but directors loans are a normal thing in business. I’ve forgone wages myself and done it so it helps cash flow without me working for free and others who do r take a wage I’m guessing would put in to help cash flow then take the money back on sale. Maybe I’m missing his point entirely. What it does do is make a mockery of the argument that they are being charitable by putting money in which I’ve head implied - they’re investing for more money back if there’s interest on it.
Click to expand...

The difference of course is Donald has claimed he is paying back the para payments. A directors loan isn't paying that back.
 
They borrowed money from the club and wrote off that loan balance so if they have now loaned cash to the club now they could write that loan off. If they issue shares then KLD would have to match their investment otherwise their ownership % would increase and who wants that? This will all be speculation until we see the accounts in a long time.
 
Hep said:
It's net neutral, if they inject cash as shares, the club is worth more and any new investment would attract a lower % of shares.
Click to expand...
No it’s not…

An investment pissed up the wall leaves 0 in the bank.

A loan pissed up the wall leaves the loan liability payable.

Tell me how that is net 0
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top