• 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.

Loans/ Debt to the owners

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grumpy Old Man said:
I can only go on what I was told at the liaison meeting in June 2019 by Methven. He even said that the original plan was for that £25m to go straight to Short from the PL, which changed only when Angela Lowes pointed out that PL regulations only allow payment into an account in the club's name (pretty obvious when you think about it). The evidence is there that the last £25m of the debt was moved. Drumaville took out a £25m loan from SBC shortly before the completion (I stumbled on the charge document at the CH page for the Hilton). This charge, and the ones over the club, were not lifted until April 2019, on the same date. It's pretty clear that the £25m was the club debt. Short wanted £37m because he didn't want to clear any more of the debt personally (he'd already paid £45m of it via his loans to the club, which were capitalised). All the evidence points to £15m for the shares (reduced to £12.7m when N'Dong's move to Watford fell through) and £25m loan repayment, The only argument is who was intended to pay the £25m, Madrox or the club. Methven, in a minuted meeting, clearly said the latter.
Click to expand...
Methven would say the latter to be fair! My issue as I've mentioned previously is that they were quoting the £37m when saying the fans could buy them out. I think it's pretty clear that they've been looking for £37m or there abouts. If the money was club money used for a club debt then the shares should only have been worth £12m, and that was when we still had another parachute payment to come. I don't think anyone could make an argument for the value going up, it's probably dropped if anything. So as I said to Hep, if we accept their side of things that its club money paying off a club debt then fine, but Donald's 34% is worth an absolute maximum of £4m. And if they're trying to claim that everything they've paid in to keep the lights on has created a debt to them (ie if they've put it in as a loan), then as those are running costs I'd say the £4m is much lower. He should pretty much be giving kld the remainder of his shares if he's owed money from the club
 
Hep said:
The club was worth about £12m
Click to expand...
Finally.

Finally we are there with you. Then why are they quoting that they’ve wanted to get at least THEIR £37m on the club. They haven’t spent that on the club. This is the rub. If they were willing to sell at around the £15m mark then a lot of what you say would be ok. It’s not what they’re after though.

Their greed and incompetence has cost the club dearly. We’re also staring at a 5th season in the THIRD division. They are leeches. Stop defending them or their actions.

I won’t even go into their lies, contradictions, slurs and hawking out the academy
 
Last edited:
Hep said:
I agree, the decision on what to invest the money on will have a massive impact, but that's a different question.

If we buy the next Ronaldo and sell him for £100m, it's been a great investment, Grigg, not so much.

But they are two very separate things, the raw capital invested, and the return on that investment.

Loaning the club money isn't a bad thing. Spending it on Grigg is.
Click to expand...
Aye, but the fact they have spent it on Grigg (and on keeping the lights on) means they can't really say that they've added value. So if the shares were only really £12m, then Donald can't even begin to ask for more than £4m for his share. And like I say, if he's fed in £5m to keep the lights on and would get that back as its a loan, he can't just say his share is £9m! I'd suggest he should be giving the shares away for nowt and then, when the £5m is repaid, he's done pretty well out of it. Basically I've got nowt against businessmen making money. But alas if you buy a business, it's loss making and you fail to turn it around, you can also make a loss (or "your capital is at risk" as all the investment ads say). Otherwise we'd all be businessmen
 
stevo said:
Well its a load of very strange posts,that if i was employed by the shits i couldnt have compiled a better club response
Click to expand...

They're not a defence. He's commenting on the available evidence and what it may imply. No way would a club account spend so much time on the politics board man.
 
Hep said:
There is nothing to suggest that the loans are in relation to paying the equivalent of the PP money back to the club.
Click to expand...
Ok, thanks for that. 2+2 not necessarily equalling 4. So this could be a loan in addition to the parachute repayment? Needs swift clarification.
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
So, to try and make sense of the argument. Are you saying (rounded figures for ease) :
-They buy a club worth £37m
-To do it they take £25m from the club, but there's now a debt owing from them to the club of the same amount, so despite taking £25m the club is still worth £37m - if they sell it they'd get £37m but have to pay the £25m back so they'd break even (which I'd agree with)
-They remove the legal obligation to pay it back so now the value of the club has dropped to £12m on the strength of it not having £25m to come in
- Your argument seems to be that if they then, over time, put £25m in, the value of the club increases back to the £37m, so they can sell it and effectively still break even

The issues I can see here is that, even when they hadn't paid all the money back, they were telling fans and others that the value was still £37m.

Equally you seem to be assuming that if they put money in, it automatically adds to the value of the club. Let's just say Donald had to find £5m to cover the Grigg signing. That hasn't added £5m to the value of the club. That's money he's put in to run it which, ultimately, he's pissed away. If the value of the club, when it suddenly didn't have £25m to come back in, shrank to £12m, then I fail to see how that value has done anything but drop. When they came in it still had the third parachute payment to come for starters. That's been pretty much wasted as far as I can tell given the lack of progress.

So if the club was worth circa £12m once the £25m was officially written off, it certainly shouldn't be any higher now. So would you agree that, regardless of how much Donald may have put in to keep the lights on, his 34% should be about £4m? Because I don't see how anyone could argue for it to be more. At which point why the fuck doesn't KLD just buy him out.

It's like if I've got a shit old car worth £1500. Doesn't matter if I spend £3k to keep the thing road worthy, it doesn't suddenly become a £4500 car
Click to expand...
Spot on!........................... I unfortunately begin any analysis of The three amigos dealings /motives with the club with the general principle /dictum/question "what would low rent scumbags do " and then the fog lifts and everything then falls into place!We are run by scumbags on the make and until that changes I will not be shocked by anything they do and we are also doomed to sub mediocrity for years to come!

In KLD i thought we had found a small nugget of gold in the cesspit of the last four years but alas its looking more like shavings of iron pyrite as his mask is starting to slip!
 
Hep said:
Short didn't have to do anything with the burden. He had no obligation to take any of it on.

The club was worth about £12m as short either wanted to leave £25m in debt or take the PP money. If there was anyone willing to pay more, Short would have accepted.

They've never claimed that these loans relate to paying back that money.
Click to expand...
That's completely made up.
 
Since Madrox took over all the board level decisions assumed immediate promotion and a quick cash-out . As the seasons drag on in League One the Madrox cabal have become more and more financially distressed and it seems they've drawn in KLD as some kind of human shield.

Whenever we're finally rid of them SAFC should report itself to the EFL because using the club's own resources to fund its purchase should be high up the "not a fit and proper person " test .
 
G Force said:
Finally.

Finally we are there with you. Then why are they quoting that they’ve wanted to get at least THEIR £37m on the club. They haven’t spent that on the club. This is the rub. If they were willing to sell at around the £15m mark then a lot of what you say would be ok. It’s not what they’re after though.

Their greed and incompetence has cost the club dearly. We’re also staring at a 5th season in the THIRD division. They are leeches. Stop defending them or their actions.

I won’t even go into their lies, contradictions, slurs and hawking out the academy
Click to expand...
Absolutely bang-on.
It's Homes Under the Hammer - though when Dion Dublin returns 5 years later, no improvements have been made, rather the property has depreciated, there are leaks all over the gaff and they still expect a huge profit.
 
Hep said:
Short didn't have to do anything with the burden. He had no obligation to take any of it on.

The club was worth about £12m as short either wanted to leave £25m in debt or take the PP money. If there was anyone willing to pay more, Short would have accepted.

They've never claimed that these loans relate to paying back that money.
Click to expand...
I've heard people say this in this thread, though no idea if that's true or not of course
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Methven would say the latter to be fair! My issue as I've mentioned previously is that they were quoting the £37m when saying the fans could buy them out. I think it's pretty clear that they've been looking for £37m or there abouts. If the money was club money used for a club debt then the shares should only have been worth £12m, and that was when we still had another parachute payment to come. I don't think anyone could make an argument for the value going up, it's probably dropped if anything. So as I said to Hep, if we accept their side of things that its club money paying off a club debt then fine, but Donald's 34% is worth an absolute maximum of £4m. And if they're trying to claim that everything they've paid in to keep the lights on has created a debt to them (ie if they've put it in as a loan), then as those are running costs I'd say the £4m is much lower. He should pretty much be giving kld the remainder of his shares if he's owed money from the club
Click to expand...
That is the crux of the matter.
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Aye, but the fact they have spent it on Grigg (and on keeping the lights on) means they can't really say that they've added value. So if the shares were only really £12m, then Donald can't even begin to ask for more than £4m for his share. And like I say, if he's fed in £5m to keep the lights on and would get that back as its a loan, he can't just say his share is £9m! I'd suggest he should be giving the shares away for nowt and then, when the £5m is repaid, he's done pretty well out of it. Basically I've got nowt against businessmen making money. But alas if you buy a business, it's loss making and you fail to turn it around, you can also make a loss (or "your capital is at risk" as all the investment ads say). Otherwise we'd all be businessmen
Click to expand...
I mean this nails it. Basically because Donald savagely cut outlay and debt he thinks he create a more saleable club which is probably true, but it doesn’t mean it’s worth more money. The building blocks have to be there to improve and in reality it became a badly functioning shell with any potential assets sold and money needed to repair crumbling structures. They just stopped it being a financial liability debt wise by selling our future out. Easier to sell, but requiring investment.
So if someone else does the investment , as KLD has done with the academy set up, staffing, pitch etc they should have the financial benefits. Donald wants out without putting in. In short he is a spiv abs a weasel. If KLD wasn’t to buy his shares though, the balance could be messy for KLD ie another party with Donalds shares would unsettle us and we know Donald cares more about his wealth than doing the right thing by us so to me KLD is important for our stability unless someone would take the bang lot which is unlikely in our league form and position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top