Has anyone's view on Stuart Donald changed in the last few weeks ?

No, the charges over Sunderland were replaced by charges over Short's assets instead. Short in turn had charges over Sunderland's assets. You can't just look at one side of the transaction. Short taking out the loan was a cosmetic exercise to ensure the club looked debt free - simple as that. You ignore the possibility that Donald put further money into Madrox to clear the balance on the share purchase. You keep claiming that the Madrox/Sunderland debt rose to £32m, when there's no verifiable evidence that that's actually the case.

I'm going by the words of the man who owns us :D I haven't just made those quotes up, you heard them yourself. I'm not ignoring any possibilities, I'm very clearly saying that those are possibilities but that the accounts will hopefully show what happened more clearly.

Do we agree that at least £25m went to SBC via Drumaville by August of 2018?
 


I'm going by the words of the man who owns us :D I haven't just made those quotes up, you heard them yourself. I'm not ignoring any possibilities, I'm very clearly saying that those are possibilities but that the accounts will hopefully show what happened more clearly.

Do we agree that at least £25m went to SBC via Drumaville by August of 2018?

£25m went to Short. Not all of it went to SBC, because SBC's charges over the Hilton weren't lifted until this time last year. Short seems to have allocated the payment to the share purchase first. As I said, the charges over Sunderland were lifted because the debt was no longer there; it was with Drumaville. SBC had to lift the charges over Sunderland because Sunderland Ltd didn't owe them anything; Drumaville did.
 
Last edited:
£25m went to Short. Not all of it went to SBC, because SBC's charges over the Hilton weren't lifted until this time last year. Short seems to have allocated the payment to the share purchase first. As I said, the charges over Sunderland were lifted because the debt was no longer there; it was with Drumaville. SBC had to lift the charges over Sunderland because Sunderland Ltd didn't owe them anything; Drumaville did.

So you agree that £25m went to Short? And then another £<x>m went to Short in April by Donald's own admission? What are we arguing about here? That he paid for the shares using parachute payments earlier than we thought?

I don't think it's up to me to prove anything GOM. I've said I'm interested in how that money is accounted for. If Donald paid £25m to Short by August 2018, and another payment of (approx) £6-8m in April of 2019, I want to know that all of that money is either paid back or accounted for and designated to be paid back. Because of a portion of it was paid for using an advance of the parachute payments (rather than directly from them) I am simply saying that personally, I'm interested to make sure that has happened.
 
So you agree that £25m went to Short? And then another £<x>m went to Short in April by Donald's own admission? What are we arguing about here? That he paid for the shares using parachute payments earlier than we thought?

I don't think it's up to me to prove anything GOM. I've said I'm interested in how that money is accounted for. If Donald paid £25m to Short by August 2018, and another payment of (approx) £6-8m in April of 2019, I want to know that all of that money is either paid back or accounted for and designated to be paid back. Because of a portion of it was paid for using an advance of the parachute payments (rather than directly from them) I am simply saying that personally, I'm interested to make sure that has happened.

That's what we're arguing about. The £25m was to cover the SBC loan.
 
That's what we're arguing about. The £25m was to cover the SBC loan.

So what was he paying Ellis Short for in April 2019?

If SBC removed the charge in August 2018, then they had £25m from SAFC. If you're suggesting that they removed it without that money, I'm not sure that's logical at all. You seem like a rational guy and there's no reason to think that's possible.

Which means that when Donald by his own admission paid the bulk of a substantial, 8 figure loan to Ellis Short in April 2019, it added to the £25m he had already paid. Surely you can't disagree with that?
 
So what was he paying Ellis Short for in April 2019?

If SBC removed the charge in August 2018, then they had £25m from SAFC. If you're suggesting that they removed it without that money, I'm not sure that's logical at all. You seem like a rational guy and there's no reason to think that's possible.

Which means that when Donald by his own admission paid the bulk of a substantial, 8 figure loan to Ellis Short in April 2019, it added to the £25m he had already paid. Surely you can't disagree with that?

The balance of the share purchase.
 
So what was he paying Ellis Short for in April 2019?

If SBC removed the charge in August 2018, then they had £25m from SAFC. If you're suggesting that they removed it without that money, I'm not sure that's logical at all. You seem like a rational guy and there's no reason to think that's possible.

Which means that when Donald by his own admission paid the bulk of a substantial, 8 figure loan to Ellis Short in April 2019, it added to the £25m he had already paid. Surely you can't disagree with that?

No, they didn't. The £25m simply moved from Sunderland to Drumaville. All the transactions are inter-related, and SBC would have been part of that process, not least because they'd have had to OK the whole takeover anyway under the terms of the existing security.
 
But you know what I'm getting at here. SAFC paid out £25m in parachute payments by August 18 and then paid out a further amount in April 2019 to Ellis Short. Those two things are true aren't they?
 
So we agree? :D

Let me break it down for you.

1. Short moves the last £25m of the loan into Drumaville.
2. Donald pays the initial £%m of the share purchase.
3. In August, Sunderland pay Short £25m via Madrox to pay off the transferred loan. An unknown is whether SBC were told Sunderland had done this.
4 SBC lift the charges on Sunderland, but not on the Short-owner securities, suggesting Short has not actually paid them in full.
5. In April 2019, Donald pays off the £7.2m balance for the shares. SBC are finally paid in full, and lift the charges on Short's assets. Short lifts his charges on Sunderland assets.

The unknown is what Short did and when, but the date the SBC lifted the charges on his assets suggests it wasn't until Aprii 2019.
 
So if we agree on the total amount left the club (which I have been saying since last July and taken personal abuse for) and I'm saying I'm interested in how that's been addressed, then again, I am simply asking what on earth are we disagreeing over here?
 
So if we agree on the total amount left the club (which I have been saying since last July and taken personal abuse for) and I'm saying I'm interested in how that's been addressed, then again, I am simply asking what on earth are we disagreeing over here?

That the final £7.2m came from the club. You're tying it in to the Close Brothers loan, but there's no evidence that that's the case. If the balance between Madrox and Sunderland in the next accounts exceeds £25m, you've got a point, and I'll raise hell, because that's not what was supposed to happen. At the moment though, it's pure speculation, and, with feelings running high, dangerously so.
 
That the final £7.2m came from the club. You're tying it in to the Close Brothers loan, but there's no evidence that that's the case. If the balance between Madrox and Sunderland in the next accounts exceeds £25m, you've got a point, and I'll raise hell, because that's not what was supposed to happen. At the moment though, it's pure speculation, and, with feelings running high, dangerously so.

Yes there is. Because our owner said that he did it in unambiguous terms. He said that the bulk of the short term loan from close bros was used to pay Ellis Short in order to lift the charge 'to give them all options'.

Have you listened to him saying it? I posted the link earlier.
His own words, GOM. He said it in the May podcast last season. He said that 'the bulk of' that loan went to Ellis Short.

There was nothing else left to pay as the SBC charge was lifted in August of 2018.


1:12:50

He was getting rid of the charge Short had over him (and the club) for his shares. I'd guess so he could sell to Campbell who was on the table at that time, but that part is just parsing his words.

Either way, I think it's time to accept that this is what happened, and ask when and how that money came back.
It's mildly frustrating that you haven't replied after a perfectly civil discussion @Grumpy Old Man - especially given you just said that what I'm saying is 'dangerous'.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top