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

Grumpy Old Man said:
I just don't think it's a coincidence that Short got loan a from SBC to Drumaville at the time of the deal, and that just happens to be the amount of the parachute used. My understanding (and this is in the minutes of the liaison meeting last June) is that that £25m was meant to be paid directly to Drumaville, but nobody in either set of advisers thought to check if that was possible. It was only when they told Angela Lowes about this that they found out it was against Pl rules. The parachute had to go into an account in the club's name (for very good reasons, if you think about it). That set up the whole sorry trail of money flow from SAFC to Drumaville via Madrox, creating a raft of accounting problems by showing it in Madrox's books as an additional cost of investment. As Methven himself put it, the whole thing was "a monumental cock-up".
Click to expand...
Hmmm. So when will it become apparent that this loan-debt-parachute payment coincidently equalling £25m is or isn’t a genuine figure that was essential to keeping safc going or indeed was used to help ES on his way? If indeed it ever does.
I personally hope it’s a genuine debt as I’ll have a bit of humble pie to eat irl. But that’s nowt to the possible reaction on here and indeed at the SOL.
Ale taster said:
I get the principle. Perhaps someone could dig out the revenue figures for the two clubs the last time we were in the PL at the same time. I'm not clever enough :lol:
Click to expand...
:lol: You’re gonna have to take my word for it marra!.
I noticed it in the Evening Standard in one of their occasional comparing London club incomes articles. It was published around the time our books were being poured ower on here a few years after someone pointed out to MBH that accts were available at companies house:lol:. Awwwwh man was that a wrong move or what!
 
Last edited:


Reply
riffraff said:
Agreed.
Ive been banging on in here about safc being one of the 13 biggest clubs in England crowd potential wise for nigh on 20 years now. Of those only Leeds, Wednesday and City have fallen to this level since the PLs invention. A stable SAFC would be about the best investment in English football crowdwise atm. Unfortunately more affluent areas muddy the waters.
Click to expand...
In terms of numbers of people maybe, in terms of revenue not really.
 
beezer said:
When they announced theyd bought the club for £40m debt free was it inevitable that the next set of accounts would have shown them up to be fibbers?

They could have just announced the club still has £25m of debt but they have a plan to clear that over the next year or so and it would have caused them a lot less hassle.
Click to expand...

I think they actually said that Ellis got £40m, which is not the same as saying they paid £40m. The problem lies in the technical side of the accounting. Having transferred the money from Sunderland via Madrox, they had a problem in balancing the debtor to Sunderland, and the only way was by showing an increase in the cost of investment. I've spent hours trying and failing to come up with an alternative.
riffraff said:
Hmmm. So when will it become apparent that this loan-debt-parachute payment coincidently equalling £25m is or isn’t a genuine figure that was essential to keeping safc going or indeed was used to help ES on his way? If indeed it ever does.
I personally hope it’s a genuine debt as I’ll have a bit of humble pie to eat irl. But that’s nowt to the possible reaction on here and indeed at the SOL.

:lol: You’re gonna have to take my word for it marra!.
I noticed it in the Evening Standard in one of their occasional comparing London club incomes articles. It was published around the time our books were being poured ower on here a few years after someone pointed out to MBH that accts were available at companies house:lol:. Awwwwh man was that a wrong move or what!
Click to expand...

SUNDERLAND FC HOTELS LIMITED charges - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

SUNDERLAND FC HOTELS LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity
beta.companieshouse.gov.uk beta.companieshouse.gov.uk

These documents show the charges relating to the loan, which was partly secured on the Hilton (Sunderland FC Hotels Ltd was the company Short set up to develop and run it as a franchise from Hilton). It's very much a genuine loan to Short-owned companies.
 
Last edited:
flusheding said:
Did you not get a feeling that he is also quite a big football fan and enjoys owning a club? He doesn't need to stand in the away end when watching games yet does and doesn't appear to make a big deal of it wanting attention when he does it. He obviously won't want to be made bankrupt by this whole saga and making money is how he's got where he is, but he doesn't seem to be a cold hard business man who is just trying to flip the club come what may.
Click to expand...
Agree with u there... Think he enjoyed the kudos of owning a big football club as opposed to the business side of it
 
No.

In the Bob Murray interview he suggested that two PP payments went to short. SD does have to pay short 40m though right? That was the agreed sale price. I, like most people. Read the story that short cleared the debts. Not all of them then. Still, it was a huge debt he did clear though right? We were 126m in debt before SD took over.

Anyhoo
 
Fred Army said:
From watching the show I thought Donald came across as a decent enough bloke and I think he genuinely did/ does want the club to do well, it was just apparent he didn't have the means to carry it out, and was very much out of his depth.
As for Charlie, I'm not particularly keen on him, though it was hard to argue with his assessment of Jack Ross and his tactics, the observations he was making definitely echoed what myself and many others on here were saying.
Click to expand...
Seemed to me that Charlie was the only one with a semblance of control. Donald came over as a kid with a crush on hs teacher whilst Hill and Coton were ..... as we've all deeply suspected - way out of their depth.
 
Fred Army said:
From watching the show I thought Donald came across as a decent enough bloke and I think he genuinely did/ does want the club to do well, it was just apparent he didn't have the means to carry it out, and was very much out of his depth.
As for Charlie, I'm not particularly keen on him, though it was hard to argue with his assessment of Jack Ross and his tactics, the observations he was making definitely echoed what myself and many others on here were saying.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. The way Charlie spoke to that Communications Manager at the Boxing Day game was totally OTT and probably for the camera, made him come over like a right dickhead.
 
Daks said:
The lack of funds from the beginning was startling.
When they were talking about changing stadium name , changing club crest even to make a few quid and really changing anything at the club for a pittance of money
Me and a few others called them out from very early days and got slated on here.
But , has anyone changed there view on him and methven after recent documentary and interviews etc ?
Click to expand...
Someone i know was involved in talks with the club on behalf of a business to sell the naming rights to the stadium. They couldn’t agree a price but the club were apparently looking for 1.5 million over 3 seasons or so i was told
 
From an outsider point of view.

Your problem is that you are too massive a club to be in L1. That fact means you will attract a lot of chancers looking at making money out of owning you. You need a young, up and coming manager with the authority on signing players he identifies - not some clown in the boardroom playing fantasy football. Pick the right bloke and stick with him. I’d hate to suggest our fella, Wellens, but he’s exactly the type you need.
 
Plug said:
From an outsider point of view.

Your problem is that you are too massive a club to be in L1. That fact means you will attract a lot of chancers looking at making money out of owning you. You need a young, up and coming manager with the authority on signing players he identifies - not some clown in the boardroom playing fantasy football. Pick the right bloke and stick with him. I’d hate to suggest our fella, Wellens, but he’s exactly the type you need.
Click to expand...
Attracting "young, up and coming managers" is easier said than done, as it is always a gamble. Personally I think getting Mick McCarthy would be an amazing coup. Someone like Nathan Jones would also tick a lot of boxes given his age, and he was unfortunate to walk into a bad situation at Stoke.
 
More naive and well...incompetent than I realised I guess. Looked like an absolute fool after the Maja and Grigg saga, which is sad as I think he's probably a decent bloke.

I also thought that for all his and Methven's cry about the need for professionalism they'd surrounded themselves with an inner circle of hangers on and chums and the whole set up was virtually comedic. We now know what Ross meant when he said there was a need for more "structure".
 
Medulla said:
More naive and well...incompetent than I realised I guess. Looked like an absolute fool after the Maja and Grigg saga, which is sad as I think he's probably a decent bloke.

I also thought that for all his and Methven's cry about the need for professionalism they'd surrounded themselves with an inner circle of hangers on and chums and the whole set up was virtually comedic. We now know what Ross meant when he said there was a need for more "structure".
Click to expand...
He should have listened to his manager!
 
Daks said:
The lack of funds from the beginning was startling.
When they were talking about changing stadium name , changing club crest even to make a few quid and really changing anything at the club for a pittance of money
Me and a few others called them out from very early days and got slated on here.
But , has anyone changed there view on him and methven after recent documentary and interviews etc ?
Click to expand...

Skint or maximising every opportunity instead of pissing it up the wall on cryo chambers and Fookin plants?
 
MrBraithwaite said:
Attracting "young, up and coming managers" is easier said than done, as it is always a gamble. Personally I think getting Mick McCarthy would be an amazing coup. Someone like Nathan Jones would also tick a lot of boxes given his age, and he was unfortunate to walk into a bad situation at Stoke.
Click to expand...
Mick McCarthy? Jeez, things can’t be that bad. He’s just more of the same.
 
I am very interested to see the club accounts this month (unless they avoid that by doing what Ashley has done)

There was a loan via Close Bros that was taken out and used to pay Ellis Short this time last year, and the only thing at that point outstanding was the purchase of shares by Donald from Short. We haven't heard anything about how that amount was then put back into the club, and why a loan was taken out in the club's name to pay that debt in the first place. I am hopeful (although I can see a way they could have avoided it) that we will be a little more clear on that soon.
 
Plug said:
Mick McCarthy? Jeez, things can’t be that bad. He’s just more of the same.
Click to expand...
He was the last safc manager to get value for money in transfer market. The summer after after the Reid-Wilkinson-McCarthy relegation was our last good window. We’d nearly gone under that time as well.
 

Back
Top