• 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.

Takeover in trouble

Status
Not open for further replies.
KittenMittens said:
first bit - good to know. I think it's important people understand that you are closer to this and that you want the opportunity to get closer and may avoid criticism in order to facilitate a deeper look in the long term. It's also important that as you say, there are different opinions on this, mine being the more cynical, yours being less so.

Second bit - creative accounting aside, what did Sartori pay if not £3m for 20% of something worth £15m?
Click to expand...

It's probably helps if you think of me as being closer to RAWA than the club. It was their idea to ask me to go to the meeting, not the club's. The club was happy to go along with that, which I'll freely admit is because there are people there who find me credible. That allows me to be a friendly critic. Neither RAWA nor myself want to be perceived as part of the PR machine, though RAWA may support an initiative from the club if it's clearly of benefit to the fans. On the other side, to keep that relationship needs mutual respect. To put it in a nutshell: I like Charlie Methven as a person, but that doesn't mean I'm going to trust him 100%.

As regards Sartori, the linked cashflows are unknown and likely to remain so until the next accounts are published (even then, with Madrox filing small company accounts, it could be a case of reading between the lines and cross-referencing the others). The only thing we know for sure is that his investment company (Avesa Corp) owns 20% of Madrox (source - Madrox confirmation statement filed October 2018). Now, that could have been done by him paying nominal value for the shares in Madrox (£200), with any contribution to the purchase price being done as a shareholder loan to Madrox. We simply have no idea at this stage.
 

Grumpy Old Man said:
It's probably helps if you think of me as being closer to RAWA than the club. It was their idea to ask me to go to the meeting, not the club's. The club was happy to go along with that, which I'll freely admit is because there are people there who find me credible. That allows me to be a friendly critic. Neither RAWA nor myself want to be perceived as part of the PR machine, though RAWA may support an initiative from the club if it's clearly of benefit to the fans. On the other side, to keep that relationship needs mutual respect. To put it in a nutshell: I like Charlie Methven as a person, but that doesn't mean I'm going to trust him 100%.

As regards Sartori, the linked cashflows are unknown and likely to remain so until the next accounts are published (even then, with Madrox filing small company accounts, it could be a case of reading between the lines and cross-referencing the others). The only thing we know for sure is that his investment company (Avesa Corp) owns 20% of Madrox (source - Madrox confirmation statement filed October 2018). Now, that could have been done by him paying nominal value for the shares in Madrox (£200), with any contribution to the purchase price being done as a shareholder loan to Madrox. We simply have no idea at this stage.
Click to expand...

Does it not worry you that for example, £9.6m was loaned by SAFC to Madrox, the stated purpose of which was to pay off the £9.6m balance to Ellis Short for shares in SAFC? and that subsequently that debt was reduced to £7m? And that we have no way of accounting for that money beyond a 'phantom' debt (their words) owes by Madrox to the club, which we don't know the terms of repayment for?
 
KittenMittens said:
Does it not worry you that for example, £9.6m was loaned by SAFC to Madrox, the stated purpose of which was to pay off the £9.6m balance to Ellis Short for shares in SAFC? and that subsequently that debt was reduced to £7m? And that we have no way of accounting for that money beyond a 'phantom' debt (their words) owes by Madrox to the club, which we don't know the terms of repayment for?
Click to expand...

Can't comment at this stage.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Can't comment at this stage.
Click to expand...

That's at least honest :D I see it as something very dodgy. Madrox is effectively Donald, Methven and now Sartori. The idea that they purchased the club as Madrox, then funnelled the club's money out and there is not full oversight of that because the nature of Madrox is not the same as a football club highlights the capacity for disingenuous transactions to be made. We were told more transparency, not less...

I mean it's bad when the best case scenario may be 'he didn't even pay the £5m up front and still owed some of that'... and then he still used the club's money to fund even that. Until it's clarified unequivocally with no room for creative interpretation, I think we're well within all of our rights to question why the club is lending money to the owner at any time.
 
Last edited:
KittenMittens said:
That's at least honest :D I see it as something very dodgy. Madrox is effectively Donald, Methven and now Sartori. The idea that they purchased the club as Madrox, then funnelled the club's money out and there is not full oversight of that because of the nature of the company is not the same as a football club highlights the capacity for disingenuous transactions to be made.

I mean it's bad when the best case scenario may be 'he didn't even pay the £5m up front and still owed some of that'... and then he still used the club's money to fund even that. Until it's clarified unequivocally with no room for creative interpretation, I think we're well within all of our rights to question why the club is lending money to the owner at any time.
Click to expand...

I will be commenting in due course. Keep in mind what I said about independence and the club needing to speak for itself.
 
chave said:
Based on the Ponpey model:
- player's leave on deals designed improve short term balance, at the expense of long term profit
- a parade of poorer free transfers join to replace the players who have left, on deals designed to maximise wages over signing on fees so the financial dependency is on any new owners
- Donald retreats from the public eye, except to spin what's happening as a benefit and to deny any claims against him
- team starts poorly, and settles into mid table
- Donald panics he wont get his money back/lose it all, and sells to anybody who can pass F&P, regardless of their suitability for running the club, probably before January
- if new owners have no money, they asset strip during January transfer window
- fans get disillusioned with the situation, creating a toxic atmosphere that affects the team
- mid-table/relegation battle for foreseeable future, until assets are gone and administration
- fans get together and buy the club, running on a sustainable basis, regain love for team, rise back up the leagues, win Champions League in 2040

Easy
Click to expand...

Let's hope this is not our future time line.
 
The whole thing reminds me of John Delaney and the FAI. Money been loaned here, there and everywhere! Money from UEFA for clubs been held a drip fed to clubs.
 
@Grumpy Old Man , technical one - Madrox shortened their accounting period to end July 31st '18. They then published the accounts on May 7th this year (you get 9 months after the accounting period ends to file). Now, theoretically we may not see Madrox accounts in any form until April next year, right?

Thought it was interesting, because the accounting period had been due to end on the 31st May 2019 until they did that. By filing what amount to dormant accounts for a company in existence a matter of weeks, they've avoided showing anything until April 2020, when otherwise it would have been February 2020. I wonder how much of that is based on the idea that they could effectively extend the initial accounting period to it's maximum without showing major transactions?

And we will likely know which division SAFC is in by April 30th next year. That's an interesting dynamic, because if we're promoted, people will gloss over a lot in April that they may not in February, put it that way.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top