This £20 million



Black Cat Gypsy said:
They don't intend to pay it back. They've written it off as exceptional operational costs. What are these operational costs? The whole deal is to benefit them and not the club.
Click to expand...

Yup this. Looks like any penny they’ve been forced to invest into the club they’ve counted it as paying back towards the 20 million
 
Flea Market Trader said:
No they are not as they took it on with proposals of repayment which they now do not wish to pay. Had this been clear from day one then we would not have accepted these crooks onboard.
Click to expand...
You can dress it up how you want. They own the club. the club is not a public entity, it's a private limited company that Donald, Methven and Sartori own
 
Kevsgreat said:
If they'd have come out at the start and said the price is £15m with £25m of parachute payments ringfenced to pay off remaining debt there'd have been no issue. Everyone understood the way the club was at the time.

It's the way it was initially presented, "The price is £40m", "The club is debt free", and the parachute payment talked about as a separate body of money needed for operational costs like paying players off and legacy transfer fees while they're sneaking it out the bakc door that's left a bad taste and added to the lack of trust.

Smoke and mirrors to make it look like Donald had more cash than he did.
Click to expand...

End of last season Donald also said we were in a terrific financial position and could potentially give it a ‘Right good Go’ in the transfer market using the parachute money
 
Johnsafc said:
End of last season Donald also said we were in a terrific financial position and could potentially give it a ‘Right good Go’ in the transfer market using the parachute money
Click to expand...
Yeah, him and Methven were on the podcasts saying the club was making money, on course for £5m over the season before transfers.

Then one failed takeover later our summer transfer budget can't have been any more than a tenth of that, even factoring in signing on fees for freebies.

Then another failed takeover later we're borrowing £9m.
 
TopCat said:
You can dress it up how you want. They own the club. the club is not a public entity, it's a private limited company that Donald, Methven and Sartori own
Click to expand...
Problem there is that coming out with "It's your club, help us change the seats" or "The club needs your season ticket money, help us out" at the same time as "We own the club, mind your own business" just leads to problems.
 
Flea Market Trader said:
Seems this deal suited Short
Click to expand...
To be fair, Ellis probably thought he was going to have to find £30m+ per year to pay off the gap between revenue and cost if we didn't slash costs and get promoted back to back. He had previously hired Martin Bain to fix the cost issue and get promoted. When this looked no closer he basically cut his losses.
Donald should have been clearer from the outset that he was paying £15m up front and an agreement to pay for any operational shortfall while using the parachute payments to leave the club debt free and stop the club going bust (Which is exactly what they are for). I think we could have understood this.
Kevsgreat said:
Problem there is that coming out with "It's your club, help us change the seats" or "The club needs your season ticket money, help us out" at the same time as "We own the club, mind your own business" just leads to problems.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The "One Club" mentality only works when everyone involved believes it and sticks with it.
 
Last edited:
Kevsgreat said:
Smoke and mirrors to make it look like Donald had more cash than he did.
Click to expand...
Always said Juan was only on-board to get the deal over the line for Donald as he hasn't got a pot to piss in himself, are atleast the money required to run a club like Sunderland.
 
Kevsgreat said:
Problem there is that coming out with "It's your club, help us change the seats" or "The club needs your season ticket money, help us out" at the same time as "We own the club, mind your own business" just leads to problems.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, but it's the reality

"it's your club, but in a legally binding sense, it's MY club"
:lol:
Black Cat Gypsy said:
So we have no say? And we have no right to question or criticizes the owners?
Click to expand...
Of course we do, but that's getting away from the point of the thread and the whole "£20m missing" discussion
 
Tasman said:
Sorry but you take any marketing speak with a grain of sand
Click to expand...

Anar but you’re putting yourself under the bus by saying it then only going out and buying George Dobson & then not spending any money in Janaury
 
Houghtoner said:
Someone should’ve asked when they first took over “OK the sale price is £37m but how much have you actually put in as of now?”

Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think this was clarified at the time. Doubt we’ll hear from Donald again until after he’s sold up and left. He’ll just get Rodwell to be his mouthpiece.
Click to expand...

Takeover in trouble

:lol: accusing Speedy of being malicious is bad, he is one of the best posters on here Just shows nobody is safe from the wrath of the posters up Stewart Donald's arse, never seen anything like it :lol:
www.readytogo.net
Houghtoner said:
Someone should’ve asked when they first took over “OK the sale price is £37m but how much have you actually put in as of now?”

Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think this was clarified at the time. Doubt we’ll hear from Donald again until after he’s sold up and left. He’ll just get Rodwell to be his mouthpiece.
Click to expand...

Takeover in trouble

:lol: accusing Speedy of being malicious is bad, he is one of the best posters on here Just shows nobody is safe from the wrath of the posters up Stewart Donald's arse, never seen anything like it :lol:
www.readytogo.net
 
Last edited:
TopCat said:
It's not an argument. It's a fact. They own the Ltd company and therefore own the revenues/profits
Click to expand...
Absolutely is a fact, but if this owner thinks he can get away with just plundering away what ever money he wants, just because his plan to flip the club never worked, then I think it will hurt him in the pocket anyway because he won’t get anywhere near his asking price.
 
TopCat said:
My interpretation of it is.....

The owners bought a business that had some guaranteed income (£35m in parachute payments). They bought the club from Ellis Short and agreed to pay him in instalments. They used the parachute money to pay off Ellis Short (so effectively used the guaranteed income to buy the club).

At that point, they don't owe the club anything, but agreed to pay back the £35m over a number of years. After paying back around £15m of it, they removed the obligation to pay but still intend to pay
Click to expand...
All true but I cant get my head around the guaranteed income bit, I thought the parachute payment was from the Premier League to help relegated teams cope with paying the high earning players after the drop in income not really as a profit that the new owners can use to buy a club they cant afford.
I know legally and businesses wise they haven't done anything wrong, morally it f***ing stinks.
The guarantee of using the parachute payment was really only put in place by short to make sure he got his money.
SD was actually supposed to use his own money to pay back short then the parachute payment could have been used to have an outstanding team that walked the league.
If he wanted the parachute payment to clear what was owed to short, I havnt got a problem with if he was to put it back but to write it off then people are going to think there is 20 million missing out the funds and understandably makes people think he is a chancer and just here to make as much as he can
Even the strongest of his supporters must be able to see why people think this
 
Iain said:
All true but I cant get my head around the guaranteed income bit, I thought the parachute payment was from the Premier League to help relegated teams cope with paying the high earning players after the drop in income not really as a profit that the new owners can use to buy a club they cant afford.
I know legally and businesses wise they haven't done anything wrong, morally it f***ing stinks.
The guarantee of using the parachute payment was really only put in place by short to make sure he got his money.
SD was actually supposed to use his own money to pay back short then the parachute payment could have been used to have an outstanding team that walked the league.
If he wanted the parachute payment to clear what was owed to short, I havnt got a problem with if he was to put it back but to write it off then people are going to think there is 20 million missing out the funds and understandably makes people think he is a chancer and just here to make as much as he can
Even the strongest of his supporters must be able to see why people think this
Click to expand...
My view is that Short feared that these chancers would leave us in more debt in a few years, so he forced them to use the money coming into the club (parachute payments) to pay the debt.
 
There must be at least 50% of the posts on this thread that give explanations that don't match what actually happened.

SBC's outstanding debt owed by the club hardly ever gets a mentioned by the most rabid posters.
 

Back
Top