WMS Who Owns Sunderland AFC?

[CissesUnderpants9]

Spot on, the quicker these Minutes are released the better.Somethings not right,Can you remember i posted last season that the club had no intention of going up in the short term,yourself and think it was riff raff backed me up.Now i am feeling just the same,not long till we find out, in the Jan window.As you say if we have been led up the garden path again all hell will break out.

You can guarantee that.

 

[Hep]

short got thw para money..i think in reality..if they had to pay 37m for safc then..they simply wouldnt have done it..but then nor woruld anyone else because it wasnt worth 37m then...it was worth 12.7m..

This ^

Remember, Short took the best deal. There wasn't a billionaire with a load of money to lose waiting in the wings.

 

[kildaremackem]

Wrong again. If KLD wants to loan money to the club due to the pandemic the others are under absolutely no obligation to match him pound for pound. And that won't affect the shareholdings.

yes he can loan it...but will he? and also an indebted club is worth less than a non indebted one...

 

[molthemackem]

Spot on, the quicker these Minutes are released the better.Somethings not right,Can you remember i posted last season that the club had no intention of going up in the short term,yourself and think it was riff raff backed me up.Now i am feeling just the same,not long till we find out, in the Jan window.As you say if we have been led up the garden path again all hell will break out.

It takes a bit of time for the minutes of any meeting to be agreed and signed off on but just going from the comments of the past few days and some speculation in the media then the club must surely see that coming out with the details of who exactly owns what, just to stop any further speculation, would be the best cousre of action. I look forward to reading then very shortly.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

short got thw para money..i think in reality..if they had to pay 37m for safc then..they simply wouldnt have done it..but then nor woruld anyone else because it wasnt worth 37m then...it was worth 12.7m..

They wouldn't have been able to afford it. The para payments allowed them to fund the purchase (and keep Short sweet at the same time) to buy a 'ready made' football club in the sense it has a massive fan base and already some of the best facilities in the country. That could then be sold for a profit within a year if they cut all it's cost.

If that was another business it would have been a shrewd move but their mistake was that football clubs simply aren't a nornal business and don't have run of the mill customers who don't have a vested interest in the 'product'. They thought they could lie about it and people wouldn't care enough and all being well they would have been out with a tidy sum before anyone realised potentially paying back that money they used during the sale process in terms of the valuation.

Ultimately they couldn't make enough profit on it, or couldn't find a buyer after putting their eggs in Campbells basket, so sold a smaller share (than the whole lot) and keep their toes in the water for a bumper payoff further down the line with someone else making investments, and the money they originally saved on the para payments keeping them at the table.

 

[Hep]

Wrong again. If KLD wants to loan money to the club due to the pandemic the others are under absolutely no obligation to match him pound for pound. And that won't affect the shareholdings.

Actually, he's right, if the money is done via Share Issue as he said, they will have to put money in.

Why would KLD loan money to the club, whilst the other shareholders don't??

 

[G Force]

Welcome to the SMB.


I doubt that will ever happen. From what people who know what they’re talking about on financial matters, legally they don’t have to, but morally they should.
So that’s where the case falls to pieces, as they have very low ones.

And that is exactly why there is unrest with them

 

[Hep]

They wouldn't have been able to afford it. The para payments allowed them to fund the purchase (and keep Short sweet at the same time) to buy a 'ready made' football club in the sense it has a massive fan base and already some of the best facilities in the country. That could then be sold for a profit within a year if they cut all it's cost.

If that was another business it would have been a shrewd move but their mistake was that football clubs simply aren't a nornal business and don't have run of the mill customers who don't have a vested interest in the 'product'. They thought they could lie about it and people wouldn't care enough and all being well they would have been out with a tidy sum before anyone realised potentially paying back that money they used during the sale process in terms of the valuation.

Ultimately they couldn't make enough profit on it, or couldn't find a buyer after putting their eggs in Campbells basket, so sold a smaller share (than the whole lot) and keep their toes in the water for a bumper payoff further down the line with someone else making investments, and the money they originally saved on the para payments keeping them at the table.

That's right. Without the para payments the deal with Short wouldn't have happened. So what would have short done then? I'd guess he'd have waited till the parachute payments landed, repaid part of his loan with them and put the club into administration.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

It would just lead to discussions on here and chats in the pub. Nothing of substance and nothing that will make a difference.

If you think the whole donaldout campaign and atmosphere around the club at the time was just a chat in the pub and nothing more, theb you either have a short memory or are deliberately playining it down to suit.

Donald publicly made the club available for purchase and resigned as chairman as a result.

 

[Hep]

And that is exactly why there is unrest with them

What? Because we want them to hand over their cash to fund our club over and above its revenues?

 

[molthemackem]

Actually, he's right, if the money is done via Share Issue as he said, they will have to put money in.

Why would KLD loan money to the club, whilst the other shareholders don't??

I believe that if KLD did put money in as part of a share issue, the remaining directors would have to cough up cash or dilute their share holding...Grumps would be able to confirm if i'm right.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

That's right. Without the para payments the deal with Short wouldn't have happened. So what would have short done then? I'd guess he'd have waited till the parachute payments landed, repaid part of his loan with them and put the club into administration.

No, your logic is all owners are the same and different owners don't change anything so Short wouldn't have done anything differently to Donald or KLD.

 

[Hep]

If you think the whole donaldout campaign and atmosphere around the club at the time was just a chat in the pub and nothing more, theb you either have a short memory or are deliberately playining it down to suit.

Donald publicly made the club available for purchase and resigned as chairman as a result.

Just like when Murray resigned? But in reality, nothing really changed and he did what he was going to anyway.

You've just got to look at all the other clubs who protest against their owner, little of it makes a difference. Look at Ashley, he stayed until he decided, not the fans.

No, your logic is all owners are the same and different owners don't change anything so Short wouldn't have done anything differently to Donald or KLD.

No, my logic is fans knowing the finer details of the ownership doesn't make a difference.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

Just like when Murray resigned? But in reality, nothing really changed and he did what he was going to anyway.

You've just got to look at all the other clubs who protest against their owner, little of it makes a difference. Look at Ashley, he stayed until he decided, not the fans.

No, my logic is fans knowing the finer details of the ownership doesn't make a difference.

Ownership of a football club isn't finer details.

 

[G Force]

What? Because we want them to hand over their cash to fund our club over and above its revenues?

No we didn’t want them to lie about how they funded the club, wanting to flip it after a year and needing to go into a massive cost cutting exercise while flogging off the academy kids for funds as the flip didn’t happen

Oh and accuse the fans of kidnapping, or pointed digs in the media. Lie lie lie.

And you wonder why we don’t want them to have much of a say in the club.

I get it, you don’t care about any of that. You’re in a very small minority though. Good for you, I wish I didn’t

 

[kildaremackem]

They wouldn't have been able to afford it. The para payments allowed them to fund the purchase (and keep Short sweet at the same time) to buy a 'ready made' football club in the sense it has a massive fan base and already some of the best facilities in the country. That could then be sold for a profit within a year if they cut all it's cost.

If that was another business it would have been a shrewd move but their mistake was that football clubs simply aren't a nornal business and don't have run of the mill customers who don't have a vested interest in the 'product'. They thought they could lie about it and people wouldn't care enough and all being well they would have been out with a tidy sum before anyone realised potentially paying back that money they used during the sale process in terms of the valuation.

Ultimately they couldn't make enough profit on it, or couldn't find a buyer after putting their eggs in Campbells basket, so sold a smaller share (than the whole lot) and keep their toes in the water for a bumper payoff further down the line with someone else making investments, and the money they originally saved on the para payments keeping them at the table.

i doubt they would have been able to pay 37 m right then your right..amybe with sartori they would. but my point is....no one would whether they could afford to or not, because they would be paying 3 times the value of the asset...
the money they saved on the para? they saved nowt..ellis got it..he saved 25 m

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

No we didn’t want them to lie about how they funded the club, wanting to flip it after a year and needing to go into a massive cost cutting exercise while flogging off the academy kids for funds as the flip didn’t happen

Oh and accuse the fans of kidnapping, or pointed digs in the media. Lie lie lie.

And you wonder why we don’t want them to have much of a say in the club.

I get it, you don’t care about any of that. You’re in a very small minority though. Good for you, I wish I didn’t

He clearly cares or wouldn't even be on this thread. He's quite vociferously against any clarity with regards to football clubs.

He hasn't said why though which is odd.

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

I believe that if KLD did put money in as part of a share issue, the remaining directors would have to cough up cash or dilute their share holding...Grumps would be able to confirm if i'm right.

Correct. That's not the case with a loan.

 

[kildaremackem]

He clearly cares or wouldn't even be on this thread. He's quite vociferously against any clarity with regards to football clubs.

He hasn't said why though which is odd.

yes its strange, he probably agrees with me on a few things..but aking why it matters who owns a club is a really strange view indeed

Correct. That's not the case with a loan.

but if a club has loads of debt..even if soft loans..it reduces the notional value of the equity for others wanting to sell? so for eg if KLD loaned the club money..donald would find it hard to sell his shares to anyone other than KLD?

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

He clearly cares or wouldn't even be on this thread. He's quite vociferously against any clarity with regards to football clubs.

He hasn't said why though which is odd.

I think the point he's trying to make, but not well, is that, other than making a lot of noise, there's little the fans can do irrespective of what the ownership structure looks like. What impact any noise has is simply a matter of how thick-skinned the owners are.