Jump to content

Maddogbob

Moderator
  • Posts

    21,216
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About Maddogbob

  • Birthday 25/12/1978

Profile Information

  • Location
    Chesterfield

Recent Profile Visitors

9,339 profile views

Maddogbob's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Reacting Well
  • Dedicated
  • Very Popular
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine

Recent Badges

11k

Reputation

1

Community Answers

  1. Yes. My cover is blown. Now where did those moon cakes go?
  2. It's something you read quite regularly on the local Facebook grassroots pages. Huge shortage this season as well. What's the answer? For me sanctions on people that break the rules and better support for young ref's. I believe the one I've posted comes from the girls Saturday league, just demonstrating that it's a problem across both forms of the game. Heard a story from a friend whos son was involved in a game that had to be abandoned recently after a u16 lad decided to make a racist remark, then decided he wanted to fight the lad he'd abused, the manager and finally the ref. That was 10 mins in. Sunday I was watching my youngest, saw a lad elbow another kid in the face, with venom and spite, just because he was losing.... That was at u7. (Not his team btw). Manager refused to remove him from play, because they only had 5 and it was a cup final. Very little the ref could do imho. I'll be honest, it's getting worse out there and personally, with all the drama that goes with it, grassroots is increasingly not worth while, or it's certainly not worth the head space.
  3. Think the 30 year thing is between swfc and S3. Which I think is the loophole we used re ffp. We just put it in the wrong accounts. If S3 don't pay the loan, I presume that becomes void. I'm pretty sure the third party (who then take ownership, lock, stock and barrel) can do what they like. Which for me is the biggest danger. S3 currently owns it, don't pay, as per you photo, earlier they get Hillsborough as payment. Bit like a bank taking ownership of a house if you don't pay the mortgage. Sorry if I'm coming across as a bit scaremongering. I only have a very basic level of understanding.
  4. Actually I've just read the trust statement. That actually makes more sense to me now. Think I was a bit wrong. Long and short, if the loan isn't paid back next year, another company, not belonging to DC owns the stadium and they can charge whatever they like rent wise. (imagine fair market value), so that the buisness hemorrhaging yet more money, in the sense it's another cost. Which impacts everything. In essence, we've got a year to find it. So yes I'm concerned. As I'm not unduly sure old DC has it.
  5. All boils down the front loading the buisness with multi year tickets for me.
  6. I don't know mate.I could be wrong. It might be worth going back to the original source to re read. For me there are two different loans. The one between swfc and S3 and this other one. I may be getting confused between the payments between S3 and Swfc. The third one now includes the stadium as collateral if it's not paid, from the looks of things. The stadium passes to the third party as an asset. Next year, if this isn't paid with the added interest. Because it's not been paid this year basically.
  7. He has matchday income now. How far that stretches, is anyone's guess. However most of the season tickets are loan notes from last season. It's a plus side that we have our main revenue stream open, how effective and how much it brings in is another worry re wages.
  8. Agree with you. Don't really see it as a positive and agree that's a low rate. I don't like the idea of not servicing a debt.
  9. That's no fact mate, just how I understand it. I could be totally off.
  10. I'll be honest, my understanding is the one I posted above, the S3 and swfc deal is separate and a bit smoke and mirrors. In my opinion. He's done the 3rd party deal to do the S3/swfc one. Using Hillsborough as collateral. As for the payments I'm sure they are for a number of years. Who that's between, why and how. I'll leave that to better informed people, who have a greater understanding.
  11. He did this way before the covids was a thng. The ground "sale" was to loophole ffp.
  12. I think so. There are far better finance people on owlstalk, that understand deals like this than me though. That's just my basic understanding. While I understand it why he did it. For me effectively selling your home ground is never a good idea and history tells us that it normally dosn't end well for the club involved. It's always struck me as robbing Peter to pay Paul.
  13. The the ownership of Hillsborough passes to the lender if DC fails to make payment. The lender is a third party. Not DC. And it's 6.4 million per year, for a number of years. I think, it's not just a one off. Ergo, he dosn't pay, we lose the ground to a third party.
×
×
  • Create New...