nevthelodgemoorowl Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 The Glaziers had mountains of debt in the form of negative equity. They didn't have a liquid penny to scratch their arses with yet they went on to finance the purchase of manure with borrowed money secured against nothing more than Manures revenue potential. So forgive me if I don't understand a piddling little debt on the financing of our training ground improvements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southportdc Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 52 minutes ago, Minton said: Where has it even been suggested that we are about to enter administration?! Right here: 52 minutes ago, Minton said: we are about to enter administration 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
room0035 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 10 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said: The Glaziers had mountains of debt in the form of negative equity. They didn't have a liquid penny to scratch their arses with yet they went on to finance the purchase of manure with borrowed money secured against nothing more than Manures revenue potential. So forgive me if I don't understand a piddling little debt on the financing of our training ground improvements. Thing with the glazers though they are paying it back, they bought man Utd for about £800m and their last account that figure of debt was down to £330m still a lot of money but in 12 years they have over halved the debt and still managed to keep Man Utd in profit most season and also competitive at the top of English football and in Europe though not liked by the fans i would say they are doing a great job and should they come to sell Man Utd they would get in the billions for their investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northeastowl Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 21 minutes ago, steveger said: Old tightarsed Milan used to borrow money all the time... seems a normal thing 350k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minton Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 12 minutes ago, southportdc said: Right here: I never posted anything about us going into administration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 27 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said: The Glaziers had mountains of debt in the form of negative equity. They didn't have a liquid penny to scratch their arses with yet they went on to finance the purchase of manure with borrowed money secured against nothing more than Manures revenue potential. So forgive me if I don't understand a piddling little debt on the financing of our training ground improvements. Exactly Nothing to even raise an eyebrow at this one Not sure why people are getting in a pickle Especially given the wealth and desire of our chairman Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Batman Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 36 minutes ago, McRightSide said: DC can’t invest any more money due to P&S Has he just acquired some money he can actually spend, whilst the repayment of the debt doesn’t impact P&S? That's what I thought too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heppers Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, mkowl said: Final pages of the PDF referred to on the link show it is to do with training ground My interpretation is that we have not paid several invoices due to the building and construction suppliers It then looks like Close Financing have acquired the debt and then secured it - I would say that is my interpretation not fact. Close are one of the key financing people out there Close Leasing fund assets such as trucks, diggers, etc.. They also fund quirkier assets. They also provided funding to Reading Football Club to improve the trading ground. This was to finance some modular buildings. They do not lend against land and buildings - only moveable assets. They may use the property charge to support a lend against weak assets - ones with a weak resale value. The modular building I described are weak in terms of resale value as they are bespoke and cost a lot to install and remove. If we are borrowing to improve the training ground that is a good thing as it spreads the cost which benefits us in terms of FFP. If they have offered an operating lease it is also off balance sheet. Edited April 26, 2018 by heppers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heppers Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 22 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: Exactly Nothing to even raise an eyebrow at this one Not sure why people are getting in a pickle Especially given the wealth and desire of our chairman Close Leasing fund assets such as trucks, diggers, etc.. They also fund quirkier assets. They also provided funding to Reading Football Club to improve the trading ground. This was to finance some modular buildings. They do not lend against land and buildings - only moveable assets. They may use the property charge to support a lend against weak assets - ones with a weak resale value. The modular building I described are weak in terms of resale value as they are bespoke and cost a lot to install and remove. If we are borrowing to improve the training ground that is a good thing as it spreads the cost which benefits us in terms of FFP. If they have offered an operating lease it is also off balance sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 21 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: Exactly Nothing to even raise an eyebrow at this one Not sure why people are getting in a pickle Especially given the wealth and desire of our chairman Because certain people will try to find a negative in anything the club or owner does, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 1 minute ago, heppers said: Close Leasing fund assets such as trucks, diggers, etc.. They also provided funding to Reading Football Club to improve the trading ground. This was to finance some modular buildings. They do not lend against land and buildings - only moveable assets. They may use the property charge to support a lend against weak assets - ones with a weak resale value. The modular building I described are weak in terms of resale value as they are bespoke and cost a lot to install and remove. If we are borrowing to improve the training ground that is a good thing as it spreads the cost which benefits us in terms of FFP. If they have offered an operating lease it is also off balance sheet. Good analysis - the reference to invoices threw me a little because I have not seen that in practice but what you are saying there makes a lot of sense I also thought the work had been done a while back but perhaps this document can only be signed off on completion ? Agree it makes sense to spread the cost but in terms of FFP I thought costs like these were excluded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 1 minute ago, PARKOWL said: Because certain people will try to find a negative in anything the club or owner does, Or just debating a point in the public domain because its a forum about Sheffield Wednesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 5 minutes ago, PARKOWL said: Because certain people will try to find a negative in anything the club or owner does, It's up to those who dont' hold negative views to counter-argue then The more people post positives the less heard the negative ones will be Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heppers Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 7 minutes ago, mkowl said: Good analysis - the reference to invoices threw me a little because I have not seen that in practice but what you are saying there makes a lot of sense I also thought the work had been done a while back but perhaps this document can only be signed off on completion ? Agree it makes sense to spread the cost but in terms of FFP I thought costs like these were excluded It definitely relates to Modular Buildings. The mention of invoices is due to the buildings and additions being detailed in those invoices stated so they know which assets they are funding. Most sensible businesses will finance assets over the life of that asset. A good spot but a non story. We are investing in improvements - fantastic news!! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 3 minutes ago, heppers said: It definitely relates to Modular Buildings. The mention of invoices is due to the buildings and additions being detailed in those invoices stated so they know which assets they are funding. Most sensible businesses will finance assets over the life of that asset. A good spot but a non story. We are investing in improvements - fantastic news!! Bang on Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S36 OWL Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 2 hours ago, alanharper said: The finest legal minds on Bladesmad will be on it as we speak. Jv will be here later to pick through our finances . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 How much is it for because i might aswell be reading chinese Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 31 minutes ago, mkowl said: Or just debating a point in the public domain because its a forum about Sheffield Wednesday No Problem debating anything, but I would suggest that someone with a more positive or even neutral outlook on the club and its owners wouldnt have put such a negative and misleading thread title Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HirstWhoScoredIt Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 Looked at this and the comments and I would comment as follows:- Close have acquired a fixed charge mortgage over our training ground. There is absolutely no merit to people suggesting it has been done for tax reasons. We are a football club and will therefore never earn sufficient profit over and above the accumulated and allowable losses to ever pay any tax. There is also no merit on people saying it is for FFP. To my knowledge, spending on FFP has absolutely no bearing. Therefore the following are the only plausible explanations that I can think of:- 1. We are short of cash so we have raised cash against the training ground. 2. We have spent on infrastructure on the training ground and have raised some or all of the cash via a mortgage. Either way, it suggests Chansiri cannot or does not want to put more cash in. This is also consistent with our season ticket policy - as I have said repeatedly to fans that insist on sticking their fingers in their ears. The Same fans that consistently told me to shut up when I stated that we only had a finite window in which we needed to get promoted in due to FFP and the fact the Chairman ain’t a billionaire. I suspect the financial reality of the next few years will surprise many of our fans. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 55 minutes ago, PARKOWL said: No Problem debating anything, but I would suggest that someone with a more positive or even neutral outlook on the club and its owners wouldnt have put such a negative and misleading thread title the fact is Wednesday are in debt to a 3rd party Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now