Jump to content

BREAKING NEWS - CHANSIRI LOOKING TO SECURE DEBT AGAINST HILLSBOROUGH STADIUM


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Harrysgame said:

Think some just panic about anything. Most of us have mortgages. Similar thing. DC sees the downturn in revenue, so obtains  some funds, so not going to his own pocket all the time. Many businesses have funding for tough times or expansion etc etc. Stop panicking.

Dont panic. We are a well run club. We all know that.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Sole director doesn't appear as a director of any other companies but a search of Nigel Weiss finds this company

 

http://www.goodforsport.com/index.cfm

 

 

 

Seems they are the middlemen not the actual finance company - which will be interesting to see which entity is levying the legal charge in due course

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, RichSheffWeds said:

Haven’t read this thread. 
 

I think there are a couple of points worth making for balance. 
 

The vast majority of very wealthy individuals don’t keep hundreds of millions in cash. 
 

That would be financial madness and a massive drag on investment performance so their wealth is usually in assets which they either don’t want to encash for various reasons (like tax liabilities on crystallisation) or because they are illiquid (like property). 
 

Secondly, most very wealthy individuals use debt to manage their position for the reasons above. 
 


 

Have chelsea taken loans out against their ground? Dont know, just asking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, mcmigo said:

13 pages of moaning and speculation and no solutions. Typical owlstalk.

 

i am late to this thread as I am actually doing something about this. So far , no tuna have bitten on the rod I am dangling in the pond down the road but at least I am out there doing something unlike you keyboard warriors.

Whilst you were typing you missed 2 good bites.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article this morning in the star with Maguire, to which he says there is “nothing to panic about” 12 hours after stirring the pot, and making a very weak comparison to Bassini (because he happened to use the same football finance firm once) is the reason the bloke gets pelters on here. 
 



 


 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So long as the terms of the lease are secure and so long as they keep to those terms then SWFC as the lessee can be indifferent about the identity of the lessor or about how the lessor has funded the purchase of the asset.

 

It could matter if the lease terms protecting SWFC use of the asset are weak; if they cannot fulfil lease terms such as rental payments or if they as the lessee are joined to the charge along with Sheffield 3. In these cases a lessor default could be significant.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

The article this morning in the star with Maguire, to which he says there is “nothing to panic about” 12 hours after stirring the pot, 

 


 

 


FACT CHECK TIME

HI @bigdan2003 - please can you explain how he in any way  'stirred the pot'? 

Thanks

 

 

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

The article this morning in the star with Maguire, to which he says there is “nothing to panic about” 12 hours after stirring the pot 



Just to clarify for all readers reading this and about to agree, Maguire DID NOT POST OR TWEET  ONE SINGLE TIME ANYWHERE about this


So was not 'stirring the pot'

NOT ONE POST from Maguire
NOT ONE SINGLE TWEET from Maguire


THIS is why people  bashing experts, pundits and journalists aren't taken seriously on here anymore

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:



Just to clarify for all readers reading this and about to agree, Maguire DID NOT POST OR TWEET  ONE SINGLE TIME ANYWHERE about this


So was not 'stirring the pot'

NOT ONE POST from Maguire
NOT ONE SINGLE TWEET from Maguire


THIS is why people  bashing experts, pundits and journalists aren't taken seriously on here anymore


eh? 
 

 

769CCEB8-9257-4473-A2D2-94A50E6DAD2D.jpeg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

11 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:



Just to clarify for all readers reading this and about to agree, Maguire DID NOT POST OR TWEET  ONE SINGLE TIME ANYWHERE about this


So was not 'stirring the pot'

NOT ONE POST from Maguire
NOT ONE SINGLE TWEET from Maguire


THIS is why people  bashing experts, pundits and journalists aren't taken seriously on here anymore


“not tweeted once about this” 

 

Well theres a whole thread here sausage

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bigdan2003 said:


eh? 
 

 

769CCEB8-9257-4473-A2D2-94A50E6DAD2D.jpeg



Oh dear...


OH DEAR

 

Okay...

Can I repeat my question to you

WHERE - ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET - WAS MAGUIRE 'STIRRING THE POT'???

He didn't make a single post
He didn't do a single tweet anywhere

So come on.. how exactly was Maguire stirring anything?

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, kobayashi said:

So long as the terms of the lease are secure and so long as they keep to those terms then SWFC as the lessee can be indifferent about the identity of the lessor or about how the lessor has funded the purchase of the asset.

 

It could matter if the lease terms protecting SWFC use of the asset are weak; if they cannot fulfil lease terms such as rental payments or if they as the lessee are joined to the charge along with Sheffield 3. In these cases a lessor default could be significant.

 

 

Having read the EFL disciplinary case and our aptitude to paperwork completion I am fairly nervous.

 

Saying that a finance company would look at the same lease to assess its risk position 

 

The fear is more that at some stage the ownership of the stadium could be divorced from the football club. That never seems to end well ever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, @owlstalk said:



Oh dear...


OH DEAR

 

Okay...

Can I repeat my question to you

WHERE - ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET - WAS MAGUIRE 'STIRRING THE POT'???

He didn't make a single post
He didn't do a single tweet anywhere

So come on.. how exactly was Maguire stirring anything?


hang on I’ve just quoted you where you said “he’s not tweeted about this” (assuming you meant he hasn’t tweeted about the subject) 

 

And I’ve just proven he has tweeted about it. 

 

Why do you get so defensive about these things? 
 

Call it an opinion, plenty of people will agree as plenty will disagree.

 

I think he’s stirring the pot. 

 

You don’t

 

The end.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:



Just to clarify for all readers reading this and about to agree, Maguire DID NOT POST OR TWEET  ONE SINGLE TIME ANYWHERE about this


So was not 'stirring the pot'

NOT ONE POST from Maguire
NOT ONE SINGLE TWEET from Maguire


THIS is why people  bashing experts, pundits and journalists aren't taken seriously on here anymore

 

But those defending them or believe every word uttered are equally not taken seriously - 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...