NickG Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 as this keeps getting asked, thanks for clear answer RonManager!! Verbatim from the Echo interview with nicola cortese 9/7/09. Q. Markus has bought this with his own personal wealth so does that mean the club is completely debt free? A. The club is completely debt free.
dune Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Cheers for that, i was starting to worry that a geezer worth about £3 billion was going to struggle with the overdraft and mortgage payments.
Barry the Badger Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Cheers for that, i was starting to worry that a geezer worth about £3 billion was going to struggle with the overdraft and mortgage payments. It's a reasonable concern to be fair, just look at Liverpool and Man U, very wealthy owners but still in horrible amounts of debt.
Thedelldays Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 It's a reasonable concern to be fair, just look at Liverpool and Man U, very wealthy owners but still in horrible amounts of debt. stupid comparison when they both sign players that cost more than our club quite regulalrly
Block 5 Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 I understand that our club was recently purchased by a wealthy Swiss national. Does anyone know if the terms of the purchase included clearing all the existing debts such as the stadium mortgage and overdraft? The reason I ask is because there seems to be some doubt surrounding this issue etc etc...... yawn yawn......
Jonnyboy Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Why should we be debt free - just cos he bought the club doesnt mean he wrote a cheque for £26 mill and paid off the stadium He's probably just paying the mortgage on it... Do we have shares still or will there be any in the future?
Ponty Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Why should we be debt free - just cos he bought the club doesnt mean he wrote a cheque for £26 mill and paid off the stadium He's probably just paying the mortgage on it... Do we have shares still or will there be any in the future? He paid off the stadium at a reduced rate. We're debt free and the club owns the stadium.
Professor Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Why should we be debt free - just cos he bought the club doesnt mean he wrote a cheque for £26 mill and paid off the stadium He's probably just paying the mortgage on it... Do we have shares still or will there be any in the future? There never were any shares sold in SFC. The club was fully owned by SLH and is now fully owned by a company controlled by Marcus Leibherr. It was only ever SLH shares that were traded and that company is being wound up, or has already been, as the last act of the administrators.
Danny Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Why should we be debt free - just cos he bought the club doesnt mean he wrote a cheque for £26 mill and paid off the stadium He's probably just paying the mortgage on it... He bought the club, stadium etc., from the parent company. The price he paid for these assets was determined by the amount the creditors wanted to settle the debts of Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC. As a result, there is no mortgage. There is no debt.
exit2 Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 He bought the club, stadium etc., from the parent company. The price he paid for these assets was determined by the amount the creditors wanted to settle the debts of Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC. As a result, there is no mortgage. There is no debt. you nailed it one. During all administration periods, the assets are sold and the creditors are honoured at a fixed rate of xxp in the pound. So if the set figure was 50p then ML has cleared of the debt and brought the company for half of the net debt value. Barclays and Aviva would have agreed this during the period.
eurosaint Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 (edited) He bought the club, stadium etc., from the parent company. The price he paid for these assets was determined by the amount the creditors wanted to settle the debts of Southampton Leisure Holdings PLC. As a result, there is no mortgage. There is no debt. Amen to that, now can we all move forward, united in the cause, onward and upward, together forever ?? Edited 30 July, 2009 by eurosaint No fecking chance methinks !
RonManager Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 So we're debt free - excellent. But are we really?
saintalan Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Shouldn't (ex) SLH share holders get a letter saying something/anything?
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Shouldn't (ex) SLH share holders get a letter saying something/anything? Probably in a few weeks, you'll get a letter saying company was sold, creditors have been paid off, you're getting nothing, but don't worry as you don't owe any money... it all takes time....
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Although your shares are probably registered to the company that bought them for you, so they'll more than likely get the above...
CB Fry Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 Why should we be debt free - just cos he bought the club doesnt mean he wrote a cheque for £26 mill and paid off the stadium He's probably just paying the mortgage on it... Do we have shares still or will there be any in the future? Christ, are people still not getting it? It was pretty bloody clear three weeks ago.
Red and White Army Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 We have had a history of being lied to by our directors and owners - I would like to see some firm evidence. It would be easy to claim the club is debt free while having a special purpose vehicle that assumes the clubs liababilities... perhaps the stadium payments? Such vehicle's are very common for tax and lower funding costs (indeed, we had them before) and we tried to claim the club and parent company were not linked for purposes of not getting docked points. I would like to see irrefutable evidence rather than a single line in the Echo before I am completely convinced. After all, we have had Mike Wilde claiming that he would bring in millions of quid investment as people were queuing up to invest after RL had left (the first time), and all sorts of jiggerypokery from the executive board. Fool us once, shame on you... fool us twice shame on us.
trousers Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 So, just to recap then.....If we're debt free, going into administration was ultimately a good thing? Am I warm?
TopGun Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 I know the administrators have yet to file a final report but some things still make me wonder. For example, whatever the worth of Jacksons's Farm (about £3 trillion if you ever believed Marc Jackson), surely that would have been handed over to creditors as part of any settlement in lieu of outstanding debts... (have I got too many Jacksons in my head there? If I have, you know what I mean... too much wine may have befuddled me!)
Fan The Flames Posted 30 July, 2009 Posted 30 July, 2009 SFC is still in debt to all is supporters to tune of a couple of promotions , a cup run and a top ten prem finish and here is where they start paying ....in sweat
NickG Posted 30 July, 2009 Author Posted 30 July, 2009 We have had a history of being lied to by our directors and owners - I would like to see some firm evidence. It would be easy to claim the club is debt free while having a special purpose vehicle that assumes the clubs liababilities... perhaps the stadium payments? Such vehicle's are very common for tax and lower funding costs (indeed, we had them before) and we tried to claim the club and parent company were not linked for purposes of not getting docked points. I would like to see irrefutable evidence rather than a single line in the Echo before I am completely convinced. After all, we have had Mike Wilde claiming that he would bring in millions of quid investment as people were queuing up to invest after RL had left (the first time), and all sorts of jiggerypokery from the executive board. Fool us once, shame on you... fool us twice shame on us. pay your money and cheer on the red and white.
Red and White Army Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 pay your money and cheer on the red and white. I'll be there, and I think we're in a much better position financially now than last season... but I would need details before I swallow this "debt free" argument hook line and sinker. Some of us called out Wilde and Pinnacle well before the rest of the fans caught on - ML isn't in this category but it doesn't hurt to have all the facts rather than unquestioningly accepting everything we are told.
NickG Posted 31 July, 2009 Author Posted 31 July, 2009 not saying you should have any view just just on the pitch, if we do ok there that's all that matters (as long as we don't go bust again!)
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 We have had a history of being lied to by our directors and owners - I would like to see some firm evidence. It would be easy to claim the club is debt free while having a special purpose vehicle that assumes the clubs liababilities... perhaps the stadium payments? Such vehicle's are very common for tax and lower funding costs (indeed, we had them before) and we tried to claim the club and parent company were not linked for purposes of not getting docked points. I would like to see irrefutable evidence rather than a single line in the Echo before I am completely convinced. After all, we have had Mike Wilde claiming that he would bring in millions of quid investment as people were queuing up to invest after RL had left (the first time), and all sorts of jiggerypokery from the executive board. Fool us once, shame on you... fool us twice shame on us. At the end of the day Saints are in private ownership. ML can do what he likes, when he likes and, because we have no shares, it's none of our business anyway! Harsh but true but that doesn't and will not stop us wondering. However, the wondering could drive us round the bend if ML decides not to confide in us and from his view what has it got to do with us how he runs his business? So far he and his team have seemed to be transparent with no real reason to lie or mislead us. ML is not one of those who has been at the helm during our decline. Let's not judge him how we perceived those others. So, when NC tells us that 'we' are debt free I have no reason to doubt him.
John B Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 At the end of the day Saints are in private ownership. ML can do what he likes, when he likes and, because we have no shares, it's none of our business anyway! Harsh but true but that doesn't and will not stop us wondering. However, the wondering could drive us round the bend if ML decides not to confide in us and from his view what has it got to do with us how he runs his business? So far he and his team have seemed to be transparent with no real reason to lie or mislead us. ML is not one of those who has been at the helm during our decline. Let's not judge him how we perceived those others. So, when NC tells us that 'we' are debt free I have no reason to doubt him. Very true we just have to wait and see what happens. I would have thought things will get better but maybe not as quickly as posters want.
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Very true we just have to wait and see what happens. I would have thought things will get better but maybe not as quickly as posters want. I think that's what is driving some to comment about the 'debt free' statement. It's going to take a while to rebuild this club. I'm happy that we are now financially stable. All I want now is team and football stability. I'm not expecting us to 'walk this league', conversely though I'd be peeved, seriously, if we were relegated! I feel that both ML and AP seem to share a vision of steady, sustainable growth. Hopefully promotion next season, stability the season after and then a push for PL status the following year. It's all well having lots of money, splashing on costly players etc but you have to have stability in a club and, let's face it, how many of the type of players we would like, would be interested in Saints right at this moment in time?
John B Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 I think that's what is driving some to comment about the 'debt free' statement. It's going to take a while to rebuild this club. I'm happy that we are now financially stable. All I want now is team and football stability. I'm not expecting us to 'walk this league', conversely though I'd be peeved, seriously, if we were relegated! I feel that both ML and AP seem to share a vision of steady, sustainable growth. Hopefully promotion next season, stability the season after and then a push for PL status the following year. It's all well having lots of money, splashing on costly players etc but you have to have stability in a club and, let's face it, how many of the type of players we would like, would be interested in Saints right at this moment in time? Although the dutch experiment proved a failure I liked the idea of trying to build a team around the academy players provided they were good enough plus bringing in other good players. It does take time to build a team but there is no point in bringing in players just to appease the fans and some players suggested on this forum like Lita Bent etc are as you say totally uninterested in joining SFC
Red and White Army Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 So, when NC tells us that 'we' are debt free I have no reason to doubt him. The trouble is, I don't trust your judgment. I doubt you doubted Wilde and Pinnacle either! While I don't place ML in their category - not by a long shot - I am all for transparency and honesty in dealings with the fans.
John B Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Has anyone mentioned that we are debt free yet? I dont care whether SFC is debt free as the club belongs to ML
chrisobee Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Has anyone mentioned that we are debt free yet? Are we? :smt102
CB Fry Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 The trouble is, I don't trust your judgment. I doubt you doubted Wilde and Pinnacle either! While I don't place ML in their category - not by a long shot - I am all for transparency and honesty in dealings with the fans. We've had "transparency and honesty" when we were told "we are debt free". Because we are debt free. But you don't believe it. So what's the point of demanding "transparency and honesty" when you're not going to believe what people say anyway? It works both ways you know.
Clapham Saint Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 The trouble is, I don't trust your judgment. I doubt you doubted Wilde and Pinnacle either! While I don't place ML in their category - not by a long shot - I am all for transparency and honesty in dealings with the fans. The guy was asked a direct question and answered it directly. What exactly would satisfy your "transparenct and honesty" criteria? Maybe they could invite any fans who are interested into the accounts dept to inspect he books and records? Or post the club's bank account details and log in info on this forum? Either the statement that we a re completely debt free is true (in which case calm the **** down). Or they will be caught out when they release their accounts (in which case calm the **** down).
eelpie Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Talking of expensive signings, was Skacel eventually sold?
eurosaint Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Can some of you lot please get to grips with the fact that many successful, profitable businesses use debt as a positive tool when it suits them ! There are many reasons/situations why a company may prefer some sort of debt to no debt at all ! All we (as fans) need to be concerned with is the club strategy, how it affects the team and it's performance and leave the rest to ML and his management hierarchy !!! For too long now we have been involved with PLC shenanigans, boardroom bickering and the like. Time to forget all of that nonsense and concentrate on the footy, I say !!
Clapham Saint Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Can some of you lot please get to grips with the fact that many successful, profitable businesses use debt as a positive tool when it suits them ! There are many reasons/situations why a company may prefer some sort of debt to no debt at all ! All we (as fans) need to be concerned with is the club strategy, how it affects the team and it's performance and leave the rest to ML and his management hierarchy !!! For too long now we have been involved with PLC shenanigans, boardroom bickering and the like. Time to forget all of that nonsense and concentrate on the footy, I say !! True, however the level of debt and how it is structured can be an issue if things start to go t*ts up. Hopefully not an issue but given what has happened is still at the forefront of people's minds. It would appear to be irrelevant though as it would seem that debt funding wasn't used.
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 We've had "transparency and honesty" when we were told "we are debt free". Because we are debt free. But you don't believe it. So what's the point of demanding "transparency and honesty" when you're not going to believe what people say anyway? It works both ways you know. Exactly my view. I'm now one of life's cynics but, until proven otherwise, I will take ML & NC's words as honest and transparent. At the end of the day they don't have to justify anything to us fans as they, represented by NC, own it. I hardly think that the club was bought to be an adventure doomed to failure. I'm of the opinion that ML is succesful enough a businessman to have taken good football business advice and will have surrounded himself with such advisors, so he and his team can learn and make their business model succesful. He's no slouch, he'll know all the sharp practices even though he might not practice them himself and, despite his avuncular appearance, he's going to be no pushover when it comes to wheeling and dealing. As Mr John & his agent seem to have discovered!
Whitey Grandad Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Talking of expensive signings, was Skacel eventually sold? 'released by mutual consent' or some such wording, I believe. As far as I recall, we received no fee but we could stop paying him.
Whitey Grandad Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 What is it with this 'debt free' obsession? This club is now in private ownership and all its financial arrangements are a matter for its owner. Since that owner is filthy rich, we are not going to go bust so all that matters is how much financing is available to help us advance up the leagues. We supporters can relax and get back to the business of following our team around the country. Give it a rest, please. ](*,)
RonManager Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 We are not debt free as I have just sent an invoice in for dry cleaning as I spilt my coffee when we went 1-0 up against Hearts!
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 We are not debt free as I have just sent an invoice in for dry cleaning as I spilt my coffee when we went 1-0 up against Hearts! Is that what can be termed as 'Liquidation' then?
RonManager Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Is that what can be termed as 'Liquidation' then? Sorry I don't get it.......No-wait.....Oh, I ........................ no, no I don't get it.
Bearsy Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 I don't suppose the club own the stadium, does it? I imagine ML owns the stadium and leases it to the club?
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 Sorry I don't get it.......No-wait.....Oh, I ........................ no, no I don't get it. Is a cup of coffee not liquid in your house then? Too obtuse. Sorry. :cool:
benjii Posted 31 July, 2009 Posted 31 July, 2009 I don't suppose the club own the stadium, does it? I imagine ML owns the stadium and leases it to the club? What on earth would be the point of that? Look everyone: Markus Liebherr owns a company called M2347589 Ltd (or something like that - search the OS archive of you want to know). That company bought the footballing assets of SLH PLC. We are not sure exactly what, if anything, wasn't included in the asset sale yet, but if the stadium was excluded we would have heard of it by now.
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