saints_is_the_south Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Adam Blackmorets twitter feed came up with this last night: Adam Blackmore @bigadamsport Just finishing work on a #saintsfc club finance story which will air @ 0700 tomorrow, fans can also hear details in @solentsport bulletins Which was quickly followed by this from BBC Radio Solent's: BBC Solent Sport @solentsport My personal view is that #saintsfc fans should like what they hear in morning - I'll put interview up on twitter @solentsport as well So, anybody been listening to Solent in the past 10 minutes and heard what it is? Not got access to a radio atm, so whoever does hear it please post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoneuelllfanclub Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Where has 33m come from then? If private investor or creditor such as bank lent it then do they now have shares in club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Solent headline: "It has emerged that Saints borrowed £33m in the last two years but that has been paid back in shares" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Solent: "The owner has taken £33m of their loans to the club off the balance sheet by swapping for shares" In other words, the Liebherrs loaned money to their own club and then got 'paid back' in shares, ergo no debt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Saints: "we carefully match our rise in player wages with increases in revenue" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the wedge Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Wages are currently 93% of turnover. However in the last 6 months turnover has increased by 70%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 So what does that mean in layman's terms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 So what does that mean in layman's terms? We're minted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 93% is a real worry - I read once clubs should only be at about 50-60% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 93% is a real worry - I read once clubs should only be at about 50-60% That percentage will drop like a stone in 7 games time... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the wedge Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 But with a rapidly rising turnover this will be reduced. What will be interesting is how much we start paying for premiership quality players who will want to earn more as how that affects our turnover in the coming years. Assuming we get promoted, touch wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 That percentage will drop like a stone in 7 games time... :-) Hhmmm ok but I am a bit of a pessimist what if we don't as we have some real tough games still and West Ham will come good IMO??? Also the rise in Prem wages for the mercenaries the agents will be pushing our way will that not rise again ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Hhmmm ok but I am a bit of a pessimist what if we don't as we have some real tough games still and West Ham will come good IMO??? Also the rise in Prem wages for the mercenaries the agents will be pushing our way will that not rise again ? Chill, it's not your money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Chill, it's not your money. No but its 'my' club and do not want to see us do a Skates - its a bit hypocritical is it not otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the wedge Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 The fact that the financial investment has been returned in shares shows that the club will not be held to random over it. If the investors want out, then they sell their shares for whatever money someone will pay for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 No but its 'my' club and do not want to see us do a Skates - its a bit hypocritical is it not otherwise? We won't do a Skates. We are run by ze Germans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 So, The Liebherrs, already owning the club, lent it 33m. They took shares in the club as repayment for the loan. In other words, they've given the money to the club, because they took shares for something they already own. Thats how I see it. Anyone see it differently ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggles31 Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 93% is a real worry - I read once clubs should only be at about 50-60% Surely this is all good news we are debt free, as the Liebherr family have effectively written off the original loan meaning if they sell we will be highly sought after with our current squad and facilities. As for the high wages, this will balance out assuming we go up won't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Not worried about 93% of turnover going on wages, since revenue will rocket if we go up, and I assuming that NA views the squad as being largely fit for Premiership with maybe the odd addition. Problem comes, of course, if we screw up promotion over these last 7 games. But seeing as NC has a 5 year plan, it means that maybe more loans would be forthcoming in the worst case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mesaint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Hhmmm ok but I am a bit of a pessimist what if we don't as we have some real tough games still and West Ham will come good IMO??? Also the rise in Prem wages for the mercenaries the agents will be pushing our way will that not rise again ? I am sure Nigel & Nicola are aware of what will happen with agents, if fact i'd be amazed if it hasn't been happening a for while now. They will stick to the same ethics on players that has got us this far, I.E. We'll only get in players who will fit into our mold of being team/squad players & that are better than we already have. They'll massage a few ego's and get the right players at the right price or they won't be signed up. The extra money that comes in will simply allow us to get in better players and pay sensible wages, well as sensible as prem player wages can be. This is all hepathetical of course, as we've got to get promoted first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 (edited) So, The Liebherrs, already owning the club, lent it 33m. They took shares in the club as repayment for the loan. In other words, they've given the money to the club, because they took shares for something they already own. Thats how I see it. Anyone see it differently ? No seems about right to me basicaly they've given the club 33million. I suppose if the needed/wanted to they could just take that back from the PL money (if we get there) and so won't be out of pocket. Edited 29 March, 2012 by doddisalegend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint si Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 IIRC these accounts are for the year 2010/2011, so we already have increased turnover through simply being in the Championship rather than League 1 ... higher gates and ticket prices, more TV money (and probably more appearances), higher solidarity payments, higher prize money for finishing position (presumably), higher demand for corporate etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 So, The Liebherrs, already owning the club, lent it 33m. They took shares in the club as repayment for the loan. In other words, they've given the money to the club, because they took shares for something they already own. Thats how I see it. Anyone see it differently ? Nutshell. Probably more 'tax efficient' than giving the money as an outright gift.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 So, The Liebherrs, already owning the club, lent it 33m. They took shares in the club as repayment for the loan. In other words, they've given the money to the club, because they took shares for something they already own. Thats how I see it. Anyone see it differently ? When you loan a company money you are the moneylender/bank - see Chanrai as an example When you are a shareholder you own the company and have a vested interest in to more than getting your money back. It's far healthier and looks much better on a balance sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 @bigadamsport: Headline from #saintsfc story is that the Liebherr estate has 'written off' £33M of loans to club, puts #saintsfc in strong position >>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 @bigadamsport: >>> #saintsfc for 2010-11 had wages of 93% of turnover, but say that was expected, & 5 yr plan on course. NC empowered to take club forward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Does the fact that there are shares for SFC back in existence mean we are back on the AIM or FTSE and theoretically trading can resume?. I f**king hope not. Thats what got us into a mess in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Does the fact that there are shares for SFC back in existence mean we are back on the AIM or FTSE and theoretically trading can resume?. I f**king hope not. Thats what got us into a mess in the first place. No. These are 'shares' in a Ltd company, not a plc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mancsaint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Turning a loan into equity is exactly what the new rules, to be introduced soon, will demand and accept. A loan/liabilty will disappear if converted to equity thereby getting rid of any threat from that source. The regulating body has already said that any monies lent, now and in the future, and converted to equity will not break any rules. So Chelsea and Man City will continue to be "funded" as long as it is converted to equity so I don't see any slowdown in funding them or us. Mancsaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 All this does kind of show how f ucked up modern football is though...we're very lucky to have owners willing to write off 33 million (and we're all loving it) I wonder how well would be doing if we had to actually live with in our means? I wonder how many clubs in the 4 divisions actually live on only their income and how many get buy with extra tops up of cash from rich owners? I'd love football to become more of a level playing field fianically one day....but in the mean time while it's the way it is I'm pretty glad we have the owners we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 I don't believe a word of it until Corp confirms this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 I don't believe a word of it until Corp confirms this I assume the main Pompey forums already have a 12 page thread entitled: "Scummers £33m in debt!" ? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Well, they haven't exactly "written off" the money, but, i assume, have taken the view that the value of the club will increase enough to make the decision decent business sense for the future, making it more likely that they will sell part of, if not all, the club in the future. They are protecting their investment for a) the current trading position (which is presumably running at a loss and as someone else has said, makes the balance sheet look much better in the short term) and b) future viability for a (partial) sale or float, which, of course. if done properly is no bad thing at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 writing off £33m sit right for the imminent sale of the club (apparently)..? does this take into account the sale of OxO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrek Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Remember this is up until the end of 2010-11 and our revenue has increased somewhat since then Plus, we sold Oxo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 writing off £33m sit right for the imminent sale of the club (apparently)..? does this take into account the sale of OxO? Thats a good point about OXOs money did we need 33 million on top of the 15 million for alex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 writing off £33m sit right for the imminent sale of the club (apparently)..? Perhaps i`m being a bit dim..but what do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panda Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 They have not 'written off' £33m in loans, that is a totally inaccurate slant. They have invested £33m in return for shares which means that if the club is successful they will get a return on their shares/investment and if they sell their shares for more than £33m they make a profit. If the club is unsuccessful they lose, they made a bad investment, just like Rupert! There is absolutely nothing wrong with investment if it is used wisely and, to me, it looks as though it is being used very wisely!!!!! Incurring unserviceable loans/debt is of course 'cheating'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastleighhalo Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Is it just coincidence that the solid investment being made in staplewood is approx the same as we sold oxo for ? ...and would fall into the same financial year? While i really excited about the new development im just concerned that it might affect the training schedule between now and the end of the season for our current 1st team squad... most people dont like change and any slightness of this could affect a winning mindset ....jeez am i showing how too anxiuos i am with only 7 games to go ???!!! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 I assume the main Pompey forums already have a 12 page thread entitled: "Scummers £33m in debt!" ? :-) yep Scum over spending for back to back promotions - cheats scum are in the poo big time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabrone Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 So, The Liebherrs, already owning the club, lent it 33m. They took shares in the club as repayment for the loan. In other words, they've given the money to the club, because they took shares for something they already own. Thats how I see it. Anyone see it differently ? The club has received the cash and existing shareholders have taken the hit by being diluted and thus the sp would have dropped. If the Leibherrs own the lot then it's just a paper exercise however if anyone else owns shares then they will have seen their value drop. That said being as we look to be on the verge of the premiership I'd guess that the shares would be worth much more now than then so everyone would be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Worth remembering that these figures are in no way up-to-date. They are up to 30th June 2011, so already 9 months out of date. In that intervening period, we've been promoted which brings bigger broadcasting revenue (a rise of around £4-5m), season ticket prices went up by 30% with a relatively static number of sales of said STs and matchday sales will have gone up with bigger attendances and an extra few quid on the ticket price (£24 up to £27 in most areas of the ground). I expect the sale of Chamberlain has been balanced out by the signings we've made this season and the new contracts handed out to a number of players. The news that the loans given by the Liebherr estate have been written off entirely is the best news possible. For as long as they were on the books, there was always the possibility (however remote) that they might be called in at any moment. Now that isn't an issue at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 The news that the loans given by the Liebherr estate have been written off entirely is the best news possible. For as long as they were on the books, there was always the possibility (however remote) that they might be called in at any moment. Now that isn't an issue at all. But in fairness I can imagine this was always the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rooney Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 By capitalising their Loans, they have made a stronger base for the Club as the Loans were probably repayable on demand. The shares have to be sold for the Leibherrs to get their money back now and thus have shown their comittment to the club. The have made a permanent investment now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 The news that the loans given by the Liebherr estate have been written off entirely is the best news possible. For as long as they were on the books, there was always the possibility (however remote) that they might be called in at any moment. Now that isn't an issue at all. Agreed. Also, weren't about half of those loans related to the initial purchase of the club? It's not all operating losses as some seem to think . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 They have not 'written off' £33m in loans, that is a totally inaccurate slant. They have invested £33m in return for shares which means that if the club is successful they will get a return on their shares/investment and if they sell their shares for more than £33m they make a profit. If the club is unsuccessful they lose, they made a bad investment, just like Rupert! There is absolutely nothing wrong with investment if it is used wisely and, to me, it looks as though it is being used very wisely!!!!! Incurring unserviceable loans/debt is of course 'cheating'! It's not an inaccurate slant at all. They own the business 100% now and owned it 100% before it was converted to equity. They no longer have a loan to be repaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 It's not an inaccurate slant at all. They own the business 100% now and owned it 100% before it was converted to equity. They no longer have a loan to be repaid. I think that what Panda means is that 'written off' usually implies they won't see their money again, which is clearly not the case and therefore probably not the most accurate description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowgli Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 They have not 'written off' £33m in loans, that is a totally inaccurate slant. I love the way people challenge official statements. If they expect no return on their investment then they HAVE written it iff. If you think they have not - show me where in the Leibher accounts it is shown as an asset or debtor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever a red and white Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 Whilst revenue will increase if we got up, no doubt the players wages will also be going up failry well too. 93% is just unbelievable really. Still no doubt is a huge positive I guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry the Badger Posted 29 March, 2012 Share Posted 29 March, 2012 No but its 'my' club and do not want to see us do a Skates - its a bit hypocritical is it not otherwise? I can see where you are coming from. It's understandable, certainly the last time we made a bid for promotion with Burley and Wilde and spent all that money a lot of us were caught up in it and perhaps didn't question the spending enough. The major difference here though is trust, we shouldn't have trusted Wilde so quickly like we did but we were so delighted to be rid of Lowe a lot of us simply took him on blind faith. This was the mistake a lot of Skates made when placing their trust in various owners as soon as they showed up, not that it would've made much difference if they hadnt. Having been here for nearly 3 years now, I think Cortese has done enough to earn the fans trust (plus his background is in finance). Whilst that shouldn't stop us questioning if we're concerned, I have seen enough to believe in what he's doing. Of course, the other point is that even if we were in any trouble, I don't suppose there would be a great deal we could do about it as fans anyway. 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