Jump to content

Some Tweets Saying We Have Borrowed Against Future Season Ticket Sales

Gemmel

By Gemmel,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

up and away

up and away

Posted
Posted
What this means is we do not have as much backing from the Liebherr estate as we thought we had. It maybe cheaper financing than what is available through the normal banking channels, but it is what it is; BORROWING.

 

I bet our 'yield' is a bit higher than that of Evertons too.

 

I really doubt if we have backing from the Liebherr estate, I would imagine that we still have backing from what ever Markus set up for us before his death. What the amount and conditions for this is unknown. But it would not surprise me if you wanted to add that one special player like Ramirez to the squad, that you would borrow to bridge a gap in time when that money will be available. You could easily see this as a type of bridging loan with the overall effect of costing more but not resulting in debt. The yield will be determined upon how the loan is secured and other loans incumbent upon the loanee. If this is based upon money sat in an account or trust with a short term future release date, you will hardly better that.

 

Eventually we will have to balance the books to the exact penny but I believe we are still a few years from that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Graffito

Graffito

Posted
Posted
Why? We need to borrow money against something and revenue streams like TV money/parachute payments are as liquid and certain as they come. Indeed, when has debt been wrong? More important are the terms/interest we've agreed with the company - more worrying is if we were forced to borrow on onerous terms. And just because we've borrowed from a third party doesn't mean the liebherr's money has dried up - it might just involve a rebalancing between internal and external financing.

 

Agree the future revenue is pretty much assured but borrowing against parachute payments is a concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
Why is it a risk -tv money/parachute payments are as liquid as they come. Either eventuality -whether survival or relegation- we'll be paid and that will probably mean we're borrowing on relatively favourable terms.

 

Why is it a risk?

 

I consider it to be a risk because it is income that will be needed next year. Why isn't this year's income and financial backing enough? Why do we need more? Also, where is the funding for the training ground going to come from. Perhaps this loan was to pay for some of that? We don't know.

 

Those unanswered questioned are why I think its a risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colinjb

Colinjb

Posted
Posted
define "we"

 

the fan base or 10 people from all over the country on a message board

I doubt, come sunday, anyone will give a toss and will chant "ooooh gaston ramirez"...a player we have broken the bank for...obviously

 

As will I..... Well, something to that effect anyway. ;)

 

At least there is generally a questioning of what is happening though. Forums like this tend to be microcosm's of general feeling and mentality. And just like when we were in administration there was concern with mere survival and accepting what needed to be done needed to be done..... up until very recently their very same comparable sample were crying that it was so unfair...

 

On here we question what is going on for the most part and then come to a conclusion, rather then carrying on regardless and only reaping the rewards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
well, this is clearly NCs train set...despite Stu and friends on the uglies saying he is nothing but an employee

 

To be fair, I don't believe NC has ventured in with any financial collateral of his own; therefore he does remain an employee, albeit also a company director.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
Agree the future revenue is pretty much assured but borrowing against parachute payments is a concern.

 

Agree it might constrain our ability to bounce back up -but then again we've gained assets/players who can do a job in the NPC or whom we can cash in on. Fortunately, we've bought 'young' players who have significant resale value should the need to sell arise and we've no doubt negotiated flexible relegation clauses into contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
Posted
To be fair, I don't believe NC has ventured in with any financial collateral of his own; therefore he does remain an employee, albeit also a company director.

you know what I mean.......I get the impression that the "family" have not put in any money and the debt written off was from the estate of Markus for the club..but he is obviously more than just an employee...he runs the show

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
So, a summary of the first two pages...

 

This might be a bad thing or it might be ok.

 

I'm intrigued, but would you perhaps explain how gambling against next season's TV money / parachute payments is "ok" to supplement this season's cash flow? I'm genuinely interested, because personally I only see the downsides to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
Posted
I'm intrigued, but would you perhaps explain how gambling against next season's TV money / parachute payments is "ok" to supplement this season's cash flow? I'm genuinely interested, because personally I only see the downsides to it.

maybe the family will write it off...?

maybe they have promised another injection of cash in 12 months

maybe they want some of their £30m back..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
View From The Top

View From The Top

Posted
Posted
I'm intrigued, but would you perhaps explain how gambling against next season's TV money / parachute payments is "ok" to supplement this season's cash flow? I'm genuinely interested, because personally I only see the downsides to it.

 

It's this that have fearful of. We've bet it all on red in the hope of us staying up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
I'm intrigued, but would you perhaps explain how gambling against next season's TV money / parachute payments is "ok" to supplement this season's cash flow? I'm genuinely interested, because personally I only see the downsides to it.

 

 

Given we have a guaranteed income from being in the Premier League for the next 5 years, I'm not sure I agree with the word "gambling".

 

These loans have to be approved by the Premier League so they are obviously "OK" with it.

 

I have a small degree of discomfort about it but that's more down to the fact that we don't know the details.

 

It might be "ok", it might not be. We shall see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pamplemousse

Pamplemousse

Posted
Posted

From Pompey Online

 

saintsfc borrowing money from a shady BVI company AND work on training ground redevelopment suspended. PKF's next big assignment perhaps as well?

 

On the same day? Bit of a coincidence, isn't it, scummers? You've made your bed by sniping every time we put 5p in the coffee machine. Now scrutinise yourselves by the same standards.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
Given we have a guaranteed income from being in the Premier League for the next 4 years, I'm not sure I agree with the word "gambling".

 

These loans have to be approved by the Premier League so they are obviously "OK" with it.

 

I have a small degree of discomfort about it but that's more down to the fact that we don't know the details.

 

It might be "ok", it might not be. We shall see.

 

And they are experts at football finances. Just ask Pompey. And Leeds. And West Ham. And Birmingham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
lets be honest...roles reversal...we would be all over this like a rash..just for the sake of it

 

Have they started highlighting the number of charities and tax payers we've ripped off yet? One assumes they're comparing like for like...?

 

They'll be comparing our respective administrations next and coming to the conclusion the circumstance were identical :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
And they are experts at football finances. Just ask Pompey. And Leeds. And West Ham. And Birmingham.

 

Indeed. Despite being the richest league in the world, Premier League clubs are probably in the most debt in the world. And there has been a sudden shift in the winds of change on this board tonight. We were debt free; debt was terrible; we'd learned our lessons from our previous administration; we wouldn't make the same mistakes again; and, by God, we'd ask the right questions if we did look to overspend again. It would seem that's changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Colinjb

Colinjb

Posted
Posted
Not worried in the slightest. The loan was probably to fund the Ramires deal. If we go down we sell him and pay the loan off, seems simple and stress free to me.

 

It could be.

 

Or it could be something far more critical.

 

The fact is anyone trying to convince one way or another simply will not know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
up and away

up and away

Posted
Posted
Any business gambling on future revenue that might not be there is pretty daft. Not going to criticise other clubs for it and say it's fine for Saints. We'd have had a good go without Ramirez and personally I'd rather live within our means than spend what we don't have. Ok it's not cheating on the PFC scale but it's the first (of about 1000) stages.

 

We have little idea about the exact value of the loan, the length of the loan or what it is secured against. What we can reasonably speculate is that it will be probably be £2M+, maybe as little as a couple of months in time and against what security? The answer to these questions can leave you extremely worried to what is all the fuss about, depending upon the actual figures.

 

One thing this does clearly show is we don't have carte blanche over any monies from the Liebherr family or bequeathed by Markus via a trust. Either way I would expect that Cortese could not act alone on this loan and would have had agreement from the Liebherrs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted

The one thing I'm struggling is why would we take out a loan secured against future income and pay an APR when we have multi billionaire owners who are Apparantly backing us? Cortese has also said in the past that if a time does arrive where they wont or can't then he has other people who can. it doesn't stack up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevegrant

stevegrant

Posted
Posted
The one thing I'm struggling is why would we take out a loan secured against future income and pay an APR when we have multi billionaire owners who are Apparantly backing us? Cortese has also said in the past that if a time does arrive where they wont or can't then he has other people who can. it doesn't stack up.

Maybe the "other people who can" just happen to live in the British Virgin Islands? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
The one thing I'm struggling is why would we take out a loan secured against future income and pay an APR when we have multi billionaire owners who are Apparantly backing us? Cortese has also said in the past that if a time does arrive where they wont or can't then he has other people who can. it doesn't stack up.

 

Nicola Cortese is a fantastic businessman, he knows what he is doing. And all of these contradictions can, I'm sure, be very easily explained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
We have little idea about the exact value of the loan, the length of the loan or what it is secured against. What we can reasonably speculate is that it will be probably be £2M+, maybe as little as a couple of months in time and against what security? The answer to these questions can leave you extremely worried to what is all the fuss about, depending upon the actual figures.

 

One thing this does clearly show is we don't have carte blanche over any monies from the Liebherr family or bequeathed by Markus via a trust. Either way I would expect that Cortese could not act alone on this loan and would have had agreement from the Liebherrs.

 

Sorry, I'm missing your point. How can we reasonably speculate to all of those things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
The one thing I'm struggling is why would we take out a loan secured against future income and pay an APR when we have multi billionaire owners who are Apparantly backing us? Cortese has also said in the past that if a time does arrive where they wont or can't then he has other people who can. it doesn't stack up.

 

People have backed us, albeit with a loan.

 

The backing of the family appeared to subside after ML died. Thereafter our transfer activity slowed *****il the summer) but despite that the family bailed us out recently. Now this. Details are needed but on the face of it something seems to be not quite right and we appear to be living well beyond our means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_lambden

Saint_lambden

Posted
Posted
The one thing I'm struggling is why would we take out a loan secured against future income and pay an APR when we have multi billionaire owners who are Apparantly backing us? Cortese has also said in the past that if a time does arrive where they wont or can't then he has other people who can. it doesn't stack up.

 

But he said that about 2 years ago now if memory serves me correctly (was after Adkins had come in, interview with Dan Roan) Maybe the situation has changed and plan B doesn't exist anymore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chez

Chez

Posted
Posted (edited)

what the **** are we doing? We almost died as a club five minutes ago by gambling on promotion and yet we seem to be doing the exact same thing here, albeit with a huge set of parachute payments to help. But are they going to cover Ramirez's wages for the next four years if he turns out to be a failure and we can't offload if we need to?

 

All I've heard for three years is we are run `properly' and `as a business'. Yet the only evidence of these claims in my eyes is charging fans to park and to buy tickets, doubling ticket prices and spending vast sums of money, very well I might add, on players and wages to help us get promoted. It has certainly worked to date, but I genuinely thought once we had made it to the Prem we'd cut our cloth accordingly, what with the huge income available to us and the so called non debt ideals many kept telling me on here.

 

Is it a case of needing that cash up front to help us compete? I recall Blackpool struggling to pay promotion bonus until Prem TV money started kicking in. Is it a cash flow thing? If so why haven't the owners provided a short term loan?

 

This is what confuses me most. I don't understand why the owners cleared the debt one minute and then we turn to the BVI and mortgage future earnings for money the next.

 

I for one am very concerned, as I have been a few times over the last three years about our huge wages and growing debt. The owners certainly put my fears to bed when they turned it into equity, but here we are again, but this time going to who knows who cap in hand. Maybe at the next `fans dinner' someone will stop the ass kissing and get the answers.

Edited by Chez
Link to comment
Share on other sites
View From The Top

View From The Top

Posted
Posted
This will of course hit the Echo tomorrow, possibly some nationals aswell. Would be useful if they clarified what has happened, but doubt they will. I'm not overly worried (yet), but speculation and rumour will mount among the fanbase (and Pompey's) if they keep quiet.

 

NC will say sweet FA.

 

Personally I've just had about enough of top flight football already and gambling the clubs future, yet again, on the EPL dream makes me want to puke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
This will of course hit the Echo tomorrow, possibly some nationals aswell. Would be useful if they clarified what has happened, but doubt they will. I'm not overly worried (yet), but speculation and rumour will mount among the fanbase (and Pompey's) if they keep quiet.

 

What does that mean for this?

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?37346-St-Mary-s-What-we-might-expect-to-see-happen-(and-possibly-announced-soon)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
what the **** are we doing? We almost died as a club five minutes ago by gambling on promotion and yet we seem to be doing the exact same thing here, albeit with a huge set of parachute payments to help. But are they going to cover Ramirez's wages for the next four years if he turns out to be a failure and we can't offload if we need to?

 

All I've heard for three years is we are run `properly' and `as a business'. Yet the only evidence of these claims in my eyes is charging fans to park and to buy tickets, doubling ticket prices and spending vast sums of money, very well I might add, on players and wages to help us get promoted. It has certainly worked to date, but I genuinely thought once we had made it to the Prem we'd cut our cloth accordingly, what with the huge income available to us and the so called non debt ideals many kept telling me on here.

 

Is it a case of needing that cash up front to help us compete? I recall Blackpool struggling to pay promotion bonus until Prem TV money started kicking in. Is it a cash flow thing? If so why haven't the owners provided a short term loan?

 

This is what confuses me most. I don't understand why the owners cleared the debt one minute and then we turn to the BVI and mortgage future earnings for money the next.

 

 

Isn't there some new rule from this season onwards (Financial Fair Play?) whereby owners can only inject their personal cash up to a percentage of turnover? Maybe they've hit that limit and this is the only legit way to provide the short term injection of funds we needed to hit the ground running this season?

 

I've no idea but might this have something to do with it?

Edited by trousers
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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...