Jump to content

St Mary's Football Group – 2016/17 financial results

Delmary

By Delmary,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted

Hmm. Very debatable that this has been the priority over the last couple of years.

 

“The performance of the team always remains our ultimate focus, and through continuing to strengthen our financial position we give ourselves the best opportunity of driving improvement on the pitch

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Hmm. Very debatable that this has been the priority over the last couple of years.

 

“The performance of the team always remains our ultimate focus, and through continuing to strengthen our financial position we give ourselves the best opportunity of driving improvement on the pitch

 

Just as well we sold everyone to get into the black:

 

The fact it will send us down sours that though

 

That net spend trophy does not win itself you know

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stevy777_x

stevy777_x

Posted
Posted
Much higher turnover than Everton. Therefore, why did Ralph claim that we are a small club? I suspect it was an excuse to spin the failure and mismanagement over the last 12 months.

 

https://toffeeweb.com/season/17-18/news/35987.html

 

Our commercial revenue has hardly increased despite the Virgin Media and Under Armor.

Wasn t that Ralph prime objective to increase that revenue stream when he arrived?

 

Ralph out!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JRM

JRM

Posted
Posted

This is fantastic news, hopefully once we’ve booed the players off after the final whistle against Man City we can have Ralph , Les, Kat and GAO on the pitch for a lap of honour to recognise our greatest ever profit , instead of holding saints scarves above our heads we can hold £20 notes

 

On a serious note their finances have taken a further boost with another unexpected Wembley appearance this year plus VVD sale, I’ll be very disappointed if ticket prices go up next season, in fact would like to see a decrease to recognise the importance of the fans in a world where we are increasingly taken for granted with short notice inconvenient fixture changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nordic Saint

Nordic Saint

Posted
Posted
I wonder how much this profit (and round of back slapping) will be written off thanks to Carrillo and Pellegrino?

 

Without taking into account relegation??

 

It will be increased because it doesn't take into account the van Dijk money either. But, a lot of money we get from selling our best players does seem to get frittered away on players like Bednarek, Hoedt and Carrrillo.

 

Whilst the priority of the board and owners is clearly to make money, the performance of the team continues to decline and in the long term that will turn those profits into losses as we'll be relegated and left with a lot of expensive players on high wages who aren't really good enough for the Premier League and who nobody else wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted

“What this press release fails to mention is that if you look at the companies house register for Southampton football club charges you will see that ALL future monies from the Premier League go directly to McQuarrie Bank to service the loan of 210m taken out by Mr Gao to buy the club off Kat.”

 

Can anyone confirm if this is true or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crab Lungs

Crab Lungs

Posted
Posted
All future premiership payments are lien against by McQuarrie Bank Hong Kong in consideration of the loan taken by Mr.Gao of 210M .

 

the accounts read slightly differently if you apply the 210 M as debt that is now registered against Southampton Football club Limited

 

Haven’t we done well? Bravo Kat and her team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted

Have a look at the attachment on the charge from 27/9/17. Page 31 appears to say we have agreed to give all premier league money directly to Macquarie bank for the next two years. Looks like Gao took out a loan to buy us which is being paid back by premier league money. I'm no finance expert so please tell me this isn't the case.

 

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00053301/filing-history

Link to comment
Share on other sites
charliemiller

charliemiller

Posted
Posted
“What this press release fails to mention is that if you look at the companies house register for Southampton football club charges you will see that ALL future monies from the Premier League go directly to McQuarrie Bank to service the loan of 210m taken out by Mr Gao to buy the club off Kat.”

 

Can anyone confirm if this is true or not?

 

Yep i have the document in front of me ...its on companies house registered 21 st september last year Form MR01 registration of charge , to Mcquarie Bank Limited

 

Key clauses are

 

5.2 the borrower is the sole legal and benifical owner of the secured assets

 

Southampton football club limited

 

Clause 6.71 refers to receivables under 3.1

 

Give notice to the premier league that the recievables set out in part 1 of the schedule are assigned to the bporrower

 

Oh joy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
charliemiller

charliemiller

Posted
Posted

I think he gets around the company act that says you cant use company assets because he purchased in his own name and then transferred the debt and ownership of all the assets to southampton football club limited .

 

Basically the club is paying for his debt with the TV income and we dont even see it its assigned to the bank to be paid direct to them

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nordic Saint

Nordic Saint

Posted
Posted
I think he gets around the company act that says you cant use company assets because he purchased in his own name and then transferred the debt and ownership of all the assets to southampton football club limited .

 

Basically the club is paying for his debt with the TV income and we dont even see it its assigned to the bank to be paid direct to them

 

You say 'he' but surely it's 'she' Kat Liebherr the club is paying the 210 million to, albeit, via Lander. In fact, she already has the money. The club just has to pay it plus interest back to the bank from whence it came.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
Have a look at the attachment on the charge from 27/9/17. Page 31 appears to say we have agreed to give all premier league money directly to Macquarie bank for the next two years. Looks like Gao took out a loan to buy us which is being paid back by premier league money. I'm no finance expert so please tell me this isn't the case.

 

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00053301/filing-history

 

SFC has taken out a loan from Macquarie and has indeed agreed to assign all Premier League central fund payments to Macquarie during this season and next season. See clause 6.9.

 

This doesn't necessarily mean the loan is being used to fund the purchase. We simply don't know how much the loan is or what it is for.

 

You might speculate though, given the timing, that it is connected in some way with the takeover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
A huge % of the TV money is going to the £87m wage bill and other costs each year. It isn't all paying off loans.

 

The Premier League "Central Funds" go straight to Macquarie and they distribute them in accordance with the loan. We don't know what the loan says about that distribution. I am trying to find out what Central Funds means....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted

According to a comment on the Echo: The loan from McQuarrie bank is purely so the club can access the money from the Premier League TV money before they get it as it comes in stages - nothing unusual in that at all.....

 

So could just be a cash flow thing. **** knows, I find anything to do with finances insanely boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
...so clearly it can't all be going to Gao or loans never to be seen again... or else we couldn't pay the £87m annual wage bill

 

Yes, that's probably correct. It would be interesting to know what the size of the loan is though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
According to a comment on the Echo: The loan from McQuarrie bank is purely so the club can access the money from the Premier League TV money before they get it as it comes in stages - nothing unusual in that at all.....

 

So could just be a cash flow thing. **** knows, I find anything to do with finances insanely boring.

 

Could well be as simple as that. Effectively releasing the value of the payments sooner and smoothing cash flow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
...so clearly it can't all be going to Gao or loans never to be seen again... or else we couldn't pay the £87m annual wage bill

 

Well if you read the link to the document I attached above it's been agreed that it does. All central fund money to go directly to Macquarie from the premier league for 2017/18 & 2018/19. The only way we will be able to cover the wage bill is by player sales, no wonder they wanted the delay the van Dijk deal until after the take over went through, we need the money to pay try bills. Source before you ask - Cedric. http://readsouthampton.com/2018/03/23/cedric-reveals-he-was-negotiating-southampton-exit/

 

Very worrying times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
Well if you read the link to the document I attached above it's been agreed that it does. All central fund money to go directly to Macquarie from the premier league for 2017/18 & 2018/19. The only way we will be able to cover the wage bill is by player sales, no wonder they wanted the delay the van Dijk deal until after the take over went through, we need the money to pay try bills. Source before you ask - Cedric. http://readsouthampton.com/2018/03/23/cedric-reveals-he-was-negotiating-southampton-exit/

 

Very worrying times.

 

The money goes to the bank to be distributed in accordance with the loan document. The loan will say how the debt is dealt with and what the club has left.

 

Even if the whole of the money was kept by the bank, the club would have an equivalent amount of cash (less interest) from the bank to pay the wages.

 

So, your scenario, is that the club changes its business model drastically. The loan is neither here nor there in that scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
I think it's fair to say that whatever the situation we are in our worst position both financially and on the pitch since promotion. Worrying.

 

That's speculation. We've just published our best ever results.

 

Edit - the on the pitch bit obviously isn't speculation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JRM

JRM

Posted
Posted

I think it’s pretty clear to us that Gao didn’t have any money in the first place so it’s no surprise that we’ll be paying back his loan. To assign the debt the bank must have wanted the security of the guaranteed receivables to lend the money, will be very interesting to know the total loan value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
That's speculation. We've just published our best ever results.
The fact its so opaque is worrying enough. Even more so given the reports we have seen whilst this takeover was completing and the fact the league tried to block it and subsequently changed their rules. There's enough there to be concerned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
The fact its so opaque is worrying enough. Even more so given the reports we have seen whilst this takeover was completing and the fact the league tried to block it and subsequently changed their rules. There's enough there to be concerned.

 

I agree that it's right to be concerned and I find the silence from the new owners very odd - I don't want big mouth owners but some sort of statement of intent and vision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted
I think it’s pretty clear to us that Gao didn’t have any money in the first place so it’s no surprise that we’ll be paying back his loan. To assign the debt the bank must have wanted the security of the guaranteed receivables to lend the money, will be very interesting to know the total loan value.

 

Yeah, but if it is just a cash flow facility because the PL payments are lumpy then any lender would want to take security and an assignment of the payments. That would be very normal and it's so normal that there is even a detailed procedure for it in the Premier League rules.

 

In fact, the more I think about this, the more I suspect it is all perfectly benign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Munster

Dark Munster

Posted
Posted
Have a look at the attachment on the charge from 27/9/17. Page 31 appears to say we have agreed to give all premier league money directly to Macquarie bank for the next two years. Looks like Gao took out a loan to buy us which is being paid back by premier league money. I'm no finance expert so please tell me this isn't the case.

 

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/00053301/filing-history

Which would be considerably reduced of course if we go down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red

Red

Posted
Posted

Let's not create a problem where there isn't one. Yes, we are not in good shape on field or off it, but we have announced our best financial results for some time, which is no surprise as that was the strategy since (and why) Nicki left (or was fired if you prefer).

 

The purchase by Gao is still via a personal loan and has not changed since day one of his acquisition. Clearly (same as Kat) he will look to recover this in time and then some no doubt. The Macquaire loan is a completely separate issue and one we have adopted for the last 2 to 3 years, whereby we borrow the full amount of TV fees (and only the TV fees) upfront on the basis of a mortgage if you like - we know the money will come over the next X months (typically 12) in installments, but we want the cash flow now, so Mr. Banky give us the dough now and we will pay you back with interest with the TV money - think of it as mortgage protection insurance that has your lender as the interested party (i.e. get's first dibs) in the event you default/decease.

 

Nothing new here IMHO. What's more interesting, is why is the Echo trying to down play the healthy profit we have made, prior to the VVDick sale??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JRM

JRM

Posted
Posted
Yeah, but if it is just a cash flow facility because the PL payments are lumpy then any lender would want to take security and an assignment of the payments. That would be very normal and it's so normal that there is even a detailed procedure for it in the Premier League rules.

 

In fact, the more I think about this, the more I suspect it is all perfectly benign.

 

You are right, it could even be a working capital facility where we can drawdown funds as and when we need them for cash flow and can repay as we go, as money is released by premier league it would go to a trust account held by Macquarie and any excess they would pay on to us if loan balance was lower than funds received, just allows us to tap into the cash when we need it in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
Yeah, but if it is just a cash flow facility because the PL payments are lumpy then any lender would want to take security and an assignment of the payments. That would be very normal and it's so normal that there is even a detailed procedure for it in the Premier League rules.

 

In fact, the more I think about this, the more I suspect it is all perfectly benign.

Does anyone know how many other PL clubs have the same or similar arrangements in place? That would help deduce how normal, or otherwise, our situation is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wurzel

Wurzel

Posted
Posted
Let's not create a problem where there isn't one. Yes, we are not in good shape on field or off it, but we have announced our best financial results for some time, which is no surprise as that was the strategy since (and why) Nicki left (or was fired if you prefer).

 

The purchase by Gao is still via a personal loan and has not changed since day one of his acquisition. Clearly (same as Kat) he will look to recover this in time and then some no doubt. The Macquaire loan is a completely separate issue and one we have adopted for the last 2 to 3 years, whereby we borrow the full amount of TV fees (and only the TV fees) upfront on the basis of a mortgage if you like - we know the money will come over the next X months (typically 12) in installments, but we want the cash flow now, so Mr. Banky give us the dough now and we will pay you back with interest with the TV money - think of it as mortgage protection insurance that has your lender as the interested party (i.e. get's first dibs) in the event you default/decease.

 

Nothing new here IMHO. What's more interesting, is why is the Echo trying to down play the healthy profit we have made, prior to the VVDick sale??

 

BIB - Exactly this, except maybe a once a season "payday loan" is a more appropriate comparison than a mortgage as the funds borrowed are used for day to day running costs i.e player wages. player purchase etc and repaid from the club's "salary" - i.e. the already agreed and known amount of money to be received in installments rom the PL

 

No way would an arrangement like that have been used to secure a £220m loan to buy the club. Now if we saw similar charges over stadium, training ground and everything else made at the time of the take-over we would have cause for concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted
The fact its so opaque is worrying enough. Even more so given the reports we have seen whilst this takeover was completing and the fact the league tried to block it and subsequently changed their rules. There's enough there to be concerned.
Doesn't the fact they changed their rules to allow it kind of suggest it was being blocked on a technicality rather than any outrageous breach of them?

 

Sent from my SM-J330FN using Tapatalk

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...