LFC SOLD to NESV.
- Thread starter Terrier
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
But increased replica income, increased sponsors income and even new sponsors onboard should all call for him having a point?
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
But increased replica income, increased sponsors income and even new sponsors onboard should all call for him having a point?
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
More Hicks Problems, now with the Stars - the comments from the fans are funny. Could be us speaking -\
http://www.defendingbigd.com/2010/9/22/1703937/stars-sale-gallacher-out-hicks
[size=11pt]Stars Sale: Gallacher Out, Hicks Possibly Back In?
[/size]
So you're probably feeling a little down over the Stars first loss last night but still you're not feeling too bad as to be fair it's only pre-season and The Lying Rag is still out (well at least it is where I am living) and it's the first day of fall.
Well, John Shannon of Sportsnet up in Canada is ready to sour your morning a little more with a pair of tweets...
Confirmation today from League source, that Calgary Billionaire Bill Gallacher is out of running in purchase of Dallas Stars.
That was his first tweet this morning. That in itself is kinda disappointing for Stars fans who were hoping to have a dedicated hockey fan as the next owner of their hockey team. Of course this is a rumor from a league source and it should be taken with a grain of salt until we hear something official from the Gallacher office if we hear anything at all. For all we know it could be posturing... that's how these things sometimes go when it comes to negotiating.
But four minutes later Mr. Shannon had an even more ominous tweet...
There is expectation that local groups will re-emerge to buys Stars,including a possibility that Tom Hicks will form group to buy team back.
Oh boy.
Now before you all start rushing for the closest bridge, again this is all just speculation. This is not to say for sure Hicks will be back in the picture and even if he is it doesn't necessarily mean as majority owner. It may be a case where - like in the Rangers sale - he has a very small sliver of involvement with a local ownership group.
Not to mention, Hicks was just recently shut out of additional funding that he sought in his ownership of Liverpool FC to give him an additional two years to sell that club. So it's not like his financial issues are getting any better or are any better than they were a year or two ago.
And not to be forgotten in all of this, maybe with Gallacher out this opens up things Vancouver businessman Tom Gaglardi to purchase the team. Again, it's all speculation right now. About the only thing we know for sure is that this sale is turning into a more drawn out process than I am sure most of us had expected it to be.
More Hicks Problems, now with the Stars - the comments from the fans are funny. Could be us speaking -\
http://www.defendingbigd.com/2010/9/22/1703937/stars-sale-gallacher-out-hicks
[size=11pt]Stars Sale: Gallacher Out, Hicks Possibly Back In?
[/size]
So you're probably feeling a little down over the Stars first loss last night but still you're not feeling too bad as to be fair it's only pre-season and The Lying Rag is still out (well at least it is where I am living) and it's the first day of fall.
Well, John Shannon of Sportsnet up in Canada is ready to sour your morning a little more with a pair of tweets...
Confirmation today from League source, that Calgary Billionaire Bill Gallacher is out of running in purchase of Dallas Stars.
That was his first tweet this morning. That in itself is kinda disappointing for Stars fans who were hoping to have a dedicated hockey fan as the next owner of their hockey team. Of course this is a rumor from a league source and it should be taken with a grain of salt until we hear something official from the Gallacher office if we hear anything at all. For all we know it could be posturing... that's how these things sometimes go when it comes to negotiating.
But four minutes later Mr. Shannon had an even more ominous tweet...
There is expectation that local groups will re-emerge to buys Stars,including a possibility that Tom Hicks will form group to buy team back.
Oh boy.
Now before you all start rushing for the closest bridge, again this is all just speculation. This is not to say for sure Hicks will be back in the picture and even if he is it doesn't necessarily mean as majority owner. It may be a case where - like in the Rangers sale - he has a very small sliver of involvement with a local ownership group.
Not to mention, Hicks was just recently shut out of additional funding that he sought in his ownership of Liverpool FC to give him an additional two years to sell that club. So it's not like his financial issues are getting any better or are any better than they were a year or two ago.
And not to be forgotten in all of this, maybe with Gallacher out this opens up things Vancouver businessman Tom Gaglardi to purchase the team. Again, it's all speculation right now. About the only thing we know for sure is that this sale is turning into a more drawn out process than I am sure most of us had expected it to be.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Insignificance link=topic=41783.msg1180131#msg1180131 date=1285179716]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
But increased replica income, increased sponsors income and even new sponsors onboard should all call for him having a point?
[/quote]
We lost the CL money.
A rough calculation would put that at about as big a loss as the increases in sponsorship.
[quote author=Insignificance link=topic=41783.msg1180131#msg1180131 date=1285179716]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
But increased replica income, increased sponsors income and even new sponsors onboard should all call for him having a point?
[/quote]
We lost the CL money.
A rough calculation would put that at about as big a loss as the increases in sponsorship.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
so the question is; do hick and gillett have enough personal assets to secure a refinancing deal?
so the question is; do hick and gillett have enough personal assets to secure a refinancing deal?
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
I don't know what I'd without your succinct summaries, neil.
I don't know what I'd without your succinct summaries, neil.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
Sometimes he does abbreviations too. He really is the straw that stirs the drink on SCM.
Sometimes he does abbreviations too. He really is the straw that stirs the drink on SCM.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
Gillett's just defaulted on his bit of the loan from RBS, so it looks unlikely where he's concerned. Hicks doesn't seem to have reached that point yet, but it would be extremely rare for someone to use their own assets in such a way on a deal this big (and this risky). That's why he and Gillett didn't do so when they bought Moores out in the first place.
Gillett's just defaulted on his bit of the loan from RBS, so it looks unlikely where he's concerned. Hicks doesn't seem to have reached that point yet, but it would be extremely rare for someone to use their own assets in such a way on a deal this big (and this risky). That's why he and Gillett didn't do so when they bought Moores out in the first place.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
Do you think the figures could drastically change within that 12 months then Rosco? It just seems a very bold statement for Purslow to be making.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
Do you think the figures could drastically change within that 12 months then Rosco? It just seems a very bold statement for Purslow to be making.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
It is a very bold statement, but it's not a very specific one. He could technically be right without it actually being good news for the club and out ability to spend.
The other thing that dragged down the profitability in '09 was some pretty hefty depreciation charged to the accounts, so depreciation must be a lot less in the more recent accounts. Depreciation is mainly on the players and it's calculated in an arbitrary manner, they lose value over the course of a contract. Given that we signed a number of players up to longer deals, in accounting terms anyway, those players are probably deemed more valuable than previously.
We'll see when it comes out anyway.
It is a very bold statement, but it's not a very specific one. He could technically be right without it actually being good news for the club and out ability to spend.
The other thing that dragged down the profitability in '09 was some pretty hefty depreciation charged to the accounts, so depreciation must be a lot less in the more recent accounts. Depreciation is mainly on the players and it's calculated in an arbitrary manner, they lose value over the course of a contract. Given that we signed a number of players up to longer deals, in accounting terms anyway, those players are probably deemed more valuable than previously.
We'll see when it comes out anyway.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1180189#msg1180189 date=1285182673]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
Do you think the figures could drastically change within that 12 months then Rosco? It just seems a very bold statement for Purslow to be making.
[/quote]
It's not really. Net of interest payments and player movements we made twenty odd million in 09, and in 10 we continued to increase turnover and profitability.
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1180189#msg1180189 date=1285182673]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180115#msg1180115 date=1285178503]
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=41783.msg1179921#msg1179921 date=1285158330]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=41783.msg1179905#msg1179905 date=1285157574]
This probably answers your question...
[/quote]
I've read on here from posters such as Rosco that even if we do get rid of the interest payments, then we'd still be running at a big loss. Is Purslow just chatting shit?
[/quote]
I'm going on the picture presented by the 2009 accounts, he has 2010 accounts. We won't know if he's telling the truth until they are made public next year.
[/quote]
Do you think the figures could drastically change within that 12 months then Rosco? It just seems a very bold statement for Purslow to be making.
[/quote]
It's not really. Net of interest payments and player movements we made twenty odd million in 09, and in 10 we continued to increase turnover and profitability.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180253#msg1180253 date=1285185631]
You're forgetting deprecation too Crump.
Effectively all that figure tells you is that wages are lower than turnover. Essentially if you ignore three of the clubs costs we're profitable. It's a recipe for disaster.
[/quote]
*puts abacus away*
Right. You've lost me. Again
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180253#msg1180253 date=1285185631]
You're forgetting deprecation too Crump.
Effectively all that figure tells you is that wages are lower than turnover. Essentially if you ignore three of the clubs costs we're profitable. It's a recipe for disaster.
[/quote]
*puts abacus away*
Right. You've lost me. Again
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
Depreciation? What about appreciation? Are you saying that Torres has lost 10% of value per year since we bought him like he was a laptop? Because I'm talking about cash in bank.
If you want to get petty, they wrote 40 odd million of planning and admin crap for the new stadium in those accounts too. Without interest and dicking about the club is very profitable.
Depreciation? What about appreciation? Are you saying that Torres has lost 10% of value per year since we bought him like he was a laptop? Because I'm talking about cash in bank.
If you want to get petty, they wrote 40 odd million of planning and admin crap for the new stadium in those accounts too. Without interest and dicking about the club is very profitable.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1180266#msg1180266 date=1285186131]
Depreciation? What about appreciation? [/quote]
Alright, if it makes you feel better.
You're ace you crump and you're a breath of fresh air.
Does that work for ya ?
*holds pint glass out for a refill *
[quote author=crump link=topic=41783.msg1180266#msg1180266 date=1285186131]
Depreciation? What about appreciation? [/quote]
Alright, if it makes you feel better.
You're ace you crump and you're a breath of fresh air.
Does that work for ya ?
*holds pint glass out for a refill *
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1180300#msg1180300 date=1285186965]
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
[/quote]
How is something untangible an asset ? This accountancy lark confuses the fuck out of me. I'm sticking to geekness.
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1180300#msg1180300 date=1285186965]
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
[/quote]
How is something untangible an asset ? This accountancy lark confuses the fuck out of me. I'm sticking to geekness.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1180306#msg1180306 date=1285187077]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1180300#msg1180300 date=1285186965]
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
[/quote]
How is something untangible an asset ? This accountancy lark confuses the fuck out of me. I'm sticking to geekness.
[/quote]
It would be an asset if they actually followed through with those plans, otherwise it's a total write off.
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1180306#msg1180306 date=1285187077]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1180300#msg1180300 date=1285186965]
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
[/quote]
How is something untangible an asset ? This accountancy lark confuses the fuck out of me. I'm sticking to geekness.
[/quote]
It would be an asset if they actually followed through with those plans, otherwise it's a total write off.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1180306#msg1180306 date=1285187077]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1180300#msg1180300 date=1285186965]
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
[/quote]
How is something untangible an asset ? This accountancy lark confuses the fuck out of me. I'm sticking to geekness.
[/quote]
Good man. Play to your strengths.
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=41783.msg1180306#msg1180306 date=1285187077]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=41783.msg1180300#msg1180300 date=1285186965]
That 40 M in planning on the stadium was listed as an asset.
[/quote]
How is something untangible an asset ? This accountancy lark confuses the fuck out of me. I'm sticking to geekness.
[/quote]
Good man. Play to your strengths.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
Here's the relevant page of the accounts. The figure Crump is quoting is the figure is a preliminary figure in the accounts that is simply what you get when take away the cost of the wages and other administrative expenses at the club from the revenue (the 27 odd million in the left hand column). After that we need to take into account depreciation,player trading, interest and tax. So all your actually saying is we're profitable if you don't look at the whole picture, or even 25% of the picture. It's illogical, since you're going to have depreciation, player trading and tax every year. The interest is the one thing you could argue we might not have after a takeover. The third column is the most relevant one
Here's the relevant page of the accounts. The figure Crump is quoting is the figure is a preliminary figure in the accounts that is simply what you get when take away the cost of the wages and other administrative expenses at the club from the revenue (the 27 odd million in the left hand column). After that we need to take into account depreciation,player trading, interest and tax. So all your actually saying is we're profitable if you don't look at the whole picture, or even 25% of the picture. It's illogical, since you're going to have depreciation, player trading and tax every year. The interest is the one thing you could argue we might not have after a takeover. The third column is the most relevant one
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180318#msg1180318 date=1285187323]
Here's the relevant page of the accounts. The figure Crump is quoting is the figure is a preliminary figure in the accounts that is simply what you get when take away the cost of the wages and other administrative expenses at the club from the revenue (the 27 odd million in the left hand column). After that we need to take into account depreciation,player trading, interest and tax. So all your actually saying is we're profitable if you don't look at the whole picture, or even 25% of the picture. It's illogical, since you're going to have depreciation, player trading and tax every year. The interest is the one thing you could argue we might not have after a takeover. The third column is the most relevant one
[/quote]
Well no - not at all.
The 3rd column is just the 27 million minus the player net costs minus the interest payments. That's what I said. Saying I'm only taking 25% into account is completely stupid.
I'm saying remove the interest and you get a 15m loss - because we spent 40m net on players when we only made 27m quid.
So in a zero interest position before we signed any new players or sold any we made 27m - subject to tax.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180318#msg1180318 date=1285187323]
Here's the relevant page of the accounts. The figure Crump is quoting is the figure is a preliminary figure in the accounts that is simply what you get when take away the cost of the wages and other administrative expenses at the club from the revenue (the 27 odd million in the left hand column). After that we need to take into account depreciation,player trading, interest and tax. So all your actually saying is we're profitable if you don't look at the whole picture, or even 25% of the picture. It's illogical, since you're going to have depreciation, player trading and tax every year. The interest is the one thing you could argue we might not have after a takeover. The third column is the most relevant one
[/quote]
Well no - not at all.
The 3rd column is just the 27 million minus the player net costs minus the interest payments. That's what I said. Saying I'm only taking 25% into account is completely stupid.
I'm saying remove the interest and you get a 15m loss - because we spent 40m net on players when we only made 27m quid.
So in a zero interest position before we signed any new players or sold any we made 27m - subject to tax.
Re: Merged Topics: Club Refinance Thread
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180333#msg1180333 date=1285187814]
So we spent 40m net on players last year ?
Which players would that be then ?
[/quote]
This is the year 08-09 and includes amortisation. That means that any new contracts (including Rafas) are rolled up and paid annually.
I can't remember which mongs we wasted our money on that year tbh but I'm sure google will.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=41783.msg1180333#msg1180333 date=1285187814]
So we spent 40m net on players last year ?
Which players would that be then ?
[/quote]
This is the year 08-09 and includes amortisation. That means that any new contracts (including Rafas) are rolled up and paid annually.
I can't remember which mongs we wasted our money on that year tbh but I'm sure google will.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
