ccfcway
Well-Known Member
prob about 100
£61m of debt wiped out in latest CCFC accounts (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
prob about 100
Astute
Well-Known Member
Do you mean like the 5.5m offer that they wanted to pay by installments without any guarantee? You know....The only time they tried to negotiate. They got what they asked for so wanted more for less money.
Last edited:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Bottom line is the "debt write off" is nothing of the sort. They have converted old debt of CCFC H in to shares in Otium. Had they wanted to write off the "liability" they would not have transferred it from CCFC H to Otium in the first place and would have let it die with CCFC H. This is an internal transaction moving items around group companies.
What it does do is to create a new class of share. The preference shares have terms attached to them and have an order of settlement both of capital and income
Pref A first then Pref B then ordinary shares
Both Pref shares have the following rights regarding capital and dividends etc attached
..... preference shares up to an amount equal to the aggregate of the amount paid up to them plus the aggregate additional preferential amount on each such share which is equal to 15% per annum of the amount paid up
My reading of that is that to settle out the preference shares will require repaying the original capital plus a set sum of 15% per annum of the original capital - ie that total value increases by 15% each year. It wont show as a deduction from profit but it is something like charging 15% interest each year.
What it does mean is that should the club turn a distributable profit then it will be applied to paying the 15% on the preference shares owned by SBS&L and ARVO
Total A preference shares 14.2m
Total B preference shares 49.95m
What it does do is to create a new class of share. The preference shares have terms attached to them and have an order of settlement both of capital and income
Pref A first then Pref B then ordinary shares
Both Pref shares have the following rights regarding capital and dividends etc attached
..... preference shares up to an amount equal to the aggregate of the amount paid up to them plus the aggregate additional preferential amount on each such share which is equal to 15% per annum of the amount paid up
My reading of that is that to settle out the preference shares will require repaying the original capital plus a set sum of 15% per annum of the original capital - ie that total value increases by 15% each year. It wont show as a deduction from profit but it is something like charging 15% interest each year.
What it does mean is that should the club turn a distributable profit then it will be applied to paying the 15% on the preference shares owned by SBS&L and ARVO
Total A preference shares 14.2m
Total B preference shares 49.95m
Last edited:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
With the comments from TF about co investors and the "tidying up"/restructuring done in the accounts my gut feeling was that there will be a placed change in ownership structure in the next year or so but the preference shares issued makes any change to include a new party harder. Could be wrong but they are structuring something that doesn't involve new monies from SISU but gets them a return
Last edited:
Sky Blue Dal
Well-Known Member
Off the topic question about this.. if you finish bottom and relegate will the club still get the 3 years parachute money in this new deal??
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Off topic answer: I hope not, parachute money is bullshit and allows clubs to offer silly contracts which has a inflationary effect further down the leagues, further disadvantaging those who don't get the payments.
I went looking, seems from this site http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/the-premier-league-tv-deal-master-and.html that they're still around and worse than ever:
But if a club gets promoted straight back into the premiership after one year in the championship the parachute money they would have got gets split between the other championship teams.
It looks like Wigan will be in league one with the parachute money next season.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It sickens me. The most important boycott is not to SISU (they're a mere symptom), it's not buying Sky or BT subscriptions. Genuine football fans would do this, it's for the future of the game.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Is it anything to do with the administration?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
I would think it is something to do with Otium only starting to trade August 2013. The difference I would guess is a transaction that took place in CCFC H (which held the registrations until transferred to Otium) during the period between 01/06 and 30/07
The figures will not immediately reconcile between the two remaining companies in a lot of places because of that 2 month period where operations were within CCFC H. Of course no accounts were ever produced for CCFC H since the 2012 ones
Last edited:
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
What's Simon playing at then? If it's not true then how come there's nothing on the CT yet? It's on the front page on the CT today so I guess the false story genie is out of the bottle?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Haven't had a Sky subscription in my life, even convinced my uni housemates to go Virgin. Illegally streamed football all the way for me.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
I think Simon, not being an accountant, had the wool pulled over his eyes by Mr Fisher.
H
Huckerby
Guest
Why? There's a genuine demand to watch top flight football, which settles at a certain subscription price, and it's only fair this is distributed to the teams that people are paying to watch. Nothing sickening about that at all...would you be moaning if we were in the premier league?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Yes. It is ruining the game. I am not interested in CCFC being a Premier League team.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
You don't need to see the accounts. These aren't the figures you are looking for.
What's he supposed to say?
'I didn't check the facts?'.
A good reporter will have a story 'fact checked' by at least one independent source.
From the code of ethics:
... and that's just the first of many.
https://www.spj.org/pdf/ethicscode.pdf
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
By the sound of it he got it about as right as Mr Fisher.
Yes, but you would expect Fisher to spin it over the top - what is Simons excuse?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
My mistake. I must have logged onto a Coventry Telegraph fans forum. I'll see if I can find a CCFC fans forum to hold Mr Fisher to account, somewhere where not accepting Mr Fishers spin takes priority over holding a local journalist to account. Or perhaps I'm wrong to expect the person who signs of the accounts to have a better understanding of the accounts than a local journalist who didn't.
covmark
Well-Known Member
Have a day off Tony ffs.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Toni is back, Toni is back. Ello ello.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I will when the SISU distractionist do.
covmark
Well-Known Member
Sisu distractionists only exist in your mind Tony.
Nick
Administrator
You have logged onto a forum where somebody is a member, the same as trust people are members. That is why it is discussed on here?
Simon will more than likely come on and reply when he can, that is why people ask him questions on here?
You do realize that I was criticizing Simon for not holding Fisher accountable?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
TBF, I think Simon or the accountants or whoever at CT Towers would have checked first. To say it's all Fisher's doing is pushing it even for you.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
One of the things I do applaud is the release of the full accounts on the club website
However one of the other things the release of the accounts, because of the clever accounting, has done is to confuse people further as to what is actually going on and why. Situation normal then :thinking about:
However one of the other things the release of the accounts, because of the clever accounting, has done is to confuse people further as to what is actually going on and why. Situation normal then :thinking about:
Yep good old S.N.A.F.U
