Last paragraph seems so.
Choice,yes seems so as it could be found initially when moving the club around, although obviously clawed back later via the player sales.
Last paragraph seems so.A few people have pointed to how SISU have supported the club under MR. (arrived March 2017)
So some summary actual figures taken from published financial statements since 01 June 2017 to 31 May 2021
Losses in that period £10.56m
Interest charged by owners and included in losses £8.42m (Interest added to interest bearing loans )
so without the interest the club made £2.1m losses in that period
Player sales £11.28m
Player purchases £3.68m
To survive and still make losses of 2.2m the club needed to have a net £7.6m in player sales
SISU loans made £2.14m
SISU Funds extracted £2.25m
EFL Loan £2.4m ( - loan made in 2020/21 accounts repayable over 3 years i believe)
SISU net investment is minus 111k
Balance sheet deficit increased from £17.32m to £27.88m
total liabilities increased from £19.34m to £36.53m
the balance sheet deficit can be partially offset by the real value of the squad not the £3m amortised contract cost shown at 31/05/2021, but is the uplift in value of the whole squad £33m (that just gets us to break even balance sheet)
Of course some of this will have changed since 31/05/2021 and we wont know that until February what the 2022 results are
The club was kept going in that period because of player sales, not because of owner investment. The owners charge high rate interest that cant be paid because the club cannot afford it so is added to growing liabilities - they don't have to charge as much, or any interest, they choose to.
the telling thing to me about the owners is that the owners took out a net £111k during that period of success. That is not in my mind investing in the club. It also suggests that SISU struggle to get additional long term funds or have set a ceiling that only permits emergency funding. Comments from Boddy & MR suggest it is difficult (impossible?) to get further funding from the owners. The fact that they basically advertised the club as for sale also suggests a reluctance to fund further
I do not want us to sell Hyam or the "big three" but needs must because i have no confidence in the owners making sustainable funding available. If they do fund, probably short term cash flow funding, the interest rates will be high i would think
Do you think there is any exit strategy OSB?
It’s the wider context - the failure to secure the stadium in 2012 - which was a clever strategy - has been eating at her ever since
Glad you’re back to make sense of it all. Proves SISU put nothing in,SISU only take.A few people have pointed to how SISU have supported the club under MR. (arrived March 2017)
So some summary actual figures taken from published financial statements since 01 June 2017 to 31 May 2021
Losses in that period £10.56m
Interest charged by owners and included in losses £8.42m (Interest added to interest bearing loans )
so without the interest the club made £2.1m losses in that period
Player sales £11.28m
Player purchases £3.68m
To survive and still make losses of 2.2m the club needed to have a net £7.6m in player sales
SISU loans made £2.14m
SISU Funds extracted £2.25m
EFL Loan £2.4m ( - loan made in 2020/21 accounts repayable over 3 years i believe)
SISU net investment under MR is minus 111k
Balance sheet deficit increased from £17.32m to £27.88m
total liabilities increased from £19.34m to £36.53m
the balance sheet deficit can be partially offset by the real value of the squad not the £3m amortised contract cost shown at 31/05/2021, but is the uplift in value of the whole squad £33m (that just gets us to break even balance sheet)
Of course some of this will have changed since 31/05/2021 and we wont know that until February what the 2022 results are
The club was kept going in that period because of player sales, not because of owner investment. The owners charge high rate interest that cant be paid because the club cannot afford it so is added to growing liabilities - they don't have to charge as much, or any interest, they choose to.
the telling thing to me about the owners is that the owners took out a net £111k during that period of success. That is not in my mind investing in the club. It also suggests that SISU struggle to get additional long term funds or have set a ceiling that only permits emergency funding. Comments from Boddy & MR suggest it is difficult (impossible?) to get further funding from the owners. The fact that they basically advertised the club as for sale also suggests a reluctance to fund further. It also points to the owners intention to extract funds (in 2019 they extracted 1.7m but due Covid problem had to put it back in 2020)
I do not want us to sell Hyam or the "big three" but needs must because i have no confidence in the owners making sustainable funding available. If they do fund, probably short term emergency cash flow funding, the interest rates will be high and expected to be repaid on any major player sale i would think
hahahaha not like you to talk utter tripe now is it?
So a football club is run like a grocery store? Hahahahaha. Got to be one of the best ever on here. Just like when you asked if we could sign female players!! Hahahahaha. What a fool.I was thinking exactly the same thing about you. Obviously no clue how the grocery sector works in any way shape or form but still puts opinion over as fact. Then again I'd also say that about your footballing and business knowledge...
Swapping him for a steak and 6 bottles of milk according to some on here.Has he gone yet?
i think you could well be right
So a football club is run like a grocery store? Hahahahaha. Got to be one of the best ever on here. Just like when you asked if we could sign female players!! Hahahahaha. What a fool.
Thanks for this. So just to be clear - the high interest on the loans is added as losses/debt/liability on paper but not actually extracted from the club? So it’s just there for when they come to sell (if ever) so they can take that money back?A few people have pointed to how SISU have supported the club under MR. (arrived March 2017)
So some summary actual figures taken from published financial statements since 01 June 2017 to 31 May 2021
Losses in that period £10.56m
Interest charged by owners and included in losses £8.42m (Interest added to interest bearing loans )
so without the interest the club made £2.1m losses in that period
Player sales £11.28m
Player purchases £3.68m
To survive and still make losses of 2.2m the club needed to have a net £7.6m in player sales
SISU loans made £2.14m
SISU Funds extracted £2.25m
EFL Loan £2.4m ( - loan made in 2020/21 accounts repayable over 3 years i believe)
SISU net investment under MR is minus 111k
Balance sheet deficit increased from £17.32m to £27.88m
total liabilities increased from £19.34m to £36.53m
the balance sheet deficit can be partially offset by the real value of the squad not the £3m amortised contract cost shown at 31/05/2021, but is the uplift in value of the whole squad £33m (that just gets us to break even balance sheet)
Of course some of this will have changed since 31/05/2021 and we wont know that until February what the 2022 results are
The club was kept going in that period because of player sales, not because of owner investment. The owners charge high rate interest that cant be paid because the club cannot afford it so is added to growing liabilities - they don't have to charge as much, or any interest, they choose to.
the telling thing to me about the owners is that the owners took out a net £111k during that period of success. That is not in my mind investing in the club. It also suggests that SISU struggle to get additional long term funds or have set a ceiling that only permits emergency funding. Comments from Boddy & MR suggest it is difficult (impossible?) to get further funding from the owners. The fact that they basically advertised the club as for sale also suggests a reluctance to fund further. It also points to the owners intention to extract funds (in 2019 they extracted 1.7m but due Covid problem had to put it back in 2020)
I do not want us to sell Hyam or the "big three" but needs must because i have no confidence in the owners making sustainable funding available. If they do fund, probably short term emergency cash flow funding, the interest rates will be high and expected to be repaid on any major player sale i would think
Thanks for this. So just to be clear - the high interest on the loans is added as losses/debt/liability on paper but not actually extracted from the club? So it’s just there for when they come to sell (if ever) so they can take that money back?
Thanks for this. So just to be clear - the high interest on the loans is added as losses/debt/liability on paper but not actually extracted from the club? So it’s just there for when they come to sell (if ever) so they can take that money back?
Yep. Investment is putting the money in and getting a return from improved performances brought about by that funding. Loans is getting a return regardless. Hence why they prefer it like that.He doesn't want to aim for self-sufficiency, definitely not, selling players is a no.
He doesn't want the owers to inject money in the form of loans to cover shortfall, as they are (and not calling in) , also a no (this is not sustainable apparently).
What he wants it seems is "investment", but that can't be loans, they must pump in money, and when we finish 10th and lose a fortune, just write it off like it didn't matter.
That's modern football for you, that sense of entitlememt where football fans demand that their club owners should just spunk money up the wall, and when the club doesn't reach the promised land, ah well, not my money is it. Fuck em.
Agree entirely. If the Hyam sale was for say £3m and meant that our expenses were covered and didn't have to sell anyone else, the I could at least understand the thinking, even if I do think it leaves us weak defensively and we'd need to make a signing anyway.The truth seems that the pittance received for Hyam won’t touch the sides so someone else needs to go still. Which if true begs the question why sell Hyam at all-it’s certainly not for footballing reasons.
So just a placeholder for when they fancy taking the cash.They took out £1.5m in 2019 - just depends on annual circumstance
They took out £1.5m in 2019 - just depends on annual circumstance
Agree entirely. If the Hyam sale was for say £3m and meant that our expenses were covered and didn't have to sell anyone else, the I could at least understand the thinking, even if I do think it leaves us weak defensively and we'd need to make a signing anyway.
If it doesn't do that, then what is it achieving other than making the team worse and thus more likely to lose and reduce income from tickets, merch, food etc?
It just feels like all that momentum and happy feeling in the camp is being thrown on the bonfire.
And put back £1.6m in 2020 ?
Blackburn Rovers transfer move for Coventry City star potentially in doubt as barrier emerges
Blackburn Rovers' move for Coventry City centre-back Dominic Hyam will depend on Ben Brereton-Diaz being sold during this window, according to an update from Alan Nixon.footballleagueworld.co.uk
Nothings agreed until everything’s agreedSeems a really daft situation. Have we accepted a bid subject to another club’s incomplete business?
Nothings agreed until everything’s agreed
It was CCFC saying the club has accepted a bid that’s made it look a bit laughable on our side.
Surely Blackburn shouldn’t have submitted a bid if they don’t have the fucking money..
This is ripe for a Tesco analogy m8
No but it is a business and there will be a turn over of people before contracts run out. I know it's a complex metaphor don't worry you're little bonnet about it. Away from that we are a selling club to make ends meet we all know it and we definitely can't afford anyone to run down a contract.So a football club is run like a grocery store? Hahahahaha. Got to be one of the best ever on here. Just like when you asked if we could sign female players!! Hahahahaha. What a fool.
No but it is a business and there will be a turn over of people before contracts run out. I know it's a complex metaphor don't worry you're little bonnet about it. Away from that we are a selling club to make ends meet we all know it and we definitely can't afford anyone to run down a contract.
But we have to sell to make ends meet in this case. We didn't sell the players we wanted to so fell down the stack until someone was wanted. I think we all know Hamer was the main chap they wanted to move on.Hyam is contracted to June 2024
Brereton-Diaz will be soldAs disappointing as the entire situation is, from a cashflow perspective it's probably more of a worrying prospect if the club are unable to sell Hyam, and potentially one other.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?