assets are currently
playing squad
ryton
sell on fees - eg callum wilson
balance of this seasons season ticket money
golden share
i think in reality the sale price would be around £10m for a debt free club
one of the guys in the studio on the phone in suggested single figure millions to fisher and he didnt flinch
I think £10m would seal the deal
Any sale will be for a £ but unless the new owner is taking on the debt and committing to repaying in full that will have to be settled as part of the sale.Trouble is with the debt the club is worth £1. Been confirmed on here.
And todays prize for the most stupid and irrelevant question goes to.......
What the club is worth largely depends on what a buyer is able to do with what's left of an asset base.
I'm over simplifying it but company valuations are based on a combination of past performance and potential - applying a multiple to profit. That multiple will be higher if the business has high potential or growth. Hence - in my view - why Tim is so chuffed to tell people we made a £1m profit last year. That certainly wasn't to get the fans on side, but to up the valuation.
Our only asset really is the right to play in the football league - and an established fan base. That's worth more to someone with a ground and training facilities (because they can realise any potential - in theory!!). Maybe someone like Wasps...
But not everyone will be able to realise the club's potential without investing heavily in infrastructure (I'd imagine a new ground would dwarf the investment needed to pull together a competitive Championship side). And so, you'd think, the badge might be worth less.
The problem is SISU aren't daft and are prone to push their luck. Debt free or not their perception of value will depend on the depth of the buyer's pockets and what they think they are due.
If I were having a guess - I'd say £6-8m would get you a football club. Less of they were allowed a silent minority stake - or a lump sum on promotion.
Do you think given a limited budget resigning Ricketts and Tudgay were sensible moves Tony?
No, we didn't get the squad did we as all of the decent monkeys were snapped up
We ended up getting wingers in on trial when we didn't even play wingers. We signed 2 left wingers and about 6 or 7 strikers.
We should have gone for solid league 1 players in the first place or at least had a solid plan B after going for championship players failed.
Further info. Seems Boltons new owners have funds up to end of this season and if they don't go up then they will have to cut cloth to fit.
It was down to the players TM was going after. What on earth he thought he would achieve going after players we clearly couldn't afford only he knows.I really don't understand why anyone thought we had a top half budget in the first place to be honest.
Maybe just Maybe they were in his budget range.It was down to the players TM was going after. What on earth he thought he would achieve going after players we clearly couldn't afford only he knows.
It was down to the players TM was going after. What on earth he thought he would achieve going after players we clearly couldn't afford only he knows.
Maybe just Maybe they were in his budget range.
Who knows did they cut the budget forcing him to get in the ones he did, or did were the targets mentioned just rumours to get us to buy ST etc?
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that he started the recruitment process under the illusion that he was getting the lions share of the Maddison money. Something else that has been confirmed not to be the case.
So we couldn't afford them as we don't have a competitive budget and them not signing convinced people that we must have a competitive budget. You'd have to be pretty stupid to come to that conclusion from the events as they happened.
Anderson stated he wouldn't when we sold him last January
Which creditors?Like I mentioned at the time, the sale of maddison was to keep the club afloat as the creditors were knocking on the door
Which creditors?
Again "the budget" is an irrelevant statement and "the budget" being in the lower half was said for one reason and one reason only.
So you keep saying. You won't say why so it's either a glip comment or you're trying to trip someone up so you can feel clever about yourself. Spit it out. Why?
I agree with your valuation of 6-8m. But who is going to pay that? At a guess no one.
No one has got that lying around. What have recent football league clubs sold for? Bolton sold for a £ didn't they in the summer?
Wrong : Bolton sold for 7.5m! With 172.5m of debt.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35630605
I agree. I doubt SISU would be happy with a deferred payment based on on-pitch success however.I think it is very important that whoever buys of SISU doesn't carry debts over, maybe a little based on targets like promotion but nothing that would hamper the club's future.
Well it's fairly obvious isn't it.
Fisher works on half truths spin and misdirection.
All teams will set budgets as high as they can at 60% of revenue forecasted. Our attendances put us easily in the top half - easily.
So why would Tim want to say we are in the bottom half?
Stop fucking around and spit it out. If you've got a point to make, make it. I ain't playing your stupid games.
Well you keep replying so actually - yes you are
Fair enough. It was clearly a glib comment based on nothing. Game over.
Mr. Grendel, I haven’t done my homework properly so I don’t know what you mean. Speaking as one of the thickos at the back of the class, it would be great if you could just tell me the answer. And put a gold star in my exercise book. Then we’ll both feel good.No it was based on fishers next comments regarding revenues and the correlation of revenues in league one to on and off field activity.
As you clearly are not stupid work out why he said it.
Vincelot requested a move upon seeing the budget and deciding the clubs ambitions didn't match his.And what about him letting the likes of Vincelot and JOB go, some very strange decisions by Mr Mowbray. He has definitely played a big part in our current demise.
thought you were in the "we've got a top six budget and its all mowbreys fault " campNo it was based on fishers next comments regarding revenues and the correlation of revenues in league one to on and off field activity.
As you clearly are not stupid work out why he said it.
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?