No Ricoh buy out and 54.9 million in debt (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Glen
- Start date
shy_tall_knight
Well-Known Member
don't worry we have AT Bell & Jeffers
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Have the talks stalled or is it that there is no new information? All the report says is that Council not talking to anyone ..... it doesnt confirm whether or not progress has been made between charity and SISU because the Charity are not saying. There is no point the Council talking further to SISU about stadium until things sorted out with the Higgs Charity. Nothing story
Plus the deal on the shares has nothing at all to do with the latest accounts - all the parties involved already had most of the info in the accounts and at least some idea of the 2012 figures & budget. the discussions were not dependant on the 2011 accounts and the report is misleading to link them
as for the losses and debt that got me thinking. The debt is as a consequence of funding the losses (I think we can use that as a starting point at least) If so has the club made £54m in losses since SISU took over in January 2008 - no. From memory the losses to 31/05/11 were something like
jan 2008 to may 2008 £3m
2009 £7.6m
2010 £3.1m
2011 £7.1m
Total £20.8m which should be the total losses of CCFC that SISU have funded via SBS&L then via CCFC H up until 31/05/11. Why then is the debt £54m ? Well thats because they have left the inter group balance at its full value which includes funding CCFC received via CCFC H prior to when SISU came in.
Yet in the accounts of CCFCH they have made a provision of 100% against what that company is owed by CCFC. Leaving the following
CCFC owes CCFCH £54m value in the accounts
CCFC owed by CCFC £54m
less provision £54m
value in accounts £nil
Why not write down permanently the amounts of £54m in both companies. I can see why they wouldn't write down to nil because if just CCFC were sold then SISU would have no claim for the actual funding they provided. BUT why not write down to £20.8m which was the actual funding SISU provided, (they have already said that CCFCH do not expect to get the money back)...... but it would make the CCFC figures look better........... £33m better There would be no effect on CCFCH it has already been written down to nil in those accounts.
It does not change the group accounts of SBS&L at all doing this
SISU have at 31/05/11 put into the whole group £29.7m .............. they have not provided £54m and shouldnt expect to recoup that. They are never ever going to get the "£54m". The amount that SISU investors are due is £29.7m not the £54m
It makes the whole thing £33m more attractive to investors if just looking at CCFC, gets rid of hysterical headlines, actually creates a year that CCFC will turn an accounting surplus ...........
just a thought or two. bit technical i know but surely part of this is in the perception of how the club is seen by fans , investors, media etc so why leave something in the accounts that will never be paid when you control both sides of the transactions
Plus the deal on the shares has nothing at all to do with the latest accounts - all the parties involved already had most of the info in the accounts and at least some idea of the 2012 figures & budget. the discussions were not dependant on the 2011 accounts and the report is misleading to link them
as for the losses and debt that got me thinking. The debt is as a consequence of funding the losses (I think we can use that as a starting point at least) If so has the club made £54m in losses since SISU took over in January 2008 - no. From memory the losses to 31/05/11 were something like
jan 2008 to may 2008 £3m
2009 £7.6m
2010 £3.1m
2011 £7.1m
Total £20.8m which should be the total losses of CCFC that SISU have funded via SBS&L then via CCFC H up until 31/05/11. Why then is the debt £54m ? Well thats because they have left the inter group balance at its full value which includes funding CCFC received via CCFC H prior to when SISU came in.
Yet in the accounts of CCFCH they have made a provision of 100% against what that company is owed by CCFC. Leaving the following
CCFC owes CCFCH £54m value in the accounts
CCFC owed by CCFC £54m
less provision £54m
value in accounts £nil
Why not write down permanently the amounts of £54m in both companies. I can see why they wouldn't write down to nil because if just CCFC were sold then SISU would have no claim for the actual funding they provided. BUT why not write down to £20.8m which was the actual funding SISU provided, (they have already said that CCFCH do not expect to get the money back)...... but it would make the CCFC figures look better........... £33m better There would be no effect on CCFCH it has already been written down to nil in those accounts.
It does not change the group accounts of SBS&L at all doing this
SISU have at 31/05/11 put into the whole group £29.7m .............. they have not provided £54m and shouldnt expect to recoup that. They are never ever going to get the "£54m". The amount that SISU investors are due is £29.7m not the £54m
It makes the whole thing £33m more attractive to investors if just looking at CCFC, gets rid of hysterical headlines, actually creates a year that CCFC will turn an accounting surplus ...........
just a thought or two. bit technical i know but surely part of this is in the perception of how the club is seen by fans , investors, media etc so why leave something in the accounts that will never be paid when you control both sides of the transactions
Last edited:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
And brings the taxman to the door!..........
imp:
to collect what ? ............. wouldnt create any tax
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Keeping the debt on the books keeps the taxman away from the door!..........
doesnt affect the tax due ............ The club and group members have accumulated tax losses in any case but the gain in CCFC would be matched by a loss in CCFCH and could be group relieved even if there were tax due. Its a paper transaction within a group situation
The Reverend Skyblue
Well-Known Member
The true figure if i understand OSB posts is just under £23 million in debt, as they have conceded they will not get the other stuff back. Its just the money SISU have put in that they should expect back and its the 23 million we are in debt with SISU.
The Rev
The Rev
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
They are running a £10m business. How much tax did they pay last year?
they paid no corporation tax they made a loss and had losses to carry forward of approx £54m
Only taxes they paid out was PAYE on wages and VAT on trading activities
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
thats exactly the point Rev....... Thats what they have channeled to CCFC ............... overall at 31/05/11 the Group accounts show that SISU investors were owed 29.7m and ARVO 2m but that debt is sitting in SBS&L
grego_gee
New Member
running a £10m business and not paying tax is called creative accounting..
its good practise and quite correct.....
If they write off £54m of debts they would start paying tax! Why would they?.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17075846
imp:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
you dont have to be"creative" if you pay out more in wages than turnover to avoid paying corporation tax. PAYE & VAT can be avoided by going into administration but as it stands we are not yet. I wasnt suggesting administration either
Wasnt suggesting writing off £54m only the part relating to pre sisu ownership. However every transaction has a debit and credit. The surplus created in CCFC would be matched by an equal deficit in CCFCH..... this is a Group and losses can be transferred around it. There would be no additional tax created by a permanent write down....... also as clubs make losses unlikely to affect future tax either
Wasnt suggesting writing off £54m only the part relating to pre sisu ownership. However every transaction has a debit and credit. The surplus created in CCFC would be matched by an equal deficit in CCFCH..... this is a Group and losses can be transferred around it. There would be no additional tax created by a permanent write down....... also as clubs make losses unlikely to affect future tax either
Last edited:
grego_gee
New Member
Ok, suggest it to SISU!
I don't think they need any advice on doing the books!
That's one thing they CAN handle!
They are running it most efficiently for tax - given they don't want to sell.....
the only time they would want it to look better in the accounts is when they did want to sell!
The thing I can't work out is where they are getting any benefit from the operation.
imp:
I don't think they need any advice on doing the books!
That's one thing they CAN handle!
They are running it most efficiently for tax - given they don't want to sell.....
the only time they would want it to look better in the accounts is when they did want to sell!
The thing I can't work out is where they are getting any benefit from the operation.
imp:Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Question: SISU have loaned £30m to SBS+L. The total losses funded by SISU to the club were £21m-where does the additional £9m go?
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
Some of those who wanted to believe without researching the facts believed his bullshit as well, Glen....that is why we need to consign idiotic comments like 'we are debt-free' and 'we are the only club in the Championship without an overdraft' to the history bin.
Last edited:
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
Offset against monies made by other companies owned by SISU? I don't know....
skyblueman
New Member
To be honest all this analysis of the debt is academic - SISU owe themselves a Shit load of money we all know that - club has little in the way of assets and a load of financial commitments - so the clubs worth bugger all really.. SISU have a very very low prospect of getting any of this money back - IF they can turn a profit they can convince themselves or more critically someone else that at an operating profit the club has a value - the bigger the profit the bigger the value obviously - BUT and this is the BIG BUT... CAN the club be made profitable quickly?? If the prospect for SISU is just hemorrhaging money for the foreseeable future they might well decide that enough is enough
grego_gee
New Member
Maybe that's possible, I don't know if it is in Company accounts.
But it is possible to offset business losses against other income for individuals!
It's quite likely part of their game!
imp:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
that would equate to the original investment BSB when they came in
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
They can transfer trading losses from CCFC to CCFCH or SBS&L or any combination around the group headed by SBS&L LBB. Only way the SISU investors get loss relief on the loans they have made is to settle at a lower figure then write off difference or to write off the loan entirely. They can not transfer trading losses to another SISU company because it is not part of the same group
As it stands in the last accounts it suits to show the full debt in CCFC because that emphasises to the Council and Charity how bad things are for CCFC. All in the perception as i said
However the focus on £54m is misleading and unrealisitic. The directors of CCFCH already have provided against it 100% that they wont get the money. That would be the same directors pretty much that CCFC have.
SISU are owed 31/05/11 £29.7m that not the £54m is the starting point, because SISU might accept say a third in settlement and the rest(or some more of it) dependant on certain events. That would be 10m not 18m in cash and up to 20m not 36m dependent on other events. If thats the starting point then buying in to CCFC might be a lot cheaper than we think, say £10m to settle loans, £10m buy ACL shares (might not be that much), £5m to invest in squad and continue to trade on to settle other creditors but allow £5m in working capital...... total £30m.... the "rest" might never be paid. The key is the SISU loan settlement not the "debt" in CCFC
What I am saying is that folk here and in the media keep going on about the £54m owed but it isnt that figure that is important. The figure that is important is the amount owed by the whole group to SISU investors. If that 29.7m is the important figure why carry assets and liabilities in subsidiary companies that they owe each other and in the SBS&L Group dont actually exist.
Last edited:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
really ? ...... done a damn fine job so far haven't they .......... 21m losses to 31/05/11 and rising and owed 30m and rising they cant find a way of recovering in full for their clients ! ........... clearly dont need any advice from me they are doing a great job :facepalm:!
