McCabe Time For You To INVEST or GO

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


In most cases, until the recession, owners borrowed money from banks and when a club's losses became too much for them to fund they would put the club into administration. A new owner would get the club cheap and with vastly reduced debts and would invest their money in trying to
rebuild. Sometimes it worked, sometimes they ended up going into admin too.

In other cases, the club is funded out of the owners' personal wealth. Again, when they lose too much, they usually cut their losses, accept the money is gone and sell the club on the cheap, so some other mug can risk their money.

I don't think there are many cases where an owner just clings onto a club through so much failure and loss, unwilling to put any more money in than absolutely necessary while the club continues to decline and the value of their assets continue to reduce.
 
All this talk of money spent and valuations, but nobody's talking about the elephant in the corner of the room as usual...

Now, for the fist time I can remember we don't have a single player that I look forward to seeing play, not one entertainer, not one flair player, not one who can turn the game on his own, not one leader to drag us up by the bootstraps when we go behind.....not one with any potential... We are without class, quality, or style... There's always been at least one player who could produce something to get us out of the shit, today there's nobody..

Football is about money, look at man Utd, man city and the like, mcabe is out of his depth in any other league above where we are.... Funny that isn't it... Co incidence...?

We aren't in league one by accident and bad decisions, we are in league one because a builder won't allow any manager to build a team regardless of how many "free" Stars the accademy produced...

Friday we gave our marquee signing to burton albion to save on his wages, ignore that he's out of form, just focus on the fact that we've done that...
 
BushBlade said:
I don't think there are many cases where an owner just clings onto a club through so much failure and loss, unwilling to put any more money in than absolutely necessary while the club continues to decline and the value of their assets continue to reduce.
Click to expand...

One thing you can do is to start to jack up the rent charged to play at Bramall Lane
 
Blade56 said:
But to an businessman like McCabe a loss here can be written of there or am I wrong Sean Thornton ?
Click to expand...

The unitilised tax losses shown in the accounts of the relevant companies says not.


McCabes Belgian bun shop for example
can't set off Uniteds losses against the profits he makes on chocolate cakes, even though he built said patisserie empire solely on the back of his ownership of a fucked L1 club.
 
Esablade said:
..it's the convoluted nature of McCabe's dealings with the club that are fucked up, the property/asset's seem of far more importance than the football side...

Let's land the club in debt to the tune of £18 million to build a hotel (we don't need) then swap the hotel out of the club in exchange for debts (loans made by his other companies to the club), loans which he has no chance of getting back any other way...

I simply don't think the bloke has his eye on the ball...
Click to expand...


The debt swap related to borrowings specific to the hotel.

I think he has his eye on the ball but he needs specs. Those big jam jar bottom ones.
 
Worksop II said:
One thing you can do is to start to jack up the rent charged to play at Bramall Lane
Click to expand...

And that will happen at some point if it hasn't already. Thus saving him 50% of the investment needed to cover losses. And people say he's not astute :)
 
Sean Thornton said:
And that will happen at some point if it hasn't already. Thus saving him 50% of the investment needed to cover losses. And people say he's not astute :)
Click to expand...

Hasn't the rent gone up from around £100K to £370K?
 
BushBlade said:
What do you mean by 'written off'?
Click to expand...
Tax based on assets within the parent group SUFC Ltd or Scarborugh Holding or one of any derivative rather than losses in other businesses outside the umbrella of the 'group'.
Engineer not an accountant but I have accountant friends (yes LYDON you're not my only imaginary pal) who always say there's always a way to deal with losses.
 
Esablade said:
Hasn't the rent gone up from around £100K to £370K?
Click to expand...

Yes. But I think the £100k didn't cover a full year.

Last December there were two rumours on BM, one said McCabe had sold the ground and we were moving to Attercliffe (from a director) and the other said the rent was now over a million and that's how McCabe was getting his money back. ( Again from a director) .

The first one wasn't true and we'll have to wait for SU Ltd 2016 accounts to see if the second one has any validity.
 
Sean Thornton said:
I think he means set off against against profits elsewhere. Trouble is there aren't any.
Click to expand...
Presumably he can offset it against his personal tax liability though although I'm guessing he doesn't pay much tax anyway.

Which of course doesn't mean 'free money' it just means you lose 25-50% less (depending on tax rates, I've used UK's, there may be a higher rate but it doesn't concern me because I won't be paying it any time in the near future).

(Second paragraph for colour for those who don't understand the point in my first).
 
Sean Thornton said:
Yes. But I think the £100k didn't cover a full year.

Last December there were two rumours on BM, one said McCabe had sold the ground and we were moving to Attercliffe (from a director) and the other said the rent was now over a million and that's how McCabe was getting his money back. ( Again from a director) .

The first one wasn't true and we'll have to wait for SU Ltd 2016 accounts to see if the second one has any validity.
Click to expand...

The only rumours I get involved in are of the 100 page epic-type on the rumours board here...why would a director of the club say these things?
 

Blade56 said:
Tax based on assets within the parent group SUFC Ltd or Scarborugh Holding or one of any derivative rather than losses in other businesses outside the umbrella of the 'group'.
Engineer not an accountant but I have accountant friends (yes LYDON you're not my only imaginary pal) who always say there's always a way to deal with losses.
Click to expand...


As I've said, the accounts show unitilised losses. Without knowing the complex structure of the group as a whole, you can only act on the information available.

SUFC ltd is a subsidiary of Blades Leisure Ltd which SU Ltd owns 50% of. SU Ltd is owned ultimately by Scaborough Group International ltd. Which has over £135m in tax losses itself at Feb 2015.
 
BushBlade said:
Presumably he can offset it against his personal tax liability though although I'm guessing he doesn't pay much tax anyway.

Which of course doesn't mean 'free money' it just means you lose 25-50% less (depending on tax rates, I've used UK's, there may be a higher rate but it doesn't concern me because I won't be paying it any time in the near future).

(Second paragraph for colour for those who don't understand the point in my first).
Click to expand...


I would doubt it. It's Corporation tax losses. Loss on shares owned by him is a personal matter though.
 
Sean Thornton said:
As I've said, the accounts show unitilised losses. Without knowing the complex structure of the group as a whole, you can only act on the information available.

SUFC ltd is a subsidiary of Blades Leisure Ltd which SU Ltd owns 50% of. SU Ltd is owned ultimately by Scaborough Group International ltd. Which has over £135m in tax losses itself at Feb 2015.
Click to expand...
So you're not sure?
 
Esablade said:
The only rumours I get involved in are of the 100 page epic-type on the rumours board here...why would a director of the club say these things?
Click to expand...

Indeed.

This is not digging up Ben_1982s post as he did work at the club but the two on BM have anti McCabe agendas for different reasons.
 
Sean Thornton said:
Dear me. The accounts show it hasn't happened!
Click to expand...
Dear me? You said

'As I've said, the accounts show unitilised losses. Without knowing the complex structure of the group as a whole, you can only act on the information available.'

So do you know the complex structure of the group as a whole and have you got all the information available?
 
BushBlade said:
Dear me? You said

'As I've said, the accounts show unitilised losses. Without knowing the complex structure of the group as a whole, you can only act on the information available.'

So do you know the complex structure of the group as a whole and have you got all the information available?
Click to expand...


No that was a reply to B56s comment about always being able to do something with losses. IE you can't make such broad statement without that info.

Now THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE IS IN THE ACCOUNTS AND SAYS THAT SET OFF OF LOSSES HASNT OCCURED.

That's what said, nothing else. You need to read properly before trying to pick someone up on a comment. I've said several times its in the accounts but rather than look you want to be a forensic smart arse.
 
Sean Thornton said:
No that was a reply to B56s comment about always being able to do something with losses. IE you can't make such broad statement without that info.

Now THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE IS IN THE ACCOUNTS AND SAYS THAT SET OFF OF LOSSES HASNT OCCURED.

That's what said, nothing else. You need to read properly before trying to pick someone up on a comment. I've said several times its in the accounts but rather than look you want to be a forensic smart arse.
Click to expand...
No, you need to explain things more clearly and not fall back on accountancy jargon and words like unitilised when trying to make your point to lay people.

And you're one of the biggest smart arses on here.
 
↑
Tax based on assets within the parent group SUFC Ltd or Scarborugh Holding or one of any derivative rather than losses in other businesses outside the umbrella of the 'group'.
Engineer not an accountant but I have accountant friends (yes @LYDON you're not my only imaginary pal) who always say there's always a way to deal with losses.




As I've said, the accounts show unitilised losses. Without knowing the complex structure of the group as a whole, you can only act on the information available.



So you can grasp the context, my reply States in the first line the info is in the accounts. Which is where my info comes from.

I haven't "acted" on anything or suggested I know the structure. To pass on opinion that the losses can always be written off without having that info is clearly not a wise thing to do.
 
BushBlade said:
No, you need to explain things more clearly and not fall back on accountancy jargon and words like unitilised when trying to make your point to lay people.

And you're one of the biggest smart arses on here.
Click to expand...

You've said before you have some background in finance. You don't understand jargon but you are quite capable of commenting on it rather than ask what it means? How does that work? You just post on a subject without knowing what it's about?
 
Sean Thornton said:
You've said before you have some background in finance. You don't understand jargon but you are quite capable of commenting on it rather than ask what it means? How does that work? You just post on a subject without knowing what it's about?
Click to expand...


Anyway I'm off to the pub.







Set of cunts

Slams door.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JayGreen17
No Excuses Not to GO to Wembley
6 7 8
Replies
229
Views
17K
Koh Samui Blade
Koh Samui Blade
U
You are the board
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
Gin&Juice
Gin&Juice
Alan Birchenall's hair
Must be the best season ever for half the posters on this forum.....
2
Replies
59
Views
3K
Bell4
Bell4
HeCanDoMagic
Reflecting on Wembley
2 3 4
Replies
109
Views
7K
Jan Age
Jan Age
jono_t2000
Where to from here
Replies
7
Views
921
Toto
T

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom