Asset Stripping -They need To Go

[Frank the tank]

We're going to need to be to compete in League One.
Collapse in season ticket sales, big loss in tv income, it's good that the boys are planning ahead by slashing the wage bill now.

Doesn't matter what league we are in we still have to meet scr
Would you rather we didn't sell players and ended up like Wednesday ?

 

[MosboroughBlade]

That's not asset stripping though is it?

That's like saying that you bought a house for 30-50k and sold it for 105k.

Yeah but don't forget ripping the gas, electric, central heating out, boiler, floor boards windows and roof as in our case UTB

 

[Iffy Onuora's Shiny Head]

That's not asset stripping though is it?

That's like saying that you bought a house for 30-50k and sold it for 105k.

The club was increasingly run to preserve and realise the owner's equity value rather than maximise the football team.

He bought control of the club for relatively little, the club itself funded the return of assets like Bramall Lane, and players like Ndiaye and Berge were sold while he was looking to sell. He then sold the whole club, including those assets, for over £100m. A lot of the value he cashed in on was built and funded by the club itself.

 

[coolasanidiot]

Whilst many on here state that we shouldn't be selling players without adequate replacements , some are stating we should get rid of the owners ( how exactly) forgetting theres not a queue of billionaires out there.

The transfer market has gone silly in the PL and now championship clubs chasing top 8 are joining in.

Maybe its a one off , maybe after our flirtations with the PL and parachutes its our last chance to properly stabilise financially , start a new page.

Whatever moans and groans I hope we can get behind the team , starting tonight and surprise a few people.

UTB .

Hear what you are saying but I bought 3 season tickets for us to go and watch Brooks, Gus and OHare, these owners are not thinking about the paying fans and The Community they are the worst of the worst, they ain't looking for best interests of the club they are looking out for themselves.

Yes I hope we win, but all entertainment has been ripped away from us. They'd close us down without batting an eyelid if it meant their balance sheet looked a bit better. Your post almost gives them some credance, what they are doing is downright disgusting.

These Yanks have no idea of the importance that this club means to about 100,000 folk, they should have never been allowed to buy us.

 

[dingledog]

Looks like the new toilets in the South Stand will be going back

 

[Carlton Blade]

There's no hole in revenue that needs to be 'plugged'. Wage bill is much reduced and £15m has been added through sales. There aren't huge transfer payments outstanding.

What this is doing is removing a player with money committed past this summer. The only 1st team players with definite money still committed are Tanganga, McGuinness, Chong, Cannon, Peck, Arblaster, Campbell. Not sure on Cooper and Burrows, they may last unto 2028

 

[Champagneblade]

No its fine I dont have real understanding other than what im told from.people close to the club the wage bill takes us close to scr and the owners are able / willing to cover 15 m other than that if we spend we have to sell first
Thats my rudimentary understanding

Oh also clearing the decks now and then replacing with loans and frees on short term contracts puts us in a stronger position next season with scr

There’s a lot of financial gymnastics with this one isn’t there? We lose the Sky money but it didn’t come in one lump, it’s paid through the season.

You might get a 6m guaranteed for Hamer but then on one side, this payment may get spread over a couple of years but of course on the other we aren’t paying him the best part of 2m a year anymore. I know accounting is factored over his contract BIr payment doesn’t necessarily mirror that. So we might get 3m this year and 3m next but we also save 2m in wages. Same with Callum. We might get 3.5m this year and next but this year we’ll save 2m in wages so those two save us 10.5m this year. Gus brings in 3m next year but no wage save as he would be out of contract whereas Callum beings in 3.5m next year and also saves 2m on wages.

But that’s 2 players. Say Brooks was on 25k (guestimate) then he saves us 1.25m this year and maybe brings in 4.5m. So between these three 16.25m is made up from the shortfall. If Cannon goes for 7m guaranteed then let’s say he’s on 30k, he brings in 3.5m and saves us 1.5m in wages so we’re up to 21.25m for this year, but we’ve also got 3.5m next year in fee and 1.5m in wages.

My convoluted point is that we get fees of 29m for those 4 alone and save wages of 11.5m if we say O’Hare, Brooks and Cannon were contracted to the club for next season as well as this but not beyond.

So we hit 40.5m but we don’t realise it all immediately.

Then it’s a question of the wages of those going out vs those coming in. How much of a delta is there? Positive or negative? Is it adding to the 40.5m or subtracting?

 

[MosboroughBlade]

Looks like the new toilets in the South Stand will be going back

We literally have got a pot to piss in

 

[Houso]

The club was increasingly run to preserve and realise the owner's equity value rather than maximise the football team.

He bought control of the club for relatively little, the club itself funded the return of assets like Bramall Lane, and players like Ndiaye and Berge were sold while he was looking to sell. He then sold the whole club, including those assets, for over £100m. A lot of the value he cashed in on was built and funded by the club itself.

You're conflating turning a profit on an investment with asset stripping.

 

[Tickhill Blade]

Looks like the new toilets in the South Stand will be going back

It's fine, we transferred the toilets to a new entity so we owe nothing

 

[Brian Deane]

There’s a lot of financial gymnastics with this one isn’t there? We lose the Sky money but it didn’t come in one lump, it’s paid through the season.

You might get a 6m guaranteed for Hamer but then on one side, this payment may get spread over a couple of years but of course on the other we aren’t paying him the best part of 2m a year anymore. I know accounting is factored over his contract BIr payment doesn’t necessarily mirror that. So we might get 3m this year and 3m next but we also save 2m in wages. Same with Callum. We might get 3.5m this year and next but this year we’ll save 2m in wages so those two save us 10.5m this year. Gus brings in 3m next year but no wage save as he would be out of contract whereas Callum beings in 3.5m next year and also saves 2m on wages.

But that’s 2 players. Say Brooks was on 25k (guestimate) then he saves us 1.25m this year and maybe brings in 4.5m. So between these three 16.25m is made up from the shortfall. If Cannon goes for 7m guaranteed then let’s say he’s on 30k, he brings in 3.5m and saves us 1.5m in wages so we’re up to 21.25m for this year, but we’ve also got 3.5m next year in fee and 1.5m in wages.

My convoluted point is that we get fees of 29m for those 4 alone and save wages of 11.5m if we say O’Hare, Brooks and Cannon were contracted to the club for next season as well as this but not beyond.

So we hit 40.5m but we don’t realise it all immediately.

Then it’s a question of the wages of those going out vs those coming in. How much of a delta is there? Positive or negative? Is it adding to the 40.5m or subtracting?

It may also depend that the budget Peroni boy has in his back pocket for this season or to cover from the start of this season to the next window ( January) is to cover the monies required for loan fees and their respective wages ?

 

[CaptainHotdog]

Don’t want to come across all Wendy but let the protests begin.
No vitriol towards the manager and players. Let’s direct it all at the fraudsters

 

[Iffy Onuora's Shiny Head]

You're conflating turning a profit on an investment with asset stripping.

I’m not saying making a profit is asset stripping. I’m saying it was asset stripping indirectly.

He secured his investment through low-risk tangible assets like the stadium and property, while the longer-term footballing potential of the club was weakened through player sales and inadequate reinvestment.

So the club helped build and protect the value he eventually sold, while the playing side took the hit.

 

[Grappler]

The club was increasingly run to preserve and realise the owner's equity value rather than maximise the football team.

He bought control of the club for relatively little, the club itself funded the return of assets like Bramall Lane, and players like Ndiaye and Berge were sold while he was looking to sell. He then sold the whole club, including those assets, for over £100m. A lot of the value he cashed in on was built and funded by the club itself.

What you are describing is not "asset stripping".

Are you saying we sold Ndiaye and Berge against their will?

Do you think that if, say, a club owner bought a football club for £50 million, and then later sold it for £100 million, then that person should only take £50 million, to break even (without taking inflation into account) and give the other £50 million back to the club?

I'm not saying Prince Abdullah or Rosen and Eltoukhy are saints, but they are not asset strippers.

The land at Dore wouldn't have been purchased, for a start.

 

[Youngand70]

Asset stripping has become a phrase to adopt when people are pissed off with owners, but it's simply not true here. As others have said, we've got a massive dip in income, the owners were idiots to listen to Bord, idiots to listen to Wilder and the money spent over the past couple of seasons has been thrown down a fucking well and has us in the position we do now.

They came into this knowing nothing about football and Bettis should have told them to take a fucking breath and bring in someone to manage the football operations including purse strings.

One of the big problems is Lap Dog Bettis's 10 year football CV includes Sheffield United, Sheff United and SUFC and sweet FA else.

 

[Brian Deane]

What you are describing is not "asset stripping".

Are you saying we sold Ndiaye and Berge against their will?

Do you think that if, say, a club owner bought a football club for £50 million, and then later sold it for £100 million, then that person should only take £50 million, to break even (without taking inflation into account) and give the other £50 million back to the club?

I'm not saying Prince Abdullah or Rosen and Eltoukhy are saints, but they are not asset strippers.

The land at Dore wouldn't have been purchased, for a start.

Way things are going, we might even de up playing our home games at Dore next season whilst the owners sell of the ground to some property developers.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Well our previous owner invested somewhere in the region of 30-50m in the club and walked away with 105. So there's at least 50m there

Not true.

 

[Iffy Onuora's Shiny Head]

Not true.

I mean at least explain why.

The court case said he had invested 18m plus then paid 5m to secure Mccabes half. Thats 23m of factual court backed evidence.

Then he went on record at the end of 2023 saying he “had to put, or borrowed, around £40m.

We dont know the split. We dont know how much was equity or debt. There are costs going through the accounts at that time which were down as loans, which would have been repaid on sale of the club.

This is where I get my "not true" 50m estimate from.

 

[dexter101]

Genuine question. Assuming they aren't going to start paying dividends out, surely all the money that is generated in sales stays within the Club, if thats correct, how would it be asset stripping?

I am not suggesting this would happen but if the sale of Hamer for example, funded laying a new pitch at Dore, This could be deemed building a better future for the club (and potentially a more sellable company).

Obviously they way they seem to be doing things at the moment looks like they are going to cause the club to be performing very badly on the pitch, but as long as we don't get relegated, does poor league position make any difference to the club?

Just to be clear, I don't like them, I don't like what they are doing, but I am curious about my above questions.

 

[Sean Thornton]

I mean at least explain why.

The court case said he had invested 18m plus then paid 5m to secure Mccabes half. Thats 23m of factual court backed evidence.

Then he went on record at the end of 2023 saying he “had to put, or borrowed, around £40m.

We dont know the split. We dont know how much was equity or debt. There are costs going through the accounts at that time which were down as loans, which would have been repaid on sale of the club.

This is where I get my "not true" 50m estimate from.

All you have to do is examine the increase in share capital in SUFC and BL and adjust for any McCabe input. The Confirmation Statements clearly state all new SC was paid for in full.

The court case was wasn’t the end of his investment.

I see the £30-£50m has now become £50m though. Have the court case facts changed over the last hour?

This has been done before.

 

[djbaldken]

Would you rather we didn't sell players and ended up like Wednesday ?

Unfortunately Frank we ARE selling OUR BEST players and the way it's looking we WILL end up like Wednesday. By that I mean In league one.

These Yanks have no idea of the importance that this club means

You should have left it at 'these Yanks have no idea'. They clearly dont.

I did say at the time of the takeover that they are not football people. They are venture capitalists looking to make a quick buck or two. They have no idea how football works.

They have clearly shown this.
First they sack Wilder and put in someone who was WAY out of his depth.
Then they fail to meet their financial commitments.
Now they are selling off our most valuable assets.

The writing is on the wall. This is going to be a season of turmoil. Where it will end is anybody's guess.
However much you are against Wilder, THIS IS NOT HIS FAULT. Nor is it the fault of the players.

As fans all we can do is look on and hope for the best.
In this case the best will be avoiding relegation.
Strap yourselves in. It will not be pleasant.

Anybody else getting Deane and Fijortoft vibes?

 

[Sean Thornton]

Genuine question. Assuming they aren't going to start paying dividends out, surely all the money that is generated in sales stays within the Club, if thats correct, how would it be asset stripping?

I am not suggesting this would happen but if the sale of Hamer for example, funded laying a new pitch at Dore, This could be deemed building a better future for the club (and potentially a more sellable company).

Obviously they way they seem to be doing things at the moment looks like they are going to cause the club to be performing very badly on the pitch, but as long as we don't get relegated, does poor league position make any difference to the club?

Just to be clear, I don't like them, I don't like what they are doing, but I am curious about my above questions.

There are no profits to pay dividends from. They could repay any directors loans.

 

[dexter101]

There are no profits to pay dividends from. They could repay any directors loans.

Thanks Sean, had forgotten about money loaned to the club.

 

[Ron_Justice]

If they're asset stripping they're hilariously bad at it. Bought the club for £100M (£65M), paid off a couple of managers, invested in mental contracts and fees for players with no re-sale value, and have made £13M in player sales this window. They are SOOOOOO very deep in the red that to break even and make a profit from 'Asset Stripping' they'd need to sell everything, players, hotel, Dore, the ground, Shirecliff, even the Tea Urn and Lady. Maybe then they'd break even.

The owners are business people. They get it. The ONLY way they get a return on their investment is by investing more OR fluking it getting out of the Champ on a shoestring and fwiw, I even think they're smart enough to know that option 2 is a non-starter.

For me, as bad as this window appears to be, this is all about ship steading and a consolidation season. They have no choice but to dig in, pay and build a squad capable of promotion OR sell up and take a loss on the value of the club.

 

[Frank the tank]

Unfortunately Frank we ARE selling OUR BEST players and the way it's looking we WILL end up like Wednesday. By that I mean In league one.

You should have left it at 'these Yanks have no idea'. They clearly dont.

I did say at the time of the takeover that they are not football people. They are venture capitalists looking to make a quick buck or two. They have no idea how football works.

They have clearly shown this.
First they sack Wilder and put in someone who was WAY out of his depth.
Then they fail to meet their financial commitments.
Now they are selling off our most valuable assets.

The writing is on the wall. This is going to be a season of turmoil. Where it will end is anybody's guess.
However much you are against Wilder, THIS IS NOT HIS FAULT. Nor is it the fault of the players.

As fans all we can do is look on and hope for the best.
In this case the best will be avoiding relegation.
Strap yourselves in. It will not be pleasant.

Anybody else getting Deane and Fijortoft vibes?

It doesn't matter who is in charge these players would have had to have been sold anyway
You cant lose 35-40 m in income and just carry on regardless

In the past we have been lucky our assets have been worth more and two sales would have been enough but after the last season we ave to sell everyone half decent to make up the shortfall

If you think we will go down anyway then surely that's good business sense to get their wages off the books and for the record o hare asked for a move

 

[Grappler]

Unfortunately Frank we ARE selling OUR BEST players and the way it's looking we WILL end up like Wednesday. By that I mean In league one.

You should have left it at 'these Yanks have no idea'. They clearly dont.

I did say at the time of the takeover that they are not football people. They are venture capitalists looking to make a quick buck or two. They have no idea how football works.

They have clearly shown this.
First they sack Wilder and put in someone who was WAY out of his depth.
Then they fail to meet their financial commitments.
Now they are selling off our most valuable assets.

The writing is on the wall. This is going to be a season of turmoil. Where it will end is anybody's guess.
However much you are against Wilder, THIS IS NOT HIS FAULT. Nor is it the fault of the players.

As fans all we can do is look on and hope for the best.
In this case the best will be avoiding relegation.
Strap yourselves in. It will not be pleasant.

Anybody else getting Deane and Fijortoft vibes?

Private Equity investors, not Venture Capitalists.

Just saying......

 

[Iffy Onuora's Shiny Head]

All you have to do is examine the increase in share capital in SUFC and BL and adjust for any McCabe input. The Confirmation Statements clearly state all new SC was paid for in full.

The court case was wasn’t the end of his investment.

I see the £30-£50m has now become £50m though. Have the court case facts changed over the last hour?

This has been done before.

I know it wasn't the end of his investment... hence calling out the £40m..? Which ties into the increase in share capital you mentioned.

But we don't know how much of the 40m was equity or repayble loans or what securities were taken out on these against the clubs assets.

(and Ive said 50m just for ease no need to nitpick )

 

[Sean Thornton]

Private Equity investors, not Venture Capitalists.

Just saying......

It’s the new “asset stripping”

 

[djbaldken]

It doesn't matter who is in charge these players would have had to have been sold anyway
You cant lose 35-40 m in income and just carry on regardless

In the past we have been lucky our assets have been worth more and two sales would have been enough but after the last season we ave to sell everyone half decent to make up the shortfall

If you think we will go down anyway then surely that's good business sense to get their wages off the books and for the record o hare asked for a move

Didn't know O Hare had asked for a move so fair enough if he wants to go. That suggests he's not happy and can see what's coming. Or he's been tapped up.

The thought of us going down is there in my mind. With the situation as it is now, losing out best players and the possibility of points deduction, it's not unlikely we'll go down. I do believe though that the ONLY man capable of keeping us in Championship is Wilder. I hope he doesn't walk or these incompetent charlatans sack him again.

 

[HIBGIA]

We needed to sell players to plug a 40 m hole and we've not pulled in half of that

Those are the simple economic facts

The hole will be bigger with relegation, which is more likely, after the sale of COH. But's it's ok because we have reduced the wage bill, but what then replaces to losss in revenue next season in L1? Sell the ground again?