losses up 1m quid

[Sean Thornton]

I only scanned it but I think the exec summary only mentioned Maguire and Taylor under the section on disposals. Did anyone else leave for a fee?

I only scanned it but I think the exec summary only mentioned Maguire and Taylor under the section on disposals. Did anyone else leave for a fee?

I thought there was another one albeit a small fee, £50k or so, but I may be wrong.

That's the profit, be nice to know what the actual fees were.

 

[Esablade]

McCabe is a businessman who understands precisely what money he has lost and what his half company is worth IF he can find a willing buyer. A sale now though would crystallise those losses as did giving up half the company.

There will be the hope that future successes will enhance the value of the company and make his half ownership more valuable than it is today. For that half to ever be worth £60m plus is fantasy football.

Yes a quid.

It would be far better for the club if those losses were indeed 'crystallised' and he 'sold up'...a clean slate...but of course, what with the 'debts' owed to McCabes companies, the ground, hotel, academy, all the intertwined businesses, things are not that straightforward are they?

Princey was supposedly brought in to 'benefit the enhancement of on field contributions'..he's ended up subbing the running costs whilst McCabe strikes off debts, which as you state, he has no hope of recovering...

'As part of the transaction a significant equity commitment has been made by our new partner, HRH Prince Abdullah bin Mosaad bin
Abdulaziz Al Saud to finance Blades Leisure group operations for the forthcoming two years on the basis that the underlying activities are operating on a breakeven basis allowing funds to benefit the
enhancement of on field contribution. As part of the investment '

 

[Balham]

I thought there was another one albeit a small fee, £50k or so, but I may be wrong.

That's the profit, be nice to know what the actual fees were.

£2m from Maguire you'd think, as he'd have zero NBV unless they'd capitalised any signing on fees. The rest could be anything and I'd be amazed if there was a book profit on Taylor (residual value £100k-is)

 

[10-0 win]

You've misunderstood what I meant.

see you're point, sorry, just think KM is better than alot of other owners, facilities, gates, pitch , basically everything is prepared for better days.

 

[PeteBlade]

That is a reasonable statement, carefully worded and sensible.

Does the 'beneficial' bit cover his £60m losses? Nowhere near and never would unless we had managed to 'do a Leicester' and then he might have had the reflected glory.

He could have cut and run years ago but he wants to leave a legacy and won't rest in his grave I'm sure if we are in this state when he pops it.

Without knowing the ins and outs of his company finances I would suggest that a decent amount of this investment could have been recouped by other (perfectly legal and above board) methods.

He's a very successful businessman as we've both agreed upon. I don't think very successful businessmen continue to pump money into black holes without ways of offsetting these losses.

The last bit I've no idea whether true unless you know the man personally?

 

[Woodwardfan]

It would be far better for the club if those losses were indeed 'crystallised' and he 'sold up'...a clean slate...but of course, what with the 'debts' owed to McCabes companies, the ground, hotel, academy, all the intertwined businesses, things are not that straightforward are they?

Pretty straightforward and simple these days.

 

[10-0 win]

His biggest mistake was probably not giving Wilson another year, else I think (at the time, not on hindsight) he sacked and hired ok. Weir wasn't what we hoped,Clough was annoyingly uninspiring and was given too much rope. How we could sign a player like Higdon, overweight and donkeyslow, should have gone just because bad or no research. NA will always be remembered for beeing the one who got offloaded Higdon on loan and later selling him (for free), but still a feat.

 

[Esablade]

Pretty straightforward and simple these days.

Well, if that's the case, what's the exit strategy?
Presuming he doesn't want to destroy the club of course...

 

[Woodwardfan]

Without knowing the ins and outs of his company finances I would suggest that a decent amount of this investment could have been recouped by other (perfectly legal and above board) methods.

He's a very successful businessman as we've both agreed upon. I don't think very successful businessmen continue to pump money into black holes without ways of offsetting these losses.

The last bit I've no idea whether true unless you know the man personally?

Bit vague that Pete. He's lost millions, don't doubt it.

No I don't know him personally.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Well, if that's the case, what's the exit strategy?
Presuming he doesn't want to destroy the club of course...

He said only the other week something to the effect "if there is a willing buyer who I think will have the interests of the club at heart then I'll willingly talk to them about a deal for my half of the club". The club is worth peanuts, it's the right type of owner with the right resources and the right intentions that matters. It took KM years to find the prince.

Why on earth do you say "presuming he doesn't want to destroy the club of course"?

Hope that helps. I deflected you from the tussle with Sean with the 'right intentions'!!

 

[Woodwardfan]

His biggest mistake was probably not giving Wilson another year, else I think (at the time, not on hindsight) he sacked and hired ok. Weir wasn't what we hoped,Clough was annoyingly uninspiring and was given too much rope. How we could sign a player like Higdon, overweight and donkeyslow, should have gone just because bad or no research. NA will always be remembered for beeing the one who got offloaded Higdon on loan and later selling him (for free), but still a feat.

Higdon left in February by 'mutual consent' and had a contract until August 2016.

There was an option for a third year and if that was a player option rather than a club option then United will have needed to come to a settlement on 18 months wages rather than just the 6 remaining months. He didn't go for "free".

 

[Harry's Game]

Higdon left in February by 'mutual consent' and had a contract until August 2016.

There was an option for a third year and if that was a player option rather than a club option then United will have needed to come to a settlement on 18 months wages rather than just the 6 remaining months. He didn't go for "free".

Another reason to look back in horror at that Clough / Brannigan Omni shambles.12 months ago some People were asking what triggered Cloughs sacking? Looking at it with what we know now it's no surprise at all.

An 18 month reign that has set us back a minimum of two years, maybe more.

 

[Esablade]

He said only the other week something to the effect "if there is a willing buyer who I think will have the interests of the club at heart then I'll willingly talk to them about a deal for my half of the club". The club is worth peanuts, it's the right type of owner with the right resources and the right intentions that matters. It took KM years to find the prince.

Why on earth do you say "presuming he doesn't want to destroy the club of course"?

Hope that helps. I deflected you from the tussle with Sean with the 'right intentions'!!

Well, he found the Prince, ( by chance, allegedly) who appears good for subbing the ongoing running costs of the club...at a push...you say it's simple to walk away, I don't believe it is ..without destroying the club...he could find a mythical buyer who matches his valuation but he's been looking a very long time in truth, right?

 

[The Crab]

Not good, probably ends any hopes of serious money being spent this summer... I'm half expecting Trevor Birch to be re-appointed soon.

He discovered Abramovich you know

 

[Woodwardfan]

Well, he found the Prince, ( by chance, allegedly) who appears good for subbing the ongoing running costs of the club...at a push...you say it's simple to walk away, I don't believe it is ..without destroying the club...he could find a mythical buyer who matches his valuation but he's been looking a very long time in truth, right?

One last post Esa.

I never said it was "simple to walk away". I said the club accounts had been simplified and meant that there were none of all that long list of complications that you previously mentioned above that would deter any potential new owner.

Finding the prince " by chance allegedly" is a strange comment too - KM had been searching for investors for years and had said so for years. The "by chance" bit you have in mind could relate to the occasion he came across the prince at an unrelated occasion and everything else is history as they say. KM had something to sell and he sold it when the opportunity arose because the prince passed his 'suitable investor' criteria.

Your last sentence was partly correct but used in the wrong context.

I can't believe KM would ever leave the club and the prince' high and dry' but we should all appreciate the ongoing costs he has, even as half owner. This season he has put in at least £4m and whichever way you look at next season it will cost him a bundle just to keep us competitive.

Don't know what you mean by "mythical buyer" but he found the prince and there's nothing to stop the prince finding an investor. To be honest I don't think that "matching his valualtion" is the main barrier against any change.

Esa, you and Sean and I are poles apart in our knowledge of the facts and views of the current situation but I hope our perspectives have been of interest.

 

[Darthblade]

Well at least we know Brannigan wasn't being paid half a million a year as claimed.

Thank goodness for that ....... based on his record of achievement for the Club ...... he should have been paying us £500k per year to retain him !!!

UTB & FTP

 

[Esablade]

One last post Esa.

I never said it was "simple to walk away". I said the club accounts had been simplified and meant that there were none of all that long list of complications that you previously mentioned above that would deter any potential new owner.

Finding the prince " by chance allegedly" is a strange comment too - KM had been searching for investors for years and had said so for years. The "by chance" bit you have in mind could relate to the occasion he came across the prince at an unrelated occasion and everything else is history as they say. KM had something to sell and he sold it when the opportunity arose because the prince passed his 'suitable investor' criteria.

Your last sentence was partly correct but used in the wrong context.

I can't believe KM would ever leave the club and the prince' high and dry' but we should all appreciate the ongoing costs he has, even as half owner. This season he has put in at least £4m and whichever way you look at next season it will cost him a bundle just to keep us competitive.

Don't know what you mean by "mythical buyer" but he found the prince and there's nothing to stop the prince finding an investor. To be honest I don't think that "matching his valualtion" is the main barrier against any change.

Esa, you and Sean and I are poles apart in our knowledge of the facts and views of the current situation but I hope our perspectives have been of interest.

What has the Prince brought to the table apart from easing McCabe's burden, sharing his debt?
We now have the promise that the Prince will only release the next trench of investment once promotion to the championship has been achieved.

The club accounts have been simplified in the respect of any assets of value, 'Premiere league stadium, Copthorne, John Street business centre,development land behind kop with planning permission, have all been transferred to the McCabe family...to be 'bought back at some unspecified future date' or not...as the case may be.

McCabe is very happy to tell us what he's put in, but silent on how he and his businesses have benefitted over the years with their various oversea's 'ventures'.

The fact is simply this, McCabe, by his own reckoning, has put 90million into a club he's steered into L1...he can blame bad luck all he likes but that's the one fact that remains.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see much changing whilst he/his family are at the helm...

 

[Sean Thornton]

HRH isnt "sharing" any debt. The Fc was effectively debt free when he bought in. He's having to fund ongoing losses, as is McCabe, on a fifty fifty basis. The share capital increased by ten million which HRH paid for. McCabe didn't get it, the FC did. It's gone.
The only debt written off to equity was money owed to McCabe. The losses are nothing to do with historical debt or money owed to McCabe they are trading results.

 

[Darthblade]

We are a 'big club' with the infrastructure of a 'big club'. Having all those facilities in waiting for a return to the big time is outrageously expensive and that includes the management teams and the playing squad.

Some on here think KM and the prince will fund all that and then spoil it for the sake of a player signing or two. That's nonsense.

All we need is a manager who can spend one of the best budgets in the league effectively and get the best out of his players. For 5 years we've not had that.

Some now 'smell austerity'. I don't because I can see the owners are demanding promotion and putting all in place to achieve it. The manager will have a similar budget next season and he should have got us promoted this season. He has to be more careful with his spending because his signings cost us dear this season.

When it comes to the money side what strikes me is how little the biggest critics can interpret the financials. It's always the owners' fault for not spending that extra £2m or so and 'asking the manager to do the job with his hands tied behind his back'.

"Some on here think KM and the prince will fund all that and then spoil it for the sake of a player signing or two. That's nonsense."

Regrettably; I don't believe that your statement is "nonsense" ....... I believe that we have been quite close to a competitive squad for a while but stopped short of completing it. For example; in the year when Mr Evans went on his HMP holiday, if we had another competent striker on the books at the time then we would certainly have been promoted that season.

Since then its been a different story; selling our best players and replacing them with crap or not replacing them at all. This "master plan" does not have any chance of success, as proven by the last 3 years and therefore its a fool that continues along this path. We currently have around 5 / 6 senior players worth retaining in the summer IMHO.


"All we need is a manager who can spend one of the best budgets in the league effectively and get the best out of his players. For 5 years we've not had that."

Totally agree here ...... Clough for example, despite the positives, brought in way too many average or below average players ....... less but more quality was needed.

UTB & FTP

 

[Esablade]

HRH isnt "sharing" any debt. The Fc was effectively debt free when he bought in. He's having to fund ongoing losses, as is McCabe, on a fifty fifty basis. The share capital increased by ten million which HRH paid for. McCabe didn't get it, the FC did. It's gone.
The only debt written off to equity was money owed to McCabe. The losses are nothing to do with historical debt or money owed to McCabe they are trading results.

'effectively' debt free...
The club has no loans outstanding, it's paying no interest on any loans?

As you confirm, McCabe has eased his burden by having the Prince here...his ongoing costs are halved.
No on is saying 'McCabe got ten million directly from the Prince'...what a vivid imagination you have!

As I stated, one could argue that McCabe offset this sale to the Prince by shifting assets of actual value, to companies owned by his family, just before selling to the Prince...which is also 'simplified' things so that the Prince has no claim on the ground, hotel etc etc..

happy to stand corrected.

 

[Woodwardfan]

"Some on here think KM and the prince will fund all that and then spoil it for the sake of a player signing or two. That's nonsense."

Regrettably; I don't believe that your statement is "nonsense" ....... I believe that we have been quite close to a competitive squad for a while but stopped short of completing it. For example; in the year when Mr Evans went on his HMP holiday, if we had another competent striker on the books at the time then we would certainly have been promoted that season.

Since then its been a different story; selling our best players and replacing them with crap or not replacing them at all. This "master plan" does not have any chance of success, as proven by the last 3 years and therefore its a fool that continues along this path. We currently have around 5 / 6 senior players worth retaining in the summer IMHO.


"All we need is a manager who can spend one of the best budgets in the league effectively and get the best out of his players. For 5 years we've not had that."

Totally agree here ...... Clough for example, despite the positives, brought in way too many average or below average players ....... less but more quality was needed.

UTB & FTP

I agree with most of what you say.

My interpretation of the situation is that the managers have not spent their budgets wisely. We always roll up to Wembley without a good striker I agree. That has been a combination of bad luck and bad planning with proper cover in the squad. Some blame the owner/s for that, I blame the managers.

I believe the budget the managers have been working to is plenty to do the job right. It's not the owners who have wasted the budgets or the transfer windows or loan windows, its the managers. I think Clough substantially exceeded his original budget in January 2015 with an agreed boost to his budget for 5 new players including Done and Brayford. The owners can't be expected to do that year in year out, at some stage it has to work as the funds naturally can't be forked out time and again.

Nobody can argue the fact that the common denominator is McCabe I acknowledge that, but the prince has been there contributing since 2013.

I suggest the manager is given a budget to work to at the start of every season and from there the owners stand back and do not interfere. If a player is sought after by higher league clubs then all parties say they are powerless to stop the player leaving and I accept that although I'm uncomfortable with it. I do believe the income from player sales is 100% ploughed back into the club.

These managers ought to do better and that includes Adkins this season, with this season's budget. He's signed two expensive strikers and has had the luxury of playing another expensive striker as left wing back. He sent another less expensive but capable striker on loan to Portsmouth for the season and he's paid off another expensive striker. We've got a young striker who is supposedly destined for the Premier League one day. OK we lost a scoring winger but FGS we should have had plenty in hand.

 

[Woodwardfan]

HRH isnt "sharing" any debt. The Fc was effectively debt free when he bought in

He's having to fund ongoing losses, as is McCabe, on a fifty fifty basis. The share capital increased by ten million which HRH paid for. McCabe didn't get it, the FC did. It's gone.
The only debt written off to equity was money owed to McCabe. The losses are nothing to do with historical debt or money owed to McCabe they are trading results.

Glad the club was "effectively debt free" when the prince joined us, that's what we were told at the time. So, he gave away half his shares and cleared the decks of debt.

For what purpose? To attract a serious investor of the right calibre and to ' do the right thing' for the club and it's fans.

All this is futile if we don't find the right manager to do the job at hand.

 

[Woodwardfan]

'effectively' debt free...
The club has no loans outstanding, it's paying no interest on any loans?

As you confirm, McCabe has eased his burden by having the Prince here...his ongoing costs are halved.
No on is saying 'McCabe got ten million directly from the Prince'...what a vivid imagination you have!

As I stated, one could argue that McCabe offset this sale to the Prince by shifting assets of actual value, to companies owned by his family, just before selling to the Prince...which is also 'simplified' things so that the Prince has no claim on the ground, hotel etc etc..

happy to stand corrected.

I have to say Esa, you are talking bullshit. You know snippets and choose to take a negative view. A little knowledge is dangerous in your case. Others might believe what you post.

 

[Esablade]

I have to say Esa, you are talking bullshit. You know snippets and choose to take a negative view. A little knowledge is dangerous in your case. Others might believe what you post.

Please explain...

 

[Sean Thornton]

'effectively' debt free...
The club has no loans outstanding, it's paying no interest on any loans?

As you confirm, McCabe has eased his burden by having the Prince here...his ongoing costs are halved.
No on is saying 'McCabe got ten million directly from the Prince'...what a vivid imagination you have!

As I stated, one could argue that McCabe offset this sale to the Prince by shifting assets of actual value, to companies owned by his family, just before selling to the Prince...which is also 'simplified' things so that the Prince has no claim on the ground, hotel etc etc..

happy to stand corrected.

No loans no interest, as as has been stated - and it's in the accounts- all debt transferred to equity. As has been discussed on here many times. Try looking at the accounts.

I didn't say any one did say McCabe had taken it but I find it's better to spell things out for you, just in case. Saves daft questions.

The hotel was transferred to a McCabe company some time ago. Nothing to do with the deal with the Prince. The ground etc were transferred to SU Ltd as it wasn't part of the deal with the Prince which was team based.

Maybe you'll explain what you mean by "shifted" but as I'm sure you know, the assets were transferred out of the FC along with equivalent amounts of debt.

I bet you are.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Please explain...

See above whole string of posts explaining.

 

[Woodwardfan]

For the record. There is nothing in the 2015 accounts which contradict anything McCabe and the prince have communicated to us fans. All agree for the record?

Might save time at the forthcoming fans forums.

 

[Esablade]

No loans no interest, as as has been stated - and it's in the accounts- all debt transferred to equity. As has been discussed on here many times. Try looking at the accounts.

I didn't say any one did say McCabe had taken it but I find it's better to spell things out for you, just in case. Saves daft questions.

The hotel was transferred to a McCabe company some time ago. Nothing to do with the deal with the Prince. The ground etc were transferred to SU Ltd as it wasn't part of the deal with the Prince which was team based.

Maybe you'll explain what you mean by "shifted" but as I'm sure you know, the assets were transferred out of the FC along with equivalent amounts of debt.

I bet you are.

'Shifted', it's quite simple. McCabe shifted some tangible assets of real value in exchange for the 'equivalent amount of debt', 'debt', he's accrued through his bad decisions and 'bad luck' and which in all likelihood, he was unlikely to see ever recovered in any other way...

Of course he didn't want to include these real assets in any deal with the Prince...that why he 'shifted' them to his families companies...

It's now an issue if he wants to sell his share in 'the club'...he's offering to sell the loss making asset but not anything tangible such as the ground etc...it's a little misleading to bang on about putting 90million into the club an not detail what he's got back...don't you think?



Re: accounts/loans.

Obviously I'm not as up on it as you, perhaps these are the incorrect set of accounts posted on sufc.com....I just read 'interest on other loans'...I

 

[Sean Thornton]

'Shifted', it's quite simple. McCabe shifted some tangible assets of real value in exchange for the 'equivalent amount of debt', 'debt', he's accrued through his bad decisions and bad luck andwhich in all likelihood, he was unlikely to see ever recovered in any other way...

Of course he didn't want to include these real assets in any deal with the Prince...that why he 'shifted' them to his families companies...

It's now an issue if he wants to sell his share in 'the club'...he's offering to sell the loss making asset but not anything tangible such as the ground etc...it's a little misleading to bang on about putting 90million into the club an not detail what he's got back...don't you think?



Re: accounts/loans.

Obviously I'm not as up on it as you, perhaps these are the incorrect set of accounts posted on sufc.com....I just read 'interest on other loans'...I

View attachment 16874

Yes, you're correct. They are the wrong set of accounts.

 

[Esablade]

I have to say Esa, you are talking bullshit. You know snippets and choose to take a negative view. A little knowledge is dangerous in your case. Others might believe what you post.

Please explain whats bullshit?
McCabe shifting tangible assets such as the ground, hotel etc from the club to his families companies?

@seanthorton has just confirmed that above...its happened...McCabe would say thats in exchange of money he's put in over the years..i'm sure...if he were ever to talk about it at all...