£7.5m bank loan

[GrayBlade]

But this 'they' of whom you speak do trust Wilder - they gave him a new contract 4 months ago.

But they can't give him money that doesn't exist..

In the same way Wilder can't buy players that aren't there/wont come here.

I just find this whole notion that we can simply buy a couple of players in Jan that will come straight in to the team and make us better a little OTT...

Other clubs have found money in January in order for teams to kick on. It doesn’t always work the Pork being the prime example with Rhodes, but it has for others. What I’m saying is IF Wilder thinks we need somebody in, (not you or me or Ricky; Wilder), our owners should look at the bigger financial picture and seizure the opportunity. The ‘trust’ factor was your own comment inferring that Wilder spent poorly in January so why trust him with more I assume? TBH I think he was more getting bodies in because we were generally light. If he’d been allowed to aim higher than surely he would have and not just brought in 2 League One players and Evans?

I’ve seen both sides of the coin in my working life. I spent 25 years at a FTSE top 100 company and have had my own IT business for the last 17 years. Financial they are obviously at opposite ends of the financial spectrum, but when budgeting, I had/have the flexibility to allow for opportunities when one comes along and surely in football there’s not a bigger opportunity than the possibility of promotion to the top tier?

I do take your point mate but if we’re right up there in January and if Wilder targets a player or two that he thinks may come and would get us over the line, the dispute should be put on hold and every effort should be made to provide the funds. The how’s, why’s wherefore’s are no more my problem than my work problems are McCabe’s and the Princes’s, I didn’t chose to buy a football club like they did, but if I had the wherewithal to buy one and come January they were up at the top of the Championship, I’d do everything in my power to find the funds my manager wanted and not let an issue with my co-owner scupper our chances.

As somebody has already posted what happens in January will give us an idea where their priorities lie, but of course for all we know our owners may have already discussed and resolved the matter.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

Other clubs have found money in January in order for teams to kick on. It doesn’t always work the Pork being the prime example with Rhodes, but it has for others. What I’m saying is IF Wilder thinks we need somebody in, (not you or me or Ricky; Wilder), our owners should look at the bigger financial picture and seizure the opportunity. The ‘trust’ factor was your own comment inferring that Wilder spent poorly in January so why trust him with more I assume? TBH I think he was more getting bodies in because we were generally light. If he’d been allowed to aim higher than surely he would have and not just brought in 2 League One players and Evans?

I’ve seen both sides of the coin in my working life. I spent 25 years at a FTSE top 100 company and have had my own IT business for the last 17 years. Financial they are obviously at opposite ends of the financial spectrum, but when budgeting, I had/have the flexibility to allow for opportunities when one comes along and surely in football there’s not a bigger opportunity than the possibility of promotion to the top tier?

I do take your point mate but if we’re right up there in January and if Wilder targets a player or two that he thinks may come and would get us over the line, the dispute should be put on hold and every effort should be made to provide the funds. The how’s, why’s wherefore’s are no more my problem than my work problems are McCabe’s and the Princes’s, I didn’t chose to buy a football club like they did, but if I had the wherewithal to buy one and come January they were up at the top of the Championship, I’d do everything in my power to find the funds my manager wanted and not let an issue with my co-owner scupper our chances.

As somebody has already posted what happens in January will give us an idea where their priorities lie, but of course for all we know our owners may have already discussed and resolved the matter.

Nice post and I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, I just think the January Transfer Window is the panacea the mainstream media would have you believe.

There will be a case for strengthening in January, but it's a well known fact transfers in Jan cost more and have a lesser success factor.

Using your example is good as if you were faced with an opportunity to invest in a product which would move your business forward, but all of your competitors were the battling over the same product, the price would increase. You'd then have to decide if it was the right thing to do.

The point I'm trying to make is that investing in Jan is an expensive lottery and if we decide not to, I don't think it is a reflection of our lack of intent or that Tufty isnt being backed.

 

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

Nice post and I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, I just think the January Transfer Window is the panacea the mainstream media would have you believe.

There will be a case for strengthening in January, but it's a well known fact transfers in Jan cost more and have a lesser success factor.

Using your example is good as if you were faced with an opportunity to invest in a product which would move your business forward, but all of your competitors were the battling over the same product, the price would increase. You'd then have to decide if it was the right thing to do.

The point I'm trying to make is that investing in Jan is an expensive lottery and if we decide not to, I don't think it is a reflection of our lack of intent or that Tufty isnt being backed.

Having thought about the whole thing in depth, if we retain the services of all the performing big hitters in the jtw, I think that we are only a loan deal of a forward & a defender away from being at worst a play off position, at best an automatic promotion place. Obviously, those two players would need to be from the prem and would need financing, but that's how close I think we are this season and it wouldn't need that much £ input relatively speaking. I'm talking at the sam gallagher, conor wickham, leo bonatini, divock origi, at worst edward nketiah level.

 

[Grappler]

In your scenario, let's hope he spends it more wisely than he did last January...

Seriously , do people think it's that straightforward to just 'spend some moneh in January'? The evidence is that isn't as simple as it is on championship manager...

Prefer the Sheffield made version, picture on the front of BDTBL

 

[Cerberus Blade]

But do we have another precedent to compare it to? I think the last time we received such a substantial fee was in 2009/10 selling the 2 Kyle’s.

All we have done is freed up the capital in the form of loan to have it available now.

We could look at it optimistically and say this way we have money available to spend in January now.

I thought it was for the running costs of the club?

 

[GrayBlade]

Fair points mate. I suppose this analogy is about as close as I can make work wise.

When I was back in my old job, my own part of the group used to supply and maintain electronic equipment for customer on their outlets.. Having this equipment encouraged their own customer flow and made them money basically and we were paid a rent to supply them. Our larger customers (or potential customers) would occasionally put a chunk of supplying their business out to tender and invite all the companies in our field to put in their offers by a certain date and usually around the same time of year (April) and every one, three or five years. Even back in the 1990’s, this could involve up front and staggered payments adding to several £million as well as guaranteed service hours and response times and down time and yet there was always a scramble to secure the businesses as losing a tender would almost always reduce hit our profits as well as costing some staff their jobs.

Occasionally though, we’d walk away if we felt that their demands were too high, and also securing the contract didn’t always work out well as we hoped a bit like when the Pigs signed Rhodes. It wasn’t a definite science no more than a club deciding to speculate and buy a new player is, but if we thought that the business could lead to a major financial boost down the road, there was more chance that we’d push the boat out to get it. April was our January window.

Of course there the comparison ends as I’m talking about a PLC with thousands of staff, not a second tier football club, so that’s the end of my inane rambling,

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Prefer the Sheffield made version, picture on the front of BDTBL

That came out a year after I was taken to my first United game, and I spent hours on that – successfully rising up to get the United job. I at no stage clocked that this was a) made in Sheffield, or b) United on the front of the box. Mind blown.

 

[derfblade.3]

 

[Grappler]

That came out a year after I was taken to my first United game, and I spent hours on that – successfully rising up to get the United job. I at no stage clocked that this was a) made in Sheffield, or b) United on the front of the box. Mind blown.

There was a good relationship between the club and the game studio.

 

[Tom Bott]

*ignore the article; we have no idea how much United borrowed

The £ 85 million that Brooks was worth

 

[Bellypork]

Ok, I'll rephrase. Due to significant player sales and an increased budget, there should be significant funds to strengthen in January/next summer.We can use the money by buying players in installments - in the same way other clubs have purchased our players. Unless something has changed and the money has been reassigned for other purposes.In which case did the budget increase at all? We have no issues with FFP unlike many of our rivals, so we should be able to strike advantageous deals whilst taking advantage of their predicament. It's an interesting time in the club's history.

Both our clubs are hobbled, but in different ways.

United may have money to spend, and they have no FFP problems, but the stumbling block is the wage structure. This is the reason why they struggled to get a striker in. An established, 20-goal-a-season striker's going to cost £8-10 million in today's stupid market ... and wages proportional to a striker of that value. If the ceiling for a striker was around £4 million, then it would be the wages that determined that, rather than having the money to buy the player. This is precisely why I was thumping the drum for Joao after United went up, as he was an out-of-favour player, off the radar, young, but with bags of potential under the tutelage of a manager like Wilder.

As for Wednesday, their wage structure can accommodate most players at this level, barring the likes of Terry and Snodgrass that is, Chansiri's not short of money, but the club's turnover isn't big enough to allow it to spend more. You can only raise ticket prices so far, and you can't set up fake companies and call "favours" in for ever.

 

[nopigfansintown]

Both our clubs are hobbled, but in different ways.

United may have money to spend, and they have no FFP problems, but the stumbling block is the wage structure. This is the reason why they struggled to get a striker in. An established, 20-goal-a-season striker's going to cost £8-10 million in today's stupid market ... and wages proportional to a striker of that value. If the ceiling for a striker was around £4 million, then it would be the wages that determined that, rather than having the money to buy the player. This is precisely why I was thumping the drum for Joao after United went up, as he was an out-of-favour player, off the radar, young, but with bags of potential under the tutelage of a manager like Wilder.

As for Wednesday, their wage structure can accommodate most players at this level, barring the likes of Terry and Snodgrass that is, Chansiri's not short of money, but the club's turnover isn't big enough to allow it to spend more. You can only raise ticket prices so far, and you can't set up fake companies and call "favours" in for ever.

I agree. Which is why our board not giving Wilder/Knill the money for Ollie Watkins this time last year sticks in the craw. He was at Exeter.We also looked at Joe Lolley, another good signing on modest terms at the time. .United inquired about Jaoa but were turned down this summer. I wanted him, too; not because he's at Wednesday, but because of the attributes he has: pace and power.There aren't many of them about and they fetch big bucks usually. Something that we still lack is the ability to stretch teams. Our strikers don't really run beyond, with the possible exception of Washington who seems a bit of a stopgap. There was a rumour that we looked at Winnall - that was fake news. I think loans are the way to go for United now. Wages can be paid as part of a loan fee.That way these players wouldn't break our wage structure.We could also do with another number ten to rotate with Duffy. Every other position looks well stocked, with quality in reserve. Oh, there's also the possibility of Evans coming back. He seems to be doing well at Fleetwood.

 

[Bellypork]

I agree. Which is why our board not giving Wilder/Knill the money for Ollie Watkins this time last year sticks in the craw. He was at Exeter.We also looked at Joe Lolley, another good signing on modest terms at the time. .United inquired about Jaoa but were turned down this summer. I wanted him, too; not because he's at Wednesday, but because of the attributes he has: pace and power.There aren't many of them about and they fetch big bucks usually. Something that we still lack is the ability to stretch teams. Our strikers don't really run beyond, with the possible exception of Washington who seems a bit of a stopgap. There was a rumour that we looked at Winnall - that was fake news. I think loans are the way to go for United now. Wages can be paid as part of a loan fee.That way these players wouldn't break our wage structure.We could also do with another number ten to rotate with Duffy. Every other position looks well stocked, with quality in reserve. Oh, there's also the possibility of Evans coming back. He seems to be doing well at Fleetwood.

Yes, Winnall isn't necessarily the type I'd go for, but I could see his being loaned out in January. His wages are around the £17K mark, so it would be doable. He also works hard, which would endear him to Tufty. He struck 10 goals in half a season at Barnsley as part of that Hourihane/Winnall partnership. He's not the type to stretch teams, but he'd definitely get goals in United's set-up.

 

[Darthblade]

I do not see significant spending in January unless the litigation is sorted, and I also don't think that's likely.

Call me a cynical old bastard if you like ……. but if we got promoted ( and I don't think for a moment that we will ) ...… my guess is that the "fall out" will be forgotten and the pauper Prince & McCabe will suddenly re-discover their love for each other and their "enthusiasm" for being owners of a "premier league" Club !!

UTB & FTP

 

[derryblade]

I'm guessing this loan goes towards the £10 million that Mr Justice Fancourt said was needed to keep the club on an even keel till January. Come in handy that Brooks money, more drama from January on wards, could be worst we could be struggling on the pitch.

 

[Balham]

I'm guessing this loan goes towards the £10 million that Mr Justice Fancourt said was needed to keep the club on an even keel till January. Come in handy that Brooks money, more drama from January on wards, could be worst we could be struggling on the pitch.

I may be wrong here as I'm going from memory but that £10m included a £7m net budget for transfer fees and wages. The Brooks, Evans and Leonard deals (and the various loans) should have more than covered the Norwood, Egan, Woodburn and Henderson fees. The Prince's argument, as I remember it, was that the club didn't need more than £2m.

All this loan does is get the Brooks fee into our bank account now rather than us relying on short term loans between now and the next payment which is due on January 1st.

 

[Maidenhead]

I do not see significant spending in January unless the litigation is sorted, and I also don't think that's likely.

I actually think it's worse than that and it's highly unlikely.

 

[Maidenhead]

Other clubs have found money in January in order for teams to kick on. It doesn’t always work the Pork being the prime example with Rhodes, but it has for others. What I’m saying is IF Wilder thinks we need somebody in, (not you or me or Ricky; Wilder), our owners should look at the bigger financial picture and seizure the opportunity. The ‘trust’ factor was your own comment inferring that Wilder spent poorly in January so why trust him with more I assume? TBH I think he was more getting bodies in because we were generally light. If he’d been allowed to aim higher than surely he would have and not just brought in 2 League One players and Evans?

I’ve seen both sides of the coin in my working life. I spent 25 years at a FTSE top 100 company and have had my own IT business for the last 17 years. Financial they are obviously at opposite ends of the financial spectrum, but when budgeting, I had/have the flexibility to allow for opportunities when one comes along and surely in football there’s not a bigger opportunity than the possibility of promotion to the top tier?

I do take your point mate but if we’re right up there in January and if Wilder targets a player or two that he thinks may come and would get us over the line, the dispute should be put on hold and every effort should be made to provide the funds. The how’s, why’s wherefore’s are no more my problem than my work problems are McCabe’s and the Princes’s, I didn’t chose to buy a football club like they did, but if I had the wherewithal to buy one and come January they were up at the top of the Championship, I’d do everything in my power to find the funds my manager wanted and not let an issue with my co-owner scupper our chances.

As somebody has already posted what happens in January will give us an idea where their priorities lie, but of course for all we know our owners may have already discussed and resolved the matter.

I think that's highly unlikely as one of them is liable to lose all his additional investment if the pending court case goes against him.

I don't think either of them will throw cash on the table in a potential winner takes all scenario.

 

[Maidenhead]

Call me a cynical old bastard if you like ……. but if we got promoted ( and I don't think for a moment that we will ) ...… my guess is that the "fall out" will be forgotten and the pauper Prince & McCabe will suddenly re-discover their love for each other and their "enthusiasm" for being owners of a "premier league" Club !!

UTB & FTP

I think you're wrong.

I think that they're at the point a divorce lawyer would call irreconcilable differences, and I don't think any amount of money will change that.

 

[Harry's Game]

When it comes to court in April that won’t be the end of it.

Whoever loses is almost certain to appeal. That’s another 10-12 months on top of that.

It really is ridiculous that on the field the club could be in its best place for almost thirty years but a further three transfer windows are likely to be scuppered be this petulant behaviour from the owners. (Both are equally to blame)

 

[Sean Thornton]

I think you're wrong.

I think that they're at the point a divorce lawyer would call irreconcilable differences, and I don't think any amount of money will change that.

Basically, if McCabe wins, it's doom and gloom. If HRH wins, it's McCabes fault it's doom and gloom.

The prospect of PL riches is likely to make both of them more steadfast in their desire to win. For obvious reasons. Until that happens the likelihood of a cash flow shortage will haunt us on the basis we needed £10m until January.

 

[Maidenhead]

When it comes to court in April that won’t be the end of it.

Whoever loses is almost certain to appeal. That’s another 10-12 months on top of that.

It really is ridiculous that on the field the club could be in its best place for almost thirty years but a further three transfer windows are likely to be scuppered be this petulant behaviour from the owners. (Both are equally to blame)

If I'm being honest think that even a stable happy go lucky chap like myself might get a bit petulant over tens of millions pounds.

 

[Sean Thornton]

If I'm being honest think that even a stable happy go lucky chap like myself might get a bit petulant over tens of millions pounds.

Even of you'd siphoned it out of the business year in year out in the first place?

 

[derryblade]

I may be wrong here as I'm going from memory but that £10m included a £7m net budget for transfer fees and wages. The Brooks, Evans and Leonard deals (and the various loans) should have more than covered the Norwood, Egan, Woodburn and Henderson fees. The Prince's argument, as I remember it, was that the club didn't need more than £2m.

All this loan does is get the Brooks fee into our bank account now rather than us relying on short term loans between now and the next payment which is due on January 1st.

Let's hope you are right, I'm not convinced we will see in January .

 

[Bladesthorpe]

Call me a cynical old bastard if you like ……. but if we got promoted ( and I don't think for a moment that we will ) ...… my guess is that the "fall out" will be forgotten and the pauper Prince & McCabe will suddenly re-discover their love for each other and their "enthusiasm" for being owners of a "premier league" Club !!

UTB & FTP

Cynical old bastard.

 

[Harry's Game]

If I'm being honest think that even a stable happy go lucky chap like myself might get a bit petulant over tens of millions pounds.

Neither have covered themselves in glory, I’ve always felt slightly uncomfortable about Saudi involvement and get more uncomfortable almost every time I switch the news on.

My sympathy with McCabe however is somewhat limited, it was after all his idea to involve HRH in the first place and as a business man should have covered his arse to prevent getting stitched up as he would see it.

Multi millionaire business men trying to exploit loopholes to make or save a fortune.... who would have thought?

 

[GrayBlade]

I think that's highly unlikely as one of them is liable to lose all his additional investment if the pending court case goes against him.

I don't think either of them will throw cash on the table in a potential winner takes all scenario.

Yeah I get that mate, it’s a bloody mess isn’t it? I just wondered if a possible £190m pay-off would be enough to to entice the pair of them to sort something out between them in a way that the one didn’t lose out if he lost in court. I’ve not seen or heard of any precedent but Ithought if the mutual will was there they could make it happen.

I’m not a legal eagle though, so if those who are reckon it'd be impossible under the circumstances to rubber stamp an agreement I’ll bow down the greater knowledge ...and just end with feckin typical!

 

[Maidenhead]

Yeah I get that mate, it’s a bloody mess isn’t it? I just wondered if a possible £190m pay-off would be enough to to entice the pair of them to sort something out between them in a way that the one didn’t lose out if he lost in court. I’ve not seen or heard of any precedent but Ithought if the mutual will was there they could make it happen.

I’m not a legal eagle though, so if those who are reckon it'd be impossible under the circumstances to rubber stamp an agreement I’ll bow down the greater knowledge ...and just end with feckin typical!

It's a complete mess but the owners appear to be so far apart that absolutely no compromise is possible.

I understand that that the planned mediation didn't take place because the 2 parties are so far apart

 

[8lade]

Ok I can see 2 scenarios:
We stay in this league, the fight continues.
We get promoted nobody can get at the cash anyway while ever the ownership is uncertain, nobody can sell unless it's to the other party and the asking price for half a Premiership club surely has to be in excess of 20 million. No club money can be invested in the ground but it'll have to be spent otherwise the taxman will take a chunk.
Does this sound about right?

 

[Tezza1889]

Sooooo..

Seems on the face of it there may be two scenarios at play..

1: money secured early in order to ensure the boardroom unrest and financial stalemate does not affect the player recruitment in January, enabling the manager who’s “working miracles” to complete the job, or at least secure a higher finish than last season by funding recruitment or wages for loanees ( a realistic push for a playoff spot ).


2: Secure a loan against incoming fees from a player sale to run the club whilst the owners are at stalemate, using money that one half of the directorship won’t ever see should he be the losing party, in effect the club pays for its own running costs with no further financial exposure to either of the warring parties, plus the brooks windfall would be in effect shared by both owners now, the other way the winner would “take all” a year or two down the line when further payments are made by bournmouth..


Based on reading all the posts about prince and kmc I’m going for point 2 as it was stated we needed £5 million at the start of the season to keep the club running while the fight is on upstairs (which was why the brooks deal was done early wasn’t it) and of course we’ve recruited players since and will have incurred additional costs, so I expect another lean January..

Sorry, just how I think this situation will probably pan out.. I might be miles out though..