2011-12 Accounts out

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

Sothall_Blade said:
£1.8M of the reduction in turnover occured because McCabe sold the hotel and business centre to himself for £1.
We'd be allowed a higher wage bill under the FFP rules if he hadn't.
Maybe be able to sign a winger?
Click to expand...

Don't think you can use the revenue of the holding company for the wage levels. It is the club itself (hence the transfer of the ground on a peppercorn rent).

I think it costs us £1.6 million to operate the club without wages so 65% is actually quite low for a club on our turnover but would be high for a lot of clubs.
 

MobileBlade said:
Don't think you can use the revenue of the holding company for the wage levels. It is the club itself (hence the transfer of the ground on a peppercorn rent).

I think it costs us £1.6 million to operate the club without wages so 65% is actually quite low for a club on our turnover but would be high for a lot of clubs.
Click to expand...

What you mean that McCabe transferred the ground to the plc in the best interests of the club rather than because he is a a crook and a shyster?

You'll be telling me Jimmy Saville was a paedo next....
 
Darren said:
What you mean that McCabe transferred the ground to the plc in the best interests of the club rather than because he is a a crook and a shyster?

You'll be telling me Jimmy Saville was a paedo next....
Click to expand...


Yes just like he transferred BT....he only thinks about 'the club'. Savile is the correct spelling.
 
Finance Blade said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but a lot of people on here didn't want the hotel as they it was a drain on the club resources. Now its gone you want it back!!

In business some times you have to endure short term pain and the gains then come later. If McCabe had not taken the hotel back we'd now be getting the gain!!

The trouble was that during the the pain stages the fans wanted shut of it so McCabe obliged so he's now getting the gain. He only did what the fans at the time wanted.!!!
Click to expand...

My understanding is that Sheffield United owned some valuable land. We borrowed £20M and built a 4-Star Luxury Hotel on the valuable land.
We then paid off £5M of the debt so we owed only £15M. We also had a deal with Copthorne which gave us a regular fixed income from the hotel.

Sheffield United then “sold” McCabe the 4-Star Luxury Hotel and the land for £1 + the remaining £15M debt.
The nett result is that we lost the valuable land and the £5M we’d already paid off and the regular fixed income.

For 15M and £1, McCabe gained the valuable land AND the £20M hotel AND the regular fixed income.
Which Sheffield United fan in their right mind would "want" Kevin McCabe to do that?
 
Sothall_Blade said:
For 15M and £1, McCabe gained the valuable land AND the £20M hotel AND the regular fixed income.
Which Sheffield United fan in their right mind would "want" Kevin McCabe to do that?
Click to expand...

If he closed the club and built a Tescos on the Lane his supporters would be thanking him cos we could have had an Aldi without him.

The accounts and network of companies and transactions that have occurred make it impossible for even this forum's inelligentsia to pin down what has/is happening and whose interest it serves with any certainty.

But if he's judged on league position and debt when he took over to now then it doesn't look too clever.
 
Tuns said:
If he closed the club and built a Tescos on the Lane his supporters would be thanking him cos we could have had an Aldi without him.

The accounts and network of companies and transactions that have occurred make it impossible for even this forum's inelligentsia to pin down what has/is happening and whose interest it serves with any certainty.

But if he's judged on league position and debt when he took over to now then it doesn't look too clever.
Click to expand...
"His supporters"?
Does he have an army of supporters that turn up to the Lane chanting his name or is this another childish term used to try to discredit anybody calling for moderation amid the madness?
 
Fairs fair, it is not all taking money from the club. In the letter to shareholders (yes for my sins I am one) the letter reads that to save the club money the annual report will no longer be sent out and we can download it like everyone else.
 
Sothall_Blade said:
My understanding is that Sheffield United owned some valuable land. We borrowed £20M and built a 4-Star Luxury Hotel on the valuable land.
We then paid off £5M of the debt so we owed only £15M. We also had a deal with Copthorne which gave us a regular fixed income from the hotel.

Sheffield United then “sold” McCabe the 4-Star Luxury Hotel and the land for £1 + the remaining £15M debt.
The nett result is that we lost the valuable land and the £5M we’d already paid off and the regular fixed income.

For 15M and £1, McCabe gained the valuable land AND the £20M hotel AND the regular fixed income.
Which Sheffield United fan in their right mind would "want" Kevin McCabe to do that?
Click to expand...

Cracking post mate, top stuff and correct in all aspects per accounts
 
Darren said:
What you mean that McCabe transferred the ground to the plc in the best interests of the club rather than because he is a a crook and a shyster?

You'll be telling me Jimmy Saville was a paedo next....
Click to expand...

You really ought to leave financial threads alone. Please tell me you ain't suggesting that the transfer of BDTBL is for the benefit of sufc ltd?

I think you mean non uk tax resident rather than non domicile. Two very different things. He may be non domicile but very hard to change that status from uk domicile.
 
TarquinDelouche said:
"His supporters"?
Does he have an army of supporters that turn up to the Lane chanting his name or is this another childish term used to try to discredit anybody calling for moderation amid the madness?
Click to expand...

Some people support McCabe. It's not a childish term to call them supporters and if you read the post again you might find it's actually pretty moderate in the context of this thread.

Anyway time I got off down the Lane to give it a bit of: 'there's only one British Heart Foundation' and 'we are NHS said we are NHS'
 
Sothall_Blade said:
My understanding is that Sheffield United owned some valuable land. We borrowed £20M and built a 4-Star Luxury Hotel on the valuable land.
We then paid off £5M of the debt so we owed only £15M. We also had a deal with Copthorne which gave us a regular fixed income from the hotel.

Sheffield United then “sold” McCabe the 4-Star Luxury Hotel and the land for £1 + the remaining £15M debt.
The nett result is that we lost the valuable land and the £5M we’d already paid off and the regular fixed income.

For 15M and £1, McCabe gained the valuable land AND the £20M hotel AND the regular fixed income.
Which Sheffield United fan in their right mind would "want" Kevin McCabe to do that?
Click to expand...

Kevin McCbe transferred ownership from one hand to the other. He owns the lot. I'm all for laying the blame for the financial mess at his door. I'm lost at the idea that "we" have lost something.

UTB
 

alcoblade said:
Kevin McCbe transferred ownership from one hand to the other. He owns the lot. I'm all for laying the blame for the financial mess at his door. I'm lost at the idea that "we" have lost something.

UTB
Click to expand...

I note and enjoy your comment about the financial mess, but let's be absolutely clear that if McCabe charges £500k per annum that is cash out of the football club to be used elsewhere in his repulsive property group. If someone wants to buy SUFC Ltd off him, they will then be faced with paying rent to McCabe - which would be the end of my time as a True Blade.
 
Micalijo said:
You really ought to leave financial threads alone. Please tell me you ain't suggesting that the transfer of BDTBL is for the benefit of sufc ltd?

I think you mean non uk tax resident rather than non domicile. Two very different things. He may be non domicile but very hard to change that status from uk domicile.
Click to expand...

I start from the premise that if McCabe was only interested in his own self-aggrandisement and making as much money for himself as possible, he would not have gone within a million miles of the financial black hole that SUFC has been for the last 40 years.

If that premise is accepted then, it follows that McCabe must have got involved with SUFC for other reasons. My view is that he did it for exactly the same reason as other very rich people who get involved with football clubs - a hobby that will bring them some prestige and a feeling of power and, in the case of someone like McCabe ("local boy made good"), putting something back in the community from whence he came. Of course, that hobby tends to be a rather expensive one and I am sure KM was well aware of this when he got involved.

There may come a stage when these plutocracts get bored of their hobby and may wish to get rid of their toy with as little financial loss to themselves as possible. KM may well have reached that stage now. However, all the evidence suggests that KM does retain an affection for SUFC (after all he could just close the club down tomorrow and sell off the land if he so chose) and that he genuinely does not want to damage the club long terrm.

All this is not to be a "supporter" of McCabe - his regime from 2007 has clearly been disastrous - merely to try to have some grasp of probability and likelihood - rather than a knee jerk "hate McCabe, love United" stance. It is also not incompatible with disapproving of the way he manages his tax affairs - whatever the correct technical term is.
 
I start from the premise that if McCabe was only interested in his own self-aggrandisement and making as much money for himself as possible, he would not have gone within a million miles of the financial black hole that SUFC has been for the last 40 years.
If that premise is accepted then, it follows that McCabe must have got involved with SUFC for other reasons. My view is that he did it for exactly the same reason as other very rich people who get involved with football clubs - a hobby that will bring them some prestige and a feeling of power and, in the case of someone like McCabe ("local boy made good"), putting something back in the community from whence he came. Of course, that hobby tends to be a rather expensive one and I am sure KM was well aware of this when he got involved

Whilst the reasoning in the second para certainly played some part in it, the evidence would tend to suggest that McCabe genuinely thought that he could beat the system and make United self sustaining and make a profit for himself out of (a) the feeder clubs idea and (b) property and other spin off investments both at the Lane and at the foreign clubs.
 
Revolution said:
I start from the premise that if McCabe was only interested in his own self-aggrandisement and making as much money for himself as possible, he would not have gone within a million miles of the financial black hole that SUFC has been for the last 40 years.
If that premise is accepted then, it follows that McCabe must have got involved with SUFC for other reasons. My view is that he did it for exactly the same reason as other very rich people who get involved with football clubs - a hobby that will bring them some prestige and a feeling of power and, in the case of someone like McCabe ("local boy made good"), putting something back in the community from whence he came. Of course, that hobby tends to be a rather expensive one and I am sure KM was well aware of this when he got involved

Whilst the reasoning in the second para certainly played some part in it, the evidence would tend to suggest that McCabe genuinely thought that he could beat the system and make United self sustaining and make a profit for himself out of (a) the feeder clubs idea and (b) property and other spin off investments both at the Lane and at the foreign clubs.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But that doesn't alter the point that his primary motivation for getting involved with United was not financial.
 
Its not like there is anything to worry about we are getting a 500m injection over the next few years ;)
 
Martin Edwards
Doug Ellis
Ken Bates
Peter Hill Wood
John Hall
Freddie Fletcher
Robert Chase
John Madeski
Gollivan
Irving Scholar
Rupert Lowe
Peter Johnson
David Moores
Karl Oyston
Geoffrey Richardson
Milan Mandaric

Quick list of Chairmen who have made money out of running a club. Is that enough to dispense with the notion that no-one comes into football for anything other than misty-eyed dreams of being carried shoulder high by the grateful masses whilst young Ladies scatter rose petals beneath their feet?
 
Darren said:
I start from the premise that if McCabe was only interested in his own self-aggrandisement and making as much money for himself as possible, he would not have gone within a million miles of the financial black hole that SUFC has been for the last 40 years.

If that premise is accepted then, it follows that McCabe must have got involved with SUFC for other reasons. My view is that he did it for exactly the same reason as other very rich people who get involved with football clubs - a hobby that will bring them some prestige and a feeling of power and, in the case of someone like McCabe ("local boy made good"), putting something back in the community from whence he came. Of course, that hobby tends to be a rather expensive one and I am sure KM was well aware of this when he got involved.

There may come a stage when these plutocracts get bored of their hobby and may wish to get rid of their toy with as little financial loss to themselves as possible. KM may well have reached that stage now. However, all the evidence suggests that KM does retain an affection for SUFC (after all he could just close the club down tomorrow and sell off the land if he so chose) and that he genuinely does not want to damage the club long terrm.

All this is not to be a "supporter" of McCabe - his regime from 2007 has clearly been disastrous - merely to try to have some grasp of probability and likelihood - rather than a knee jerk "hate McCabe, love United" stance. It is also not incompatible with disapproving of the way he manages his tax affairs - whatever the correct technical term is.
Click to expand...

Got to agree that McC is involved because he is a Blade.

Scarborough had a bad time 10/11, pity it coincided with the Blades having a bad time.

Scarborough will bounch back, deals like Salfords Middlewood Lock will see to that and once Scarborough start replenishing their pot of gold I'm sure McC will feel better about putting some more into the Blades.

We've had to ride the storm out and in a business where you are judged on how many points you pick up we have not ridden the storm too well. All the things put in place have reduced McC's losses but come on hand's up who would have continued to pump money in when their own pot was shrinking? I wouldn't have and for that I can't blame McC.
 
raul said:
Martin Edwards
Doug Ellis
Ken Bates
Peter Hill Wood
John Hall
Freddie Fletcher
Robert Chase
John Madeski
Gollivan
Irving Scholar
Rupert Lowe
Peter Johnson
David Moores
Karl Oyston
Geoffrey Richardson
Milan Mandaric

Quick list of Chairmen who have made money out of running a club. Is that enough to dispense with the notion that no-one comes into football for anything other than misty-eyed dreams of being carried shoulder high by the grateful masses whilst young Ladies scatter rose petals beneath their feet?
Click to expand...

My only caveat to the list above is that any ladies scattering rose petals beneath the feet of Ken Bates should make sure that they don't trip over their guide dogs.

George
 
raul said:
Martin Edwards
Doug Ellis
Ken Bates
Peter Hill Wood
John Hall
Freddie Fletcher
Robert Chase
John Madeski
Gollivan
Irving Scholar
Rupert Lowe
Peter Johnson
David Moores
Karl Oyston
Geoffrey Richardson
Milan Mandaric
Click to expand...

Interesting list that. Some have been incredibly lucky, others incredibly cynical. It does seem that the vast majority - to my limited knowledge - made their bundle by flogging a club to a mug with money.

The only way McCabe could do such a thing is by getting us back into the premiership. What a bind!
 
alcoblade said:
Kevin McCbe transferred ownership from one hand to the other. He owns the lot. I'm all for laying the blame for the financial mess at his door. I'm lost at the idea that "we" have lost something. UTB
Click to expand...

It's not really just moving it from one hand to the other though is it?
In one hand he has a pot of money that only he and his family will benefit from.
In the other hand he has a pot of money that will determine the hopes and dreams of 30,000+ Blades fans.

It's like taking back your kid's pocket money to buy beer for yourself.
You gave them the money, so why shouldn't you take it back and spend it yourself?
Probably not illegal but it still doesn't make it right.

Sheffield United would be in a better financial position if we'd kept OUR land and charged for parking on it.
 
McCabe certainly has made a cock and balls of united since taking over. We thought we were in a bad situation then and we're in a worse one now.

Luck more than judgement got us to the premiership (who thought Warnock would turn out to do so well for us) and the fact we've squandered all the money on expensive loans/ journeymen pro's, is a tragedy. Our seeming inability to write up a decent contract and willingness to sell off talent at the drop of a hat

I can't help but think McCabe must realise the all this money united "owe" him that he want's back if he wants to sell up is only due to his bad decision making and bad management. I personally don't think it's too much to ask for him to write it off.
 
Sothall_Blade said:
It's not really just moving it from one hand to the other though is it?
In one hand he has a pot of money that only he and his family will benefit from.
In the other hand he has a pot of money that will determine the hopes and dreams of 30,000+ Blades fans.

It's like taking back your kid's pocket money to buy beer for yourself.
You gave them the money, so why shouldn't you take it back and spend it yourself?
Probably not illegal but it still doesn't make it right.

Sheffield United would be in a better financial position if we'd kept OUR land and charged for parking on it.
Click to expand...


I still don't follow. Sheffield United benefits at the rate at which Kevin McCabe is prepered to bleed cash. That cash can come via the football club or the PLC. It's all his.

The club loses pots of cash, with or without the assets in or out of the football club. It's McCabe's intentions (whatever they are) that stop him, as suggested by Dazzler, concreting over the entire place and selling the land for building.

I really don't see how it makes any difference. Removing the ground from the club did Man City lots of favours. Keeping them together did lots of other clubs no favours. No doubt there are plenty of examples in your favour too.

It's the intentions of the owners that drive the outcomes, not the accounting tweaks that they make.

Whether we like it or not, none of it is, or ever was, "OUR"'s.

UTB
 

just once it would be nice if we had a normal person in charge. not someone who wants to merge us with the pigs. move us to a new stadium in the middle of timbuktoo. build hotels. buy a brothel in kuala lumpur. turn us into barcelona. turn the car park into a willy wonka chocolate factory, or build a sandcastle on the centre circle.

just a normal person who uses our income to pay the wages, doesnt have any weird ambitions, and doesnt sell off all our best players for a pittance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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