Bugger off mr chairman!!!!

[lenners]

It's always hilarious when folk come along and start suggesting it's impossible to understand the business acumen of people like McCabe.
The financial equivalent of the emperor with no clothes.
Apparently we're so much better off than so many other clubs. I can see nearly 40 who are currently in a better position than us, including several who have nowhere near the same potential customer base.
Until last year, no other relegated club in Premiership history has had the benefit of two parachute payments plus an extra £20m thrown in for good measure.
McCabe has failed. He tried but he's failed.
I think his intentions have been for United to do well, I don't believe he wanted or expected us to perform as badly as either a football team or a business.
But equally, you would have to be remarkably naive to believe that McCabe did not also see United as a means to opening doors in other countries for property development or closer to home.
He's a businessman, a property developer. United are part of that and a part he's come up short with.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

I can see nearly 40 who are currently in a better position than us

Quality Len

No-one knows what McCabe has invested personally into the club (or not), how much money he's made, how better off his empire is because of the association with SUFC, what exactly our 'links' to China etc is worth (or not) so it's impossible for anyone to say he's done this, or should be doing that with any confidence.

Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of tying in the hotel etc to the debts, it would be interesting to see where we were debt wise before he took over before we catagorically say the club are better off overall or not.

I remember around 2004 debating on BU that he was more interested in off the field activities than on the pitch and who's to say he wasn't right the way he did it but as soon as he loosened the purse strings we were promoted and the plan seemed to have worked. The 'we are never going to be in this position again' speech suggested he meant business and he had an opportunity to make us a force as he'd always said he wanted to but it never really seemed as though he backed that up with the team. He couldn't be accused of not giving Warnock money to spend but Premiership status became the be all and end all off the pitch again and we know what happened.

The year after it went spectacularly wrong, he made the decision to spend big to bounce straight back but appointed the wrong man and all the while, all his time seemed to be spent on the Tevez business which we know, he funded personally. Doubtless this knocked him back and I don't think he's had the same enthusiasm since. Add to this the recession which will have hit his empire hard and not surpisingly, he wants out and is not prepared to back the club personally anymore.

As far as the fans are concerned, we made it to the Prem but 4 years on are pretty much back where we started from when he took over so it's difficult to say yeah, great job McCabe. He still talks the talk but it's clear that when, or if, the right investers come along he'll hand over the reigns.

Are we better off, has his reign been successful, difficult to answer. The club is better placed and will continue where others will, and have, gone to the dogs and for that, we have to be thankful but at the end of the day, there's no point in having marvellous training facilities, partnerships with other clubs and countries if we've no money to spend on the team and no prospects of challenging for promotion. Time will tell I guess whether he will be seen as a hero or a villain as football continues to self-combust financially but at the end of the day, a club is only as good as the fans and the team on the pitch and at the moment, both are losing ground.

 

[norfolkblade]

Norfolk, all the Tevez money is accounted for already. It's gone, there's nothing to come.
The size of the debt in that context defies belief.

Len for christ sake man I am an accountant, I think I know what I am talking about - they didn't pay it all at once as they couldn't afford to, so as I said, they are nothing but a fucking debtor at the moment meaning we do not have that cash available

 

[lenners]

And Norfolk, you should know it's gone, accounted for, no longer a brucie bonus, not affecting the £4m we needed to find before we kicked off the year.
And Fleets, United funded the legal costs of Tevez which were around £1.5m - not McCabe.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

It might have been accounted for, but if it's not actually been paid yet, then that will surely be affecting our liquidity

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

And Fleets, United funded the legal costs of Tevez which were around £1.5m - not McCabe.

I'm sure he said he'd funded it personally. Oh well, if that's the only fault you can find in what I said :thumbup:

 

[norfolkblade]

And Norfolk, you should know it's gone, accounted for, no longer a brucie bonus, not affecting the £4m we needed to find before we kicked off the year.
And Fleets, United funded the legal costs of Tevez which were around £1.5m - not McCabe.

If we have not received all the cash, the balance outstanding will continue to sit in the debtors (or trade receivables as now known) in the balance sheet for as long as it needs to. In other words, we will continue to account for the money until it is all received. End of.

---------- Post added at 01:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:07 PM ----------

It might have been accounted for, but if it's not actually been paid yet, then that will surely be affecting our liquidity

Correct, liquidity is related to cash flow, which the Tevez money definitely is not a part of at the moment

 

[Highbury_Blade]

If we have not received all the cash, the balance outstanding will continue to sit in the debtors (or trade receivables as now known) in the balance sheet for as long as it needs to. In other words, we will continue to account for the money until it is all received. End of.

Cue deafening silence from Len

 

[sheffielder]

Cue deafening silence from Len

He is probably just reloading his sage line 50 for beginners help guide

 

[lenners]

Fer crying out loud, the Tevez money is gone, accounted for, it doesn't matter.
The fact we haven't physically had all of it makes no difference to us starting £4m down before the year started.
And Fleets, I've never said McCabe is an arch villain I just think he hasn't run the club very well.
The way some people talk on here it's obvious they've forgotten that we support a football club, not McCabe enterprises.
What we see on the pitch is what matters, that ultimately is the success or otherwise of United

 

[Sothall_Blade]

I accept that this is hindsight - though the top of the property bubble was predicted by many, if sadly not our own property expert

McCabe did predict that the UK property market had peaked when he made £150M by selling "the bulk of his empire to an overseas company at the peak of the market" in August 2007. He was quoted at the time as saying "‘OK, the UK has peaked, but Europe hasn’t, and Valad has bought a European company".

When did Sheffield United start investing in the UK property market? Before or after August 2007?

http://www.propertyweek.com/keeping-it-in-the-family/3092768.article#ixzz0gYQKqtvF

 

[norfolkblade]

Fer crying out loud, the Tevez money is gone, accounted for, it doesn't matter.
The fact we haven't physically had all of it makes no difference to us starting £4m down before the year started.
And Fleets, I've never said McCabe is an arch villain I just think he hasn't run the club very well.
The way some people talk on here it's obvious they've forgotten that we support a football club, not McCabe enterprises.
What we see on the pitch is what matters, that ultimately is the success or otherwise of United

Do you literally enjoy fighting any fact that is thrown at you? The Tevez money isn't fucking gone because we haven't spent the fucker as WE DON'T BLOODY HAVE IT AVAILABLE TO SPEND!!!!!

 

[Micalijo]

Do you literally enjoy fighting any fact that is thrown at you? The Tevez money isn't fucking gone because we haven't spent the fucker as WE DON'T BLOODY HAVE IT AVAILABLE TO SPEND!!!!!

If I may interject?

I believe what Len is saying is that our accounts showed a £12m profit thanks to the Tevez wedge.

The accounts also show that we have debts of circa £50m. Set against these debts are the assets, one of which is a debtor of whatever from West Ham.

When this debtor is exchanged for cash it makes no impact on the net asset position.

When the cash goes to McCabe we lose a creditor of £8m being the McCabe loan and we lose an asset of £8m being the cash - again no difference to the net asset figure?

One good thing though is that the total creditirs has gone down - ie we have less to pay off.

Is that a fair summary Norfolk?

 

[raul]

That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Micalijo]

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Cheers mate!! At least it's consistent then.

 

[lenners]

Do you literally enjoy fighting any fact that is thrown at you? The Tevez money isn't fucking gone because we haven't spent the fucker as WE DON'T BLOODY HAVE IT AVAILABLE TO SPEND!!!!!

No, I think it's important to nail the notion that we still have some little pot of gold at the end of the Tevez rainbow because it's gone, accounted for, caput, essentially no longer there.
I don't think it's difficult to grasp - or is needing £4m before we kicked off the year from somewhere to remain a going concern.
I'm not sure how this is difficult to understand.
If you think they got the accounts wrong, give them a call and tell them they shouldn't have referred to the £4m shortfall because we had another chunk of Tevez money coming they simply forgot about.

 

[norfolkblade]

No, I think it's important to nail the notion that we still have some little pot of gold at the end of the Tevez rainbow because it's gone, accounted for, caput, essentially no longer there.
I don't think it's difficult to grasp - or is needing £4m before we kicked off the year from somewhere to remain a going concern.
I'm not sure how this is difficult to understand.
If you think they got the accounts wrong, give them a call and tell them they shouldn't have referred to the £4m shortfall because we had another chunk of Tevez money coming they simply forgot about.

Len I am simply referring to the point that we haven't received the cash yet, so it will continue to be accounted for on the balance sheet as a debtor, I am quite sure it will all be spent against paying creditors, most of which will be other teams for transfer fee instalments I should imagine.

---------- Post added at 05:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:13 PM ----------

If I may interject?

I believe what Len is saying is that our accounts showed a £12m profit thanks to the Tevez wedge.

The accounts also show that we have debts of circa £50m. Set against these debts are the assets, one of which is a debtor of whatever from West Ham.

When this debtor is exchanged for cash it makes no impact on the net asset position.

When the cash goes to McCabe we lose a creditor of £8m being the McCabe loan and we lose an asset of £8m being the cash - again no difference to the net asset figure?

One good thing though is that the total creditirs has gone down - ie we have less to pay off.

Is that a fair summary Norfolk?

Would say you that's an excellent reflection mate, you must work in finance?! I haven't personally seen the SUFC accounts and don't know who is owed what, etc.

If he is serious about using the Tevez money on transfers, then this will be budgeted for separately and will not be shown on the accounts anyway

 

[alcoblade]

McCabe did predict that the UK property market had peaked when he made £150M by selling "the bulk of his empire to an overseas company at the peak of the market" in August 2007. He was quoted at the time as saying "‘OK, the UK has peaked, but Europe hasn’t, and Valad has bought a European company".

When did Sheffield United start investing in the UK property market? Before or after August 2007?

http://www.propertyweek.com/keeping-it-in-the-family/3092768.article#ixzz0gYQKqtvF

I can't answer that. What I know is the property values of Blades Realty are being written down. Whatever the exact date of purchses, in the grand scheme of asset bubbles, we've loaded up near to, or right at the peak, of one of the biggest ever.

UTB

---------- Post added at 05:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:25 PM ----------

If he is serious about using the Tevez money on transfers, then this will be budgeted for separately and will not be shown on the accounts anyway

But as Len says, though we haven't received the cash, it's all factored into the plan. And that plan isn't transfers - unless we're going to find money over and above the £4M shortfall for the season. Judging by the fact that we're trying to kid ourselves that Ched Evans is a Championship striker as we fall down the league table, I'd say no transfers are happening any time soon.

UTB

 

[Trigger Blade]

No, I think it's important to nail the notion that we still have some little pot of gold at the end of the Tevez rainbow because it's gone, accounted for, caput, essentially no longer there.
I don't think it's difficult to grasp - or is needing £4m before we kicked off the year from somewhere to remain a going concern.
I'm not sure how this is difficult to understand.
If you think they got the accounts wrong, give them a call and tell them they shouldn't have referred to the £4m shortfall because we had another chunk of Tevez money coming they simply forgot about.

Unsurprisingly, you didn't answer my question about whether you understood the differnce between P&L and balance sheet, you simply asked a different question. Anyway, luckily, norfolkblade's an accountant, he'll explain it to you, though you seem to bring out some of his anger management issues.

As you mention giving them a call, I've got a better idea, I've tried to get this one moving before. There'll be another AGM in December (not a fans' forum where they can do a snow job on numpties like me), where serious questions need to be asked.

You're the man for the job, please do it for all of us and for the sake of our club, show the board up for the bunch of incompetent, disingenuous (and inexplicably) wealthy men they are.

Will you do that len, simple question, one word answer is all that's required.

 

[alcoblade]

Unsurprisingly, you didn't answer my question about whether you understood the differnce between P&L and balance sheet, you simply asked a different question. Anyway, luckily, norfolkblade's an accountant, he'll explain it to you, though you seem to bring out some of his anger management issues.

As you mention giving them a call, I've got a better idea, I've tried to get this one moving before. There'll be another AGM in December (not a fans' forum where they can do a snow job on numpties like me), where serious questions need to be asked.

You're the man for the job, please do it for all of us and for the sake of our club, show the board up for the bunch of incompetent, disingenuous (and inexplicably) wealthy men they are.

Will you do that len, simple question, one word answer is all that's required.

Trigg - at the last fans forum, McCabe was asked about his loand, and the fact that up to 10% interest was being charged on them. He answered that it was just on the advice of his accountant and that that money wasn't being charged, next question.

When you can't get to the bottom of anomalies like these at these things, you do have to question the point. I know the charge that you should attend if you're concerned is a powerful point on a message board, but the reality that any issue can be focused on and relentlessly drilled down to the route is a fallacy. The club controls the floor and the information that leaks out is the information that they want to. Nothing sinister in that, but in reality the questioning is about as pressing as Seth Bennet on praise or Grumble.

Are the AGM's reallly any different (I don't know, honest question...).

UTB

 

[Studge]

If I may interject?

I believe what Len is saying is that our accounts showed a £12m profit thanks to the Tevez wedge.

The accounts also show that we have debts of circa £50m. Set against these debts are the assets, one of which is a debtor of whatever from West Ham.

When this debtor is exchanged for cash it makes no impact on the net asset position.

When the cash goes to McCabe we lose a creditor of £8m being the McCabe loan and we lose an asset of £8m being the cash - again no difference to the net asset figure?

One good thing though is that the total creditirs has gone down - ie we have less to pay off.

Is that a fair summary Norfolk?

It works Like this courtesy of accountancy for dummies or ( F Wood accountancy when I was a lad).

West Ham Pay SUFC the settlement over the allotted period of time £20,000.000

Dr Bank 20,000,000
Cr Debtor 20,000,000

SUFC Pay Scarborough/K Mccabe

CR Bank 20,000.000
DR Loan 20,000,000

Ergo Micaliljo is correct and these are just balance sheet transactions and have no effect on the P & L A/C as the profit has already been recognised.

Good news is the mantra that the debt is £48M will have to be changed to the debt is only £28M

 

[raul]

:gallop:

Cheers mate!! At least it's consistent then.

Not you, him!